Closed BTernaryTau closed 2 weeks ago
I kept the current nnadju proof around as nnadjuALT since it's much shorter and uses a different approach, though I'm not sure how strong the requirements are for justifying keeping an alternate proof.
Shorter proof and different approach generally would be a reason to have an ALT proof.
If someone who has looked more closely at this case than I have has an opinion, feel free to speak up, but seems like a case where it seems like a good idea.
This change revises nnadju, ficardun, and ficardun2 so that they no longer depend on ax-rep. It also introduces ficardadju as a new theorem.
I kept the current nnadju proof around as nnadjuALT since it's much shorter and uses a different approach, though I'm not sure how strong the requirements are for justifying keeping an alternate proof.
The revision to ficardun in particular affects a lot of other theorems through hashun, including hashbc (Metamath 100 proof #58).