In article <222103da-c8b9-41d5-9461-689cdc417c59@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 13 Jun., 14:17, William Hughes <wpihug...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Your claim is that "no possibility exists to construct or to > > > > distinguish by one or many or infinitely many nodes > > > > of the tree another path." > > > > > Yes. > > > > > You agree that there is a path p in the tree > > > > You agree that path p can be distinguished > > from every element of P. > > If actually infinite paths exist! That is obviously a prerequisite. > Otherwise the construction using terminating paths covers everything.
You construction would require the existence of potentially infinite sets, which does not occur in any known set theory system. > > > > You do not agree that > > the tree contains a path that > > can be distinguished from every element of P. > > I can prove it.
Between what WM claims to be able to prove and what he actually is able to prove lies an unbridgeable gulf.
