Virgil
Posts:
8,833
Registered:
1/6/11


Re: Matheology � 233
Posted:
Mar 31, 2013 1:15 PM


In article <9dc44e27dced4191823e521f7e4ebf94@a8g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fhaugsburg.de> wrote:
> On 31 Mrz., 17:30, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <17e6599f5537449ab4aabb1764a3c...@g8g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fhaugsburg.de> wrote: > > > On 31 Mrz., 02:56, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <2bc13fff5cbb43dda06a218c68c99...@m9g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fhaugsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > On 30 Mrz., 22:11, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Thus there is always at least one bit of any listed entry > > > > > > > > disagreeing > > > > > > > > with the antidiagonanl, just as the Cantor proof requires. > > > > > > > > > In a list containing every rational: Is there always, i.e., up to > > > > > > > every digit, an infinite set of paths identical with the anti > > > > > > > diagonal? Yes or no? > > > > > > > > The set of paths in any Complete Infinite Binary Tree which agree > > > > > > with > > > > > > any particular path up to its nth node is equinumerous with the set > > > > > > of > > > > > > all paths in the entire tree i.e., is uncountably infinite. > > > > > > > This was the question: In a list containing every rational: Is there > > > > > always, i.e., up to every digit, an infinite set of paths identical > > > > > with the antidiagonal? Yes or no? > > > > > > Lists and trees are different. And antidiagonals derive from lists, > > > > not > > > > trees. > > > > The entries in list are well ordered. > > > > The entries in a Complete Infinite Binary Tree are densely ordered. > > > > > The entries in form of nodes are well ordered. Anything else is not > > > added to the list. > > > > > > Those order types are incompatible. > > > > > This was the question: In a list containing every rational: Is there > > > always, i.e., up to every digit, an infinite set of paths (rational > > > numbers) identical with the antidiagonal? Yes or no? > > > > This is an equally valid question: What's the difference between a duck? > > From the standpoint of matheology, perhaps.
From the standpoint of logic and common sense, undoubtdly.
Your question makes no sense anywhere outside of your own miniscule minination of Wolkenmuekenheim.
> Did you hitherto respond > in an unreasonable way because you misunderstood the question?
Your questions assume conditions contrary to fact.
They could only make sense in that wooly world of Wolkenmuekenheim to which most of us have no entry > > In mathematics, in particular in analysis, we
WM claims access to a world he is constitutionally unable to enter. 

