Re: Cantor and the binary tree

In article <1117020755.470195.94300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Virgil wrote:
>
> > > If no branching is possible without a new node (because a branching is
> > > a node), then "the infinite" does not at all help you. *That* is very
> > > easy to prove.
> >
> > How is it that all those things that WM declares so easy to prove still
> > remain unproven?
>
> It is very easily proven that a branching is impossible without a node,
> because, by definition, a branching _is_ a node.

I am not impressed by declarations that something is easy to prove.

I am only impressed by presentation of the proof itself.
.

Relevant Pages

  • 64-bit data types
    ... I have a REALbasic application that interfaces with a C-based dynamic ... Using Declares, I can access many of the functions in this ... Jonathan Hoyle ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.lang.basic.realbasic)
  • Re: Attention Greg Pease part A sub paragragh 2b ornot2b
    ... Jenna Tailya, prime minister of Minions, declares this thread to be ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)
  • Re: (ESPN) Houston in talks with Miami about David Carr ??
    ... >> Wouldn't they want to wait until Young actually declares for the draft? ... but which QB would sell more tickets in Houston? ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • FROM THIS DAY FORWARD... Nov 5
    ... he is ashamed of, he always declares that ... it is his duty." ... -George Bernard Shaw ... Prev by Date: ...
    (alt.med.fibromyalgia)
  • Re: Cantor and the binary tree
    ... Virgil wrote: ... >> If no branching is possible without a new node (because a branching is ... Regards, WM ... Prev by Date: ...
    (sci.math)