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.
--