In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 27 Jan., 10:27, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <7760d43f-8d52-4675-a42b-f8bda2f67...@4g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>, > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > The reason for this uncertainty is the > > > fact, that the Binary Tree constructed by all finite paths cannot be > > > distinguished by digits (i.e. without further definition) from that > > > Binary Tree that contains all infinite paths too. > > > > They can, nevertheless, easily be distinguished, because in binary tree > > in which all paths are finite there will only be finitely many nodes. > > If you cannot or refuse to accept my repeatedly given definition (a > finite initial segment of an infinite path I call a finite path) then > discuss your ideas in a separate thread, please, and wait until > someone is interested.
When you post to sci.math, anyone is free to point out your errors. and your imaginary Complete Infinite Binary Trees do not exist outside of your wild weird world of WMytheology. --