|
|
Re: Matheology § 191
Posted:
Jan 14, 2013 4:17 AM
|
|
On 13 Jan., 23:51, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> In article
> <b69929e5-f161-4923-839c-6d822b315...@w3g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
>
> WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> > On 13 Jan., 22:26, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
>
> > > One does not distinguish one infinite path from all others by anything
> > > less that an infinite set of nodes. Actually any infinite subset of the
> > > infinite set of nodes from any infinite path is enough to distinguish it
> > > from all others, but no finite subset of its node set is sufficient
>
> > and no infinite set can be given other than by a finite definition.
>
> > Regards, WM
>
> But any listing of infinite binary sequences such as can define a path
No infinite binary sequence can be listed.
No infinite binary sequence is used in Cantor's "proof".
Regards, WM
|
|
