Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 10:30:40 -0600
In article <MPG.1cff9fda6b659940989d2e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 1) Each number of (0,1) is given by an UNENDING path stretching over
> > infinitely many nodes (bits).
> And yet you claim that no node is infinitely far from the root? Wrong.
When you can produce a mathematically valid proof that adding 1 to a
finite number will produce an infinite number, you may claim that there
are nodes infinitely far from the root node, but until then, it is you
who are worng
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: aeo6
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- References:
- Cantor and the binary tree
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Robert Kolker
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Robin Chapman
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Ron Sperber
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: aeo6
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Robert Kolker
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: aeo6
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Robert Kolker
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: Virgil
- Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- From: aeo6
- Cantor and the binary tree
- Prev by Date: Re: Constant curvature surface
- Next by Date: Re: Help (polynomial)
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Next by thread: Re: Cantor and the binary tree
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|