```Date: Apr 5, 2013 6:00 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224

In article <929d4061-6f66-4851-aaf9-3cdf0346c437@t5g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 5 Apr., 21:10, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> > On Apr 5, 10:43 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> >> >> >> >> > > On 4 Apr., 21:01, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > > > On Apr 4, 8:22 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> > > > > On 4 Apr., 19:40, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > > > > > On Apr 4, 6:43 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> > > > > > > On 4 Apr., 18:21, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 4, 5:19 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> > > > > > > > > On 4 Apr., 16:08, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> > > > > > > > > There is no need to say what numbers belong to mathematics - > > > > > > > > > in> > > > > > > > > mathematics. There is no need to say what paths belong to the > > > > > > > > > Binary> > > > > > > > > Tree> >> > > > > > > > However, you keep talking about two types of paths,> >> > > > > > > Not at all. I talk about sets of nodes that are in the Binary > > > > > > > Tree.> >> > > > > > Indeed, and some of these subsets of nodes are paths and> > > > > > some are not.> >> > > > > In the Binary Tree there is no stop at any path.> >> > > > > > You talk about subsets of nodes with a last node> > > > > > and subsets of nodes without a last node.  However,> > > > > > you refuse outright to indicate what makes a subset of nodes> > > > > > a path  (certainly not all subsets of nodes are paths).> >> > > > > All nodes that belong to a finite path, belong to an infinite path> > > > > too.> >> > > > Since you refuse to say what makes a subset of nodes a path> > > > you cannot claim that a path without a last node exists.-> >> > > I do not claim it. The infinite path, claimed or not, is simply> > > existing as the union of all its FISONs.> >> > Certainly the subset of nodes given by the union of a set> > of FISONs exists,> > Of course it exists, namely in the tree according to the rules for> paths. Therefore I do not have to assert its existence.Before I will take WMs word on the any such claim, I require proof.> > > but since you won't say what makes a subset> > of nodes a path you cannot claim that this subset of nodes> > is a path.> > Ridiculous! A node belongs to a path, if its predecessor belongs to a> path. The only exception is the root node. Need I define what a> predecessor is?Yes! As that is a nonstandard term for tree structures. If you meant the unique parent node,  which each non-root node has, you should have said so.--
```