On Jun 15, 4:44 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 15 Jun., 22:04, 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." > > > You agree that if actually infinite paths exist > > your claim is false. > > No. I see that my claim is correct under any circumstances. That fact > is independent of whether or nor actually infinite paths exist.
Nope. You have repeatedly agreed that if actually infinite paths exist, then a path p exists that can be distinguished from every element of P.
WM: If actually infinite paths exist, then there is a path p that can be WM: distinguished from every path of P.
You also clasim
WM: And: WM: There is no path p that can be distinguished from every path of P.
<snip>
> > > Every path of the tree is is from P. > > > Nope. Every *node* of the tree is from P. > > Every path of the tree is from P. I explicitly forbid every other path > to enter my tree.
Nope. You cannot forbid every other path to enter the tree. You add nodes to the tree. When you add a node to the tree you add subsets of nodes to the tree as well. You add a subset of nodes that is not in a single element of P.
