Date: Mar 24, 2013 7:19 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224
In article

<37351761-5e10-48f4-8089-0197670ebe95@m12g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,

WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 24 Mrz., 21:29, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

>

> > A binary tree that contains only "all finite paths" cannot exist,

>

> The set of all finite paths does not exist?

A set of all finite paths can exist without being a binary tree

> Neither does the set of

> all rational numbers, I presume?

As usual WM presumes beyond his undersatnding.

> If you construct it, up to a certain

> point, suddenly all reals are there. A fascinating position.

But not mine.

--