let R, S be irreflexive RelStr ; ( the carrier of R misses the carrier of S implies sum_of (R,S) is irreflexive )
assume A1:
the carrier of R misses the carrier of S
; sum_of (R,S) is irreflexive
for x being set st x in the carrier of (sum_of (R,S)) holds
not [x,x] in the InternalRel of (sum_of (R,S))
proof
set IR = the
InternalRel of
R;
set IS = the
InternalRel of
S;
set RS =
[: the carrier of R, the carrier of S:];
set SR =
[: the carrier of S, the carrier of R:];
let x be
set ;
( x in the carrier of (sum_of (R,S)) implies not [x,x] in the InternalRel of (sum_of (R,S)) )
assume
x in the
carrier of
(sum_of (R,S))
;
not [x,x] in the InternalRel of (sum_of (R,S))
assume
[x,x] in the
InternalRel of
(sum_of (R,S))
;
contradiction
then
[x,x] in (( the InternalRel of R \/ the InternalRel of S) \/ [: the carrier of R, the carrier of S:]) \/ [: the carrier of S, the carrier of R:]
by NECKLA_2:def 3;
then
(
[x,x] in ( the InternalRel of R \/ the InternalRel of S) \/ [: the carrier of R, the carrier of S:] or
[x,x] in [: the carrier of S, the carrier of R:] )
by XBOOLE_0:def 3;
then A2:
(
[x,x] in the
InternalRel of
R \/ the
InternalRel of
S or
[x,x] in [: the carrier of R, the carrier of S:] or
[x,x] in [: the carrier of S, the carrier of R:] )
by XBOOLE_0:def 3;
end;
hence
sum_of (R,S) is irreflexive
; verum