Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Matheology � 300
Replies: 14   Last Post: Jul 23, 2013 1:31 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 8,833
Registered: 1/6/11
Re: Matheology � 300
Posted: Jul 23, 2013 1:31 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

In article <145ccf00-437a-4ba9-92c7-4dfaf133fd9f@googlegroups.com>,
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:

> On Monday, 22 July 2013 21:45:08 UTC+2, Virgil wrote:
> > It is the structure of the Complete Infinite Binary Tree which cannot
> > exist with only binary rational paths, since the existence of all the
> > binary rational approximations to an irrational in such a tree requires
> > the existence of the path for that irrational as well.

> Paths of irrationals in mathematics are not defined by "structure". That is
> purest matheology.

They may not be in WM's wild weird world of WMytheology, but they are
in the wider worlds of mathematics that allow such sets as |N and 2^|N.
> For every finite step n in the construction of the Binary Tree (by nodes or
> by FIS or by paths of rationals), there is no irrational path. They sneak in
> only after all finite steps.

Quite true.

But a binary tree cannot contain all finite paths without containing all
infinite paths just like a unary tree cannot contain all FISONs as
subsets without containing |N.

> That is obvious nonsense. But if it was not
> nonsense, then the same could happen in every Cantor-list.

Not until lists (which are really just unary trees) become binary trees.

Which they are not.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.