On 30 Mrz., 10:17, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24 Mrz., 18:09, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > <snip> > > > > The only difference is that in the second case you consider > > > some subsets of the nodes to be paths, that are not considered > > > to be paths in the first case. > > > Well, that is a correct description. It implies that these additional > > subsets cannot be distinguished by nodes from the finite subsets > > Piffle. It is trivial to distinguish a subset that has a node > at a last level from a subset that does not have a node > at a last level.
No, that is impossible if an infinite path consists of infinitely many finite subsets. It is impossible to distinguish the actually infinite path of 1/pi from a path that only is built of all finite initial segments of the path of 1/pi.