Date: Apr 4, 2013 10:08 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On Apr 2, 10:45 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 2 Apr., 00:14, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The difference between the trees is not which

> > subsets of nodes exist, but which subsets are

> > considered to be paths.

>

> The tree of all finite paths and the tree of all paths like every tree

> has infinite paths. Therefore there is no tree which has only finite

> subsets that are considered paths.

>

You confuse subsets of nodes, which belong

to both trees, with paths which are defined

differently for the two different trees.

Only in one of the trees

can a subset of nodes without a last

node be considered a path.

>

> Is this tree

>

> 0.

> 0 1

> 0 1 0 1

> ...

>

> that one with infinite subsets not considered paths?

I do not know. You have shows

me a set of nodes, but have not

told me which subsets are considered

paths.