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