On 18 Mrz., 17:59, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > On 3/18/2013 7:03 AM, WM wrote: > > > On 18 Mrz., 06:28, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > It has been done already long ago (see Matheology § 226). > > The isomorphism is from |R,+,* to |R,+,*. Only in one case the > > elements of |R are written as binary sequences and the other time as > > paths of the Binary Tree. Virgil is simply too stupid to understand > > that. > > It has not been done at all. > > You may perform the requested task according to > the standard definitions used in mathematics > or you may propose new definitions to be > considered and *agreed* upon.
Show your full ignorance of math, and by that fact justify that you had to leave academic world, by refuting that the identity mapping of | R on |R is an isomorphism.