In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 27 Dez., 12:31, gus gassmann <g...@nospam.com> wrote: > > On 26/12/2012 5:03 PM, fom wrote: > > > > > WM is an empiricist. > > > > WM is a fool. An arrogant, blustering, uneducable fool. > > Then try to educate at least the other members of this group: How can > they define more than countably many infinite paths of the CIBT by > means of nodes? Remember, Cantor is said to have proved uncountability > my means of *digits at finite indices* - by asserting that there must > be some more reals than can be counted.
And Cantor did it so successfuly than no one since has been successful in countering that argument.
All nodes of even the most infinite of paths have finite indices, so there is no problem in defining an infinite path by its finitely indexed nodes.
One can even ennumerate the nodes giving each one a unique natural number at which point each infinite path becomes identified with an infinite subset of |N. --