The goal of rspc.2 is to state that `ps` is the same as `ph`, with all instances of `x` replaced by `A.
So logically there should not be any instance of `x` remaining in `ps`.
There are two ways to state this constraint:
On the website page, the "allowed substitution hint" lists all substitutions which are not forbidden in the first way, by a "distinct variable conditions".
It is a facility which is built automatically, but does not take
the "not free hypotheses" into account, therefore the name "hint".
So you're right to point out that that in this case, while it's
not disallowed by distinct variable conditions, it's actually
disallowed by the not free hypothesis `rspc.1`
BR,
_
Thierry
Theorem rspc has the allowed substitution hint ps(x).
Is this correct? Doesn't the hypothesis rspc.1 say that x does not depend on x?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to metamath+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/c8a236ac-28c6-4d04-a221-f2a556ee8819n%40googlegroups.com.