Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Matheology § 198
Replies: 40   Last Post: Jan 26, 2013 6:54 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Virgil

Posts: 6,972
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 198
Posted: Jan 26, 2013 6:54 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article
<1331a805-5b2c-426d-95f1-09b12b42da05@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 26 Jan., 23:10, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <054da2be-2f0a-4290-b356-10eb0a5e1...@r14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >  WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> > > On 26 Jan., 01:46, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Of interest is this: If the same set of
> > > > > nodes has to describe both, the Binary Tree with finite paths and that
> > > > > with infinite paths, then it is impossible to discern, alone by nodes,
> > > > > whether we work in the former or the latter.

> >
> > > > There is no such thing as a Complete Infinite Binary Tree with finite
> > > > paths.

> >
> > > So you agree that there is a level omega?
> >
> > Why should I agree to add another level to the infinitely many finite
> > levels that must already exist in order to have a COMPLETE INFINITE
> > BINARY TREE at all?

>
> These levels exist already after constructing all finite initial
> segments of all paths, abbreviated by "all finite paths". Or can you
> determine a node or level of the complete infinite Binary Tree that
> does not exist?


The standard definition of a path in the kind of binary trees we are
talking about is that it is a MAXIMAL sequence of parent-child nodes.

In other words a path's 'first' node in parent-child order cannot be the
child of any node of the tree outside that path and its 'last' node, if
any, cannot have any child node outside that path.

Since in a Complete Infinite Binary Tree every node has two child nodes,
any finite set of nodes must have some last node with no child node in
the set, but that node must have two child nodes.

Thus no finite set of nodes can be a maximal sequence of parent-child
nodes in a Complete Infinite Binary Tree.

Thus no finite set of nodes can be a PATH in a Complete Infinite Binary
Tree.

This proof should be simple enough and straightforward enough for even
WM to understand:

In any COMPLETE INFINITE BINARY TREE any sequence of parent-child linked
nodes that has a last (most childish) node cannot be a maximal such
sequence and thus cannot be a path in any CIBT.

Thus no finite set of nodes in a Complete Infinite Binary Tree can be a
path in such a tree.

And it is easily proved, a la Cantor, that there cannot be any
surjection from |N to the set of all paths in a Complete Infinite Binary
Tree, at least outside of Wolkenmuekenheim.
--




Date Subject Author
1/24/13
Read Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Scott Berg
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/24/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/26/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/26/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/26/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/26/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
William Hughes
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology § 198
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil
1/25/13
Read Re: Matheology � 198
Virgil

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.