Date: Mar 30, 2013 9:36 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On 30 Mrz., 10:17, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 24 Mrz., 18:09, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> <snip>

>

> > > The only difference is that in the second case you consider

> > > some subsets of the nodes to be paths, that are not considered

> > > to be paths in the first case.

>

> > Well, that is a correct description. It implies that these additional

> > subsets cannot be distinguished by nodes from the finite subsets

>

> Piffle. It is trivial to distinguish a subset that has a node

> at a last level from a subset that does not have a node

> at a last level.

No, that is impossible if an infinite path consists of infinitely many

finite subsets.

It is impossible to distinguish the actually infinite path of 1/pi

from a path that only is built of all finite initial segments of the

path of 1/pi.

Regards, WM