I am puzzled about proving
A ==> B ==> C ==> B
in Isabelle. Obviously you could
apply simp
but how could I prove this with using rules?
Alternatively, is there a way to dump the rules simp
used? Thanks.
If you really want to understand how proofs work, you should forget both about funny tactics and automated reasoning tools as a start.
The statement A ==> B ==> C ==> B
(using this special ==>
connective) of Isabelle/Pure is immediately true, so its proof in Isabelle/Isar is:
lemma "A ==> B ==> C ==> B" .
That's it, just .
(which abbreviates by this
, but the this
is actually empty here).
As slightly less vacuous proof uses actual Isabelle/HOL connectives, which you can then handle by standard introduction or elimination steps. E.g. like this:
lemma "A --> B --> C --> B"
proof
show "B --> C --> B"
proof
assume b: B
show "C --> B"
proof
show B by (rule b)
qed
qed
qed
But that is not so interesting either: you build up a boring implication that that is then decomposed until you are finished.
To find more interesting Isabelle/Isar proofs just do some web search, or look through the sources that come with the system. A totally arbitrary example is here: Drinker.
There are also tons of manuals, actually too many of them.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With