lean2/examples/lean/primes.lean
Leonardo de Moura 368fcb5ff9 refactor(builtin/kernel): rename refute to by_contradiction
Signed-off-by: Leonardo de Moura <leonardo@microsoft.com>
2014-02-12 08:49:19 -08:00

549 lines
18 KiB
Text
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
-- theory primes.lean
-- author: Jeremy Avigad
--
-- Experimenting with Lean.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
import macros
import tactic
using Nat
--
-- could go in kernel
--
theorem or_imp (p q : Bool) : (p q) ↔ (¬ p → q)
:= subst (symm (imp_or (¬ p) q)) (not_not_eq p)
--
-- fundamental properties of Nat
--
theorem cases_on {P : Nat → Bool} (a : Nat) (H1 : P 0) (H2 : ∀ (n : Nat), P (n + 1)) : P a
:= induction_on a H1 (take n : Nat, assume ih : P n, H2 n)
theorem strong_induction_on {P : Nat → Bool} (a : Nat) (H : ∀ n, (∀ m, m < n → P m) → P n) : P a
:= @strong_induction P H a
-- in hindsight, now I know I don't need these
theorem one_ne_zero : 1 ≠ 0 := succ_nz 0
theorem two_ne_zero : 2 ≠ 0 := succ_nz 1
--
-- observation: the proof of lt_le_trans in Nat is not needed
--
theorem lt_le_trans2 {a b c : Nat} (H1 : a < b) (H2 : b ≤ c) : a < c
:= le_trans H1 H2
--
-- also, contrapos and mt are the same theorem
--
theorem contrapos2 {a b : Bool} (H : a → b) : ¬ b → ¬ a
:= mt H
--
-- properties of lt and le
--
theorem succ_le_succ {a b : Nat} (H : a + 1 ≤ b + 1) : a ≤ b
:=
obtain (x : Nat) (Hx : a + 1 + x = b + 1), from lt_elim H,
have H2 : a + x + 1 = b + 1, from (calc
a + x + 1 = a + (x + 1) : add_assoc _ _ _
... = a + (1 + x) : { add_comm x 1 }
... = a + 1 + x : symm (add_assoc _ _ _)
... = b + 1 : Hx),
have H3 : a + x = b, from (succ_inj H2),
show a ≤ b, from (le_intro H3)
-- should we keep this duplication or < and <=?
theorem lt_succ {a b : Nat} (H : a < b + 1) : a ≤ b
:= succ_le_succ H
theorem succ_le_succ_eq (a b : Nat) : a + 1 ≤ b + 1 ↔ a ≤ b
:= iff_intro succ_le_succ (assume H : a ≤ b, le_add H 1)
theorem lt_succ_eq (a b : Nat) : a < b + 1 ↔ a ≤ b
:= succ_le_succ_eq a b
theorem le_or_lt (a : Nat) : ∀ b : Nat, a ≤ b b < a
:=
induction_on a (
show ∀b, 0 ≤ b b < 0,
from take b, or_introl (le_zero b) _
) (
take a,
assume ih : ∀b, a ≤ b b < a,
show ∀b, a + 1 ≤ b b < a + 1,
from
take b,
cases_on b (
show a + 1 ≤ 0 0 < a + 1,
from or_intror _ (le_add (le_zero a) 1)
) (
take b,
have H : a ≤ b b < a, from ih b,
show a + 1 ≤ b + 1 b + 1 < a + 1,
from or_elim H (
assume H1 : a ≤ b,
or_introl (le_add H1 1) (b + 1 < a + 1)
) (
assume H2 : b < a,
or_intror (a + 1 ≤ b + 1) (le_add H2 1)
)
)
)
theorem not_le_lt {a b : Nat} : ¬ a ≤ b → b < a
:= (or_imp _ _) ◂ le_or_lt a b
theorem not_lt_le {a b : Nat} : ¬ a < b → b ≤ a
:= (or_imp _ _) ◂ (or_comm _ _ ◂ le_or_lt b a)
theorem lt_not_le {a b : Nat} (H : a < b) : ¬ b ≤ a
:= not_intro (take H1 : b ≤ a, absurd (lt_le_trans H H1) (lt_nrefl a))
theorem le_not_lt {a b : Nat} (H : a ≤ b) : ¬ b < a
:= not_intro (take H1 : b < a, absurd H (lt_not_le H1))
theorem not_le_iff {a b : Nat} : ¬ a ≤ b ↔ b < a
:= iff_intro (@not_le_lt a b) (@lt_not_le b a)
theorem not_lt_iff {a b : Nat} : ¬ a < b ↔ b ≤ a
:= iff_intro (@not_lt_le a b) (@le_not_lt b a)
theorem le_iff {a b : Nat} : a ≤ b ↔ a < b a = b
:=
iff_intro (
assume H : a ≤ b,
show a < b a = b,
from or_elim (em (a = b)) (
take H1 : a = b,
show a < b a = b, from or_intror _ H1
) (
take H2 : a ≠ b,
have H3 : ¬ b ≤ a,
from not_intro (take H4: b ≤ a, absurd (le_antisym H H4) H2),
have H4 : a < b, from resolve1 (le_or_lt b a) H3,
show a < b a = b, from or_introl H4 _
)
)(
assume H : a < b a = b,
show a ≤ b,
from or_elim H (
take H1 : a < b, lt_le H1
) (
take H1 : a = b, subst (le_refl a) H1
)
)
theorem ne_symm_iff {A : (Type U)} (a b : A) : a ≠ b ↔ b ≠ a
:= iff_intro ne_symm ne_symm
theorem lt_iff (a b : Nat) : a < b ↔ a ≤ b ∧ a ≠ b
:=
calc
a < b = ¬ b ≤ a : symm (not_le_iff)
... = ¬ (b < a b = a) : { le_iff }
... = ¬ b < a ∧ b ≠ a : not_or _ _
... = a ≤ b ∧ b ≠ a : { not_lt_iff }
... = a ≤ b ∧ a ≠ b : { ne_symm_iff _ _ }
theorem ne_zero_ge_one {x : Nat} (H : x ≠ 0) : x ≥ 1
:= resolve2 (le_iff ◂ (le_zero x)) (ne_symm H)
theorem ne_zero_one_ge_two {x : Nat} (H0 : x ≠ 0) (H1 : x ≠ 1) : x ≥ 2
:= resolve2 (le_iff ◂ (ne_zero_ge_one H0)) (ne_symm H1)
-- the forward direction can be replaced by ne_zero_ge_one, but
-- note the comments below
theorem ne_zero_iff (n : Nat) : n ≠ 0 ↔ n > 0
:=
iff_intro (
assume H : n ≠ 0,
by_contradiction (
assume H1 : ¬ n > 0,
-- curious: if you make the arguments implicit in the next line,
-- it fails (the evaluator is getting in the way, I think)
have H2 : n = 0, from le_antisym (@not_lt_le 0 n H1) (le_zero n),
absurd H2 H
)
) (
-- here too
assume H : n > 0, ne_symm (@lt_ne 0 n H)
)
-- Note: this differs from Leo's naming conventions
theorem mul_right_mono {x y : Nat} (H : x ≤ y) (z : Nat) : x * z ≤ y * z
:=
obtain (w : Nat) (Hw : x + w = y),
from le_elim H,
le_intro (
show x * z + w * z = y * z,
from calc
x * z + w * z = (x + w) * z : symm (distributel x w z)
... = y * z : { Hw }
)
theorem mul_left_mono (x : Nat) {y z : Nat} (H : y ≤ z) : x * y ≤ x * z
:= subst (subst (mul_right_mono H x) (mul_comm y x)) (mul_comm z x)
theorem le_addr (a b : Nat) : a ≤ a + b
:= le_intro (refl (a + b))
theorem le_addl (a b : Nat) : a ≤ b + a
:= subst (le_addr a b) (add_comm a b)
theorem add_left_mono {a b : Nat} (c : Nat) (H : a ≤ b) : c + a ≤ c + b
:= subst (subst (le_add H c) (add_comm a c)) (add_comm b c)
theorem mul_right_strict_mono {x y z : Nat} (H : x < y) (znez : z ≠ 0) : x * z < y * z
:=
obtain (w : Nat) (Hw : x + 1 + w = y),
from le_elim H,
have H1 : y * z = x * z + w * z + z,
from calc
y * z = (x + 1 + w) * z : { symm Hw }
... = (x + (1 + w)) * z : { add_assoc _ _ _ }
... = (x + (w + 1)) * z : { add_comm _ _ }
... = (x + w + 1) * z : { symm (add_assoc _ _ _) }
... = (x + w) * z + 1 * z : distributel _ _ _
... = (x + w) * z + z : { mul_onel _ }
... = x * z + w * z + z : { distributel _ _ _ },
have H2 : x * z ≤ x * z + w * z, from le_addr _ _,
have H3 : x * z + w * z < x * z + w * z + z, from add_left_mono _ (ne_zero_ge_one znez),
show x * z < y * z, from subst (le_lt_trans H2 H3) (symm H1)
theorem mul_left_strict_mono {x y z : Nat} (H : x < y) (znez : z ≠ 0) : z * x < z * y
:= subst (subst (mul_right_strict_mono H znez) (mul_comm x z)) (mul_comm y z)
theorem mul_left_le_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : a * b ≤ a * c) (anez : a ≠ 0) : b ≤ c
:=
by_contradiction (
assume H1 : ¬ b ≤ c,
have H2 : a * c < a * b, from mul_left_strict_mono (not_le_lt H1) anez,
show false, from absurd H (lt_not_le H2)
)
theorem mul_right_le_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : b * a ≤ c * a) (anez : a ≠ 0) : b ≤ c
:= mul_left_le_cancel (subst (subst H (mul_comm b a)) (mul_comm c a)) anez
theorem mul_left_lt_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : a * b < a * c) : b < c
:=
by_contradiction (
assume H1 : ¬ b < c,
have H2 : a * c ≤ a * b, from mul_left_mono a (not_lt_le H1),
show false, from absurd H (le_not_lt H2)
)
theorem mul_right_lt_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : b * a < c * a) : b < c
:= mul_left_lt_cancel (subst (subst H (mul_comm b a)) (mul_comm c a))
theorem add_right_comm (a b c : Nat) : a + b + c = a + c + b
:=
calc
a + b + c = a + (b + c) : add_assoc _ _ _
... = a + (c + b) : { add_comm b c }
... = a + c + b : symm (add_assoc _ _ _)
theorem add_left_le_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : a + c ≤ b + c) : a ≤ b
:=
obtain (d : Nat) (Hd : a + c + d = b + c), from le_elim H,
le_intro (add_injl (subst Hd (add_right_comm a c d)))
theorem add_right_le_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : c + a ≤ c + b) : a ≤ b
:= add_left_le_cancel (subst (subst H (add_comm c a)) (add_comm c b))
--
-- more properties of multiplication
--
theorem mul_left_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : a * b = a * c) (anez : a ≠ 0) : b = c
:=
have H1 : a * b ≤ a * c, from subst (le_refl _) H,
have H2 : a * c ≤ a * b, from subst (le_refl _) H,
le_antisym (mul_left_le_cancel H1 anez) (mul_left_le_cancel H2 anez)
theorem mul_right_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H : b * a = c * a) (anez : a ≠ 0) : b = c
:= mul_left_cancel (subst (subst H (mul_comm b a)) (mul_comm c a)) anez
--
-- divisibility
--
definition dvd (a b : Nat) : Bool := ∃ c, a * c = b
infix 50 | : dvd
theorem dvd_intro {a b c : Nat} (H : a * c = b) : a | b
:= exists_intro c H
theorem dvd_elim {a b : Nat} (H : a | b) : ∃ c, a * c = b
:= H
theorem dvd_self (n : Nat) : n | n := dvd_intro (mul_oner n)
theorem one_dvd (a : Nat) : 1 | a
:= dvd_intro (mul_onel a)
theorem zero_dvd {a : Nat} (H: 0 | a) : a = 0
:=
obtain (w : Nat) (H1 : 0 * w = a), from H,
subst (symm H1) (mul_zerol _)
theorem dvd_zero (a : Nat) : a | 0
:= exists_intro 0 (mul_zeror _)
theorem dvd_trans {a b c} (H1 : a | b) (H2 : b | c) : a | c
:=
obtain (w1 : Nat) (Hw1 : a * w1 = b), from H1,
obtain (w2 : Nat) (Hw2 : b * w2 = c), from H2,
exists_intro (w1 * w2)
calc a * (w1 * w2) = a * w1 * w2 : symm (mul_assoc a w1 w2)
... = b * w2 : { Hw1 }
... = c : Hw2
theorem dvd_le {x y : Nat} (H : x | y) (ynez : y ≠ 0) : x ≤ y
:=
obtain (w : Nat) (Hw : x * w = y), from H,
have wnez : w ≠ 0, from
not_intro (take H1 : w = 0, absurd (
calc y = x * w : symm Hw
... = x * 0 : { H1 }
... = 0 : mul_zeror x
) ynez),
have H2 : x * 1 ≤ x * w, from mul_left_mono x (ne_zero_ge_one wnez),
show x ≤ y, from subst (subst H2 (mul_oner x)) Hw
theorem dvd_mul_right {a b : Nat} (H : a | b) (c : Nat) : a | b * c
:=
obtain (d : Nat) (Hd : a * d = b), from dvd_elim H,
dvd_intro (
calc
a * (d * c) = (a * d) * c : symm (mul_assoc _ _ _)
... = b * c : { Hd }
)
theorem dvd_mul_left {a b : Nat} (H : a | b) (c : Nat) : a | c * b
:= subst (dvd_mul_right H c) (mul_comm b c)
theorem dvd_add {a b c : Nat} (H1 : a | b) (H2 : a | c) : a | b + c
:=
obtain (w1 : Nat) (Hw1 : a * w1 = b), from H1,
obtain (w2 : Nat) (Hw2 : a * w2 = c), from H2,
exists_intro (w1 + w2)
calc a * (w1 + w2) = a * w1 + a * w2 : distributer _ _ _
... = b + a * w2 : { Hw1 }
... = b + c : { Hw2 }
theorem dvd_add_cancel {a b c : Nat} (H1 : a | b + c) (H2 : a | b) : a | c
:=
or_elim (em (a = 0)) (
assume az : a = 0,
have H3 : c = 0, from
calc c = 0 + c : symm (add_zerol _)
... = b + c : { symm (zero_dvd (subst H2 az)) }
... = 0 : zero_dvd (subst H1 az),
show a | c, from subst (dvd_zero a) (symm H3)
) (
assume anz : a ≠ 0,
obtain (w1 : Nat) (Hw1 : a * w1 = b + c), from H1,
obtain (w2 : Nat) (Hw2 : a * w2 = b), from H2,
have H3 : a * w1 = a * w2 + c, from subst Hw1 (symm Hw2),
have H4 : a * w2 ≤ a * w1, from le_intro (symm H3),
have H5 : w2 ≤ w1, from mul_left_le_cancel H4 anz,
obtain (w3 : Nat) (Hw3 : w2 + w3 = w1), from le_elim H5,
have H6 : b + a * w3 = b + c, from
calc
b + a * w3 = a * w2 + a * w3 : { symm Hw2 }
... = a * (w2 + w3) : symm (distributer _ _ _)
... = a * w1 : { Hw3 }
... = b + c : Hw1,
have H7 : a * w3 = c, from add_injr H6,
show a | c, from dvd_intro H7
)
--
-- primes
--
definition prime p := p ≥ 2 ∧ forall m, m | p → m = 1 m = p
theorem not_prime_has_divisor {n : Nat} (H1 : n ≥ 2) (H2 : ¬ prime n) : ∃ m, m | n ∧ m ≠ 1 ∧ m ≠ n
:=
have H3 : ¬ n ≥ 2 ¬ (∀ m : Nat, m | n → m = 1 m = n),
from not_and _ _ ◂ H2,
have H4 : ¬ ¬ n ≥ 2,
from (symm (not_not_eq _)) ◂ H1,
obtain (m : Nat) (H5 : ¬ (m | n → m = 1 m = n)),
from not_forall_elim (resolve1 H3 H4),
have H6 : m | n ∧ ¬ (m = 1 m = n),
from (not_implies _ _) ◂ H5,
have H7 : ¬ (m = 1 m = n) ↔ (m ≠ 1 ∧ m ≠ n),
from not_or (m = 1) (m = n),
have H8 : m | n ∧ m ≠ 1 ∧ m ≠ n,
from subst H6 H7,
show ∃ m, m | n ∧ m ≠ 1 ∧ m ≠ n,
from exists_intro m H8
theorem not_prime_has_divisor2 {n : Nat} (H1 : n ≥ 2) (H2 : ¬ prime n) :
∃ m, m | n ∧ m ≥ 2 ∧ m < n
:=
have n_ne_0 : n ≠ 0, from
not_intro (take n0 : n = 0, substp (fun n, n ≥ 2) H1 n0),
obtain (m : Nat) (Hm : m | n ∧ m ≠ 1 ∧ m ≠ n),
from not_prime_has_divisor H1 H2,
let m_dvd_n := and_eliml Hm in
let m_ne_1 := and_eliml (and_elimr Hm) in
let m_ne_n := and_elimr (and_elimr Hm) in
have m_ne_0 : m ≠ 0, from
not_intro (
take m0 : m = 0,
have n0 : n = 0, from zero_dvd (subst m_dvd_n m0),
absurd n0 n_ne_0
),
exists_intro m (
and_intro m_dvd_n (
and_intro (
show m ≥ 2, from ne_zero_one_ge_two m_ne_0 m_ne_1
) (
have m_le_n : m ≤ n, from dvd_le m_dvd_n n_ne_0,
show m < n, from resolve2 (le_iff ◂ m_le_n) m_ne_n
)
)
)
theorem has_prime_divisor {n : Nat} : n ≥ 2 → ∃ p, prime p ∧ p | n
:=
strong_induction_on n (
take n,
assume ih : ∀ m, m < n → m ≥ 2 → ∃ p, prime p ∧ p | m,
assume n_ge_2 : n ≥ 2,
show ∃ p, prime p ∧ p | n, from
or_elim (em (prime n)) (
assume H : prime n,
exists_intro n (and_intro H (dvd_self n))
) (
assume H : ¬ prime n,
obtain (m : Nat) (Hm : m | n ∧ m ≥ 2 ∧ m < n),
from not_prime_has_divisor2 n_ge_2 H,
obtain (p : Nat) (Hp : prime p ∧ p | m),
from ih m (and_elimr (and_elimr Hm)) (and_eliml (and_elimr Hm)),
have p_dvd_n : p | n, from dvd_trans (and_elimr Hp) (and_eliml Hm),
exists_intro p (and_intro (and_eliml Hp) p_dvd_n)
)
)
--
-- factorial
--
variable fact : Nat → Nat
axiom fact_0 : fact 0 = 1
axiom fact_succ : ∀ n, fact (n + 1) = (n + 1) * fact n
-- can the simplifier do this?
theorem fact_1 : fact 1 = 1
:=
calc
fact 1 = fact (0 + 1) : { symm (add_zerol 1) }
... = (0 + 1) * fact 0 : fact_succ _
... = 1 * fact 0 : { add_zerol 1 }
... = 1 * 1 : { fact_0 }
... = 1 : mul_oner _
theorem fact_ne_0 (n : Nat) : fact n ≠ 0
:=
induction_on n (
not_intro (
assume H : fact 0 = 0,
have H1 : 1 = 0, from (subst H fact_0),
absurd H1 one_ne_zero
)
) (
take n,
assume ih : fact n ≠ 0,
not_intro (
assume H : fact (n + 1) = 0,
have H1 : n + 1 = 0, from
mul_right_cancel (
calc
(n + 1) * fact n = fact (n + 1) : symm (fact_succ n)
... = 0 : H
... = 0 * fact n : symm (mul_zerol _)
) ih,
absurd H1 (succ_nz _)
)
)
theorem dvd_fact {m n : Nat} (m_gt_0 : m > 0) (m_le_n : m ≤ n) : m | fact n
:=
obtain (m' : Nat) (Hm' : 1 + m' = m), from le_elim m_gt_0,
obtain (n' : Nat) (Hn' : 1 + n' = n), from le_elim (le_trans m_gt_0 m_le_n),
have m'_le_n' : m' ≤ n',
from add_right_le_cancel (subst (subst m_le_n (symm Hm')) (symm Hn')),
have H : ∀ n' m', m' ≤ n' → m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1), from
induction (
take m' ,
assume m'_le_0 : m' ≤ 0,
have Hm' : m' + 1 = 1,
from calc
m' + 1 = 0 + 1 : { le_antisym m'_le_0 (le_zero m') }
... = 1 : add_zerol _,
show m' + 1 | fact (0 + 1), from subst (one_dvd _) (symm Hm')
) (
take n',
assume ih : ∀m', m' ≤ n' → m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1),
take m',
assume Hm' : m' ≤ n' + 1,
have H1 : m' < n' + 1 m' = n' + 1, from le_iff ◂ Hm',
or_elim H1 (
assume H2 : m' < n' + 1,
have H3 : m' ≤ n', from lt_succ H2,
have H4 : m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1), from ih _ H3,
have H5 : m' + 1 | (n' + 1 + 1) * fact (n' + 1), from dvd_mul_left H4 _,
show m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1 + 1), from subst H5 (symm (fact_succ _))
) (
assume H2 : m' = n' + 1,
have H3 : m' + 1 | n' + 1 + 1, from subst (dvd_self _) H2,
have H4 : m' + 1 | (n' + 1 + 1) * fact (n' + 1), from dvd_mul_right H3 _,
show m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1 + 1), from subst H4 (symm (fact_succ _))
)
),
have H1 : m' + 1 | fact (n' + 1), from H _ _ m'_le_n',
show m | fact n,
from (subst (subst (subst (subst H1 (add_comm m' 1)) Hm') (add_comm n' 1)) Hn')
theorem primes_infinite (n : Nat) : ∃ p, p ≥ n ∧ prime p
:=
let m := fact (n + 1) in
have Hn1 : n + 1 ≥ 1, from le_addl _ _,
have m_ge_1 : m ≥ 1, from ne_zero_ge_one (fact_ne_0 _),
have m1_ge_2 : m + 1 ≥ 2, from le_add m_ge_1 1,
obtain (p : Nat) (Hp : prime p ∧ p | m + 1), from has_prime_divisor m1_ge_2,
let prime_p := and_eliml Hp in
let p_dvd_m1 := and_elimr Hp in
have p_ge_2 : p ≥ 2, from and_eliml prime_p,
have two_gt_0 : 2 > 0, from (ne_zero_iff 2) ◂ (succ_nz 1),
-- fails if arguments are left implicit
have p_gt_0 : p > 0, from @lt_le_trans 0 2 p two_gt_0 p_ge_2,
have p_ge_n : p ≥ n, from
by_contradiction (
assume H1 : ¬ p ≥ n,
have H2 : p < n, from not_le_lt H1,
have H3 : p ≤ n + 1, from lt_le (lt_le_trans H2 (le_addr n 1)),
have H4 : p | m, from dvd_fact p_gt_0 H3,
have H5 : p | 1, from dvd_add_cancel p_dvd_m1 H4,
have H6 : p ≤ 1, from dvd_le H5 (succ_nz 0),
have H7 : 2 ≤ 1, from le_trans p_ge_2 H6,
absurd H7 (lt_nrefl 1)
),
exists_intro p (and_intro p_ge_n prime_p)