Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 16:26:42 -0600
In article <1116958479.555107.284630@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > > .
> > > 0 1
> > > 0 1 0 1
> > > ..................
>
> Any path is an infinite sequence of bits which by multiplying with 2^-n
> and summing up establishes an infinite series representing a real
> number. Every combination of countably many bits is realized by
> definition.
But such an "infinite" binary tree is not a list, so this has nothing to
say about the validity of Cantor's theorem.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: aeo6
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- References:
- Cantor and the binary tree
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: mueckenh
- Cantor and the binary tree
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Next by Date: [Basic algebra] Simplifying
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Next by thread: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Index(es):