In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> > For every element n of the table > > 1 > 2,1 > 3,2,1 > ... > > we find that the first n elements of the first column are collected in > a line too.
But, which is far more to the point, and shows how wrong WM is, no line contains any column.
Since this holds for all n, there can never be as many in any row as in any column,
So there must be more in the first column, or any other column for that matter, than in any line THAT IS NOT A LAST LINE.
AND THERE IS NO LAST LINE!
> Every line contains only a finite number > of elements.
And every column that does not contain a last element contains more than any finite number of elements. > > We (i.e. proper mathematicians)
WM calling himself a proper mathematician is a bad joke which proper mathematician do not find amusing.
see that aleph_0 may be use as a name > for the first line, but the number of its elements cannot be larger > than every natural number. This is impossible. (Were it possible, we > had a line in the table with aleph_0 elements. Try to find out why > that is not the case!) > > |N is a limit, 0.111... is a limit, but no limit can be written with > aleph_0 symbols. TSame holds for for the limit paths in the Binary > Tree. hTerefore, the Binary Tree cannot contain uncountably many > paths. > > Regards, WM --