Date: Dec 13, 2012 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: On the infinite binary Tree
On 13 Dez., 20:57, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Are you are too dishonest, to confess your error? Or do you really not
> > understand, that your pieces of paths are irrelevant?
> They are indeed relevant.
> We don't need the zero before the decimal
> point at all, all what we need is the string of digits AFTER the
i.e., after the 0. So the string begins with 0 as I said and not with
1 as you tried to show.
> Your argument is simply the following:
> All reals are definable by parameter free finite formulas.
> Since we have countably many of those formulas.
> Then we have countably many reals.
> This argument is FALSE, simply because not all reals are definable by
> parameter free finite formulas.
Wrong. My argument is simply that you cannot find out by nodes which
paths I use to construct the complete Binary Tree. Therefore you
cannot defined by nodes which paths are missing.