# Library Coq.Logic.Diaconescu

Diaconescu showed that the Axiom of Choice entails Excluded-Middle
in topoi [Diaconescu75]. Lacas and Werner adapted the proof to show
that the axiom of choice in equivalence classes entails
Excluded-Middle in Type Theory [LacasWerner99].
Three variants of Diaconescu's result in type theory are shown below.
A. A proof that the relational form of the Axiom of Choice +
Extensionality for Predicates entails Excluded-Middle (by Hugo
Herbelin)
B. A proof that the relational form of the Axiom of Choice + Proof
Irrelevance entails Excluded-Middle for Equality Statements (by
Benjamin Werner)
C. A proof that extensional Hilbert epsilon's description operator
entails excluded-middle (taken from Bell [Bell93])
See also [Carlström04] for a discussion of the connection between the
Extensional Axiom of Choice and Excluded-Middle
[Diaconescu75] Radu Diaconescu, Axiom of Choice and Complementation,
in Proceedings of AMS, vol 51, pp 176-178, 1975.
[LacasWerner99] Samuel Lacas, Benjamin Werner, Which Choices imply
the excluded middle?, preprint, 1999.
[Bell93] John L. Bell, Hilbert's epsilon operator and classical
logic, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 22: 1-18, 1993
[Carlström04] Jesper Carlström, EM + Ext + AC_int is equivalent
to AC_ext, Mathematical Logic Quaterly, vol 50(3), pp 236-240, 2004.

# Pred. Ext. + Rel. Axiom of Choice -> Excluded-Middle

The axiom of extensionality for predicates

Definition PredicateExtensionality :=

forall P Q:bool -> Prop, (forall b:bool, P b <-> Q b) -> P = Q.

From predicate extensionality we get propositional extensionality
hence proof-irrelevance

Require Import ClassicalFacts.

Variable pred_extensionality : PredicateExtensionality.

Lemma prop_ext : forall A B:Prop, (A <-> B) -> A = B.

Lemma proof_irrel : forall (A:Prop) (a1 a2:A), a1 = a2.

From proof-irrelevance and relational choice, we get guarded
relational choice

Require Import ChoiceFacts.

Variable rel_choice : RelationalChoice.

Lemma guarded_rel_choice : GuardedRelationalChoice.

The form of choice we need: there is a functional relation which chooses
an element in any non empty subset of bool

Require Import Bool.

Lemma AC_bool_subset_to_bool :

exists R : (bool -> Prop) -> bool -> Prop,

(forall P:bool -> Prop,

(exists b : bool, P b) ->

exists b : bool, P b /\ R P b /\ (forall b':bool, R P b' -> b = b')).

The proof of the excluded middle Remark: P could have been in Set or Type

# Proof-Irrel. + Rel. Axiom of Choice -> Excl.-Middle for Equality

Section ProofIrrel_RelChoice_imp_EqEM.

Variable rel_choice : RelationalChoice.

Variable proof_irrelevance : forall P:Prop , forall x y:P, x=y.

Let a1 and a2 be two elements in some type A

We build the subset A' of A made of a1 and a2

Definition A' := @sigT A (fun x => x=a1 \/ x=a2).

Definition a1':A'.

Defined.

Definition a2':A'.

Defined.

By proof-irrelevance, projection is a retraction

But from the actual proofs of being in A', we can assert in the
proof-irrelevant world the existence of relevant boolean witnesses

Lemma decide : forall x:A', exists y:bool ,

(projT1 x = a1 /\ y = true ) \/ (projT1 x = a2 /\ y = false).

Thanks to the axiom of choice, the boolean witnesses move from the
propositional world to the relevant world

An alternative more concise proof can be done by directly using
the guarded relational choice

# Extensional Hilbert's epsilon description operator -> Excluded-Middle

Section ExtensionalEpsilon_imp_EM.

Variable epsilon : forall A : Type, inhabited A -> (A -> Prop) -> A.

Hypothesis epsilon_spec :

forall (A:Type) (i:inhabited A) (P:A->Prop),

(exists x, P x) -> P (epsilon A i P).

Hypothesis epsilon_extensionality :

forall (A:Type) (i:inhabited A) (P Q:A->Prop),

(forall a, P a <-> Q a) -> epsilon A i P = epsilon A i Q.

Theorem extensional_epsilon_imp_EM : forall P:Prop, P \/ ~ P.

End ExtensionalEpsilon_imp_EM.