let F, G be set ; :: thesis:
assume that
A1: F <> {} and
A2: G <> {} ; :: thesis:
consider y being object such that
A3: y in F by A1, XBOOLE_0:def 1;
reconsider y = y as set by TARSKI:1;
consider z being object such that
A4: z in G by A2, XBOOLE_0:def 1;
reconsider z = z as set by TARSKI:1;
A5: meet (INTERSECTION (F,G)) c= (meet F) /\ (meet G)

proof

let x be object ; :: according to TARSKI:def 3 :: thesis:
assume A6: x in meet (INTERSECTION (F,G)) ; :: thesis:
for Z being set st Z in G holds
x in Z

proof

let Z be set ; :: thesis:
assume Z in G ; :: thesis:
then y /\ Z in INTERSECTION (F,G) by A3, SETFAM_1:def 5;
then x in y /\ Z by A6, SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence x in Z by XBOOLE_0:def 4; :: thesis:

end;

then A7: x in meet G by A2, SETFAM_1:def 1;
for Z being set st Z in F holds
x in Z

proof

let Z be set ; :: thesis:
assume Z in F ; :: thesis:
then Z /\ z in INTERSECTION (F,G) by A4, SETFAM_1:def 5;
then x in Z /\ z by A6, SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence x in Z by XBOOLE_0:def 4; :: thesis:

end;

then x in meet F by A1, SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence x in (meet F) /\ (meet G) by A7, XBOOLE_0:def 4; :: thesis:

end;

A8: y /\ z in INTERSECTION (F,G) by A3, A4, SETFAM_1:def 5;
(meet F) /\ (meet G) c= meet (INTERSECTION (F,G))

proof

let x be object ; :: according to TARSKI:def 3 :: thesis:
assume x in (meet F) /\ (meet G) ; :: thesis:
then A9: ( x in meet F & x in meet G ) by XBOOLE_0:def 4;
for Z being set st Z in INTERSECTION (F,G) holds
x in Z

proof

let Z be set ; :: thesis:
assume Z in INTERSECTION (F,G) ; :: thesis:
then consider Z1, Z2 being set such that
A10: ( Z1 in F & Z2 in G ) and
A11: Z = Z1 /\ Z2 by SETFAM_1:def 5;
( x in Z1 & x in Z2 ) by A9, A10, SETFAM_1:def 1;
hence x in Z by A11, XBOOLE_0:def 4; :: thesis:

end;

hence x in meet (INTERSECTION (F,G)) by A8, SETFAM_1:def 1; :: thesis:

end;

hence (meet F) /\ (meet G) = meet (INTERSECTION (F,G)) by A5; :: thesis: