Re: infinity
- From: Virgil <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 19:24:22 -0600
In article <MPG.1d8a4e7e5495842498a23f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Virgil said:
> > In article <MPG.1d88ef739553a0a798a20f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Virgil said:
> > > > In article <MPG.1d87ab329c1e2e3998a1ec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Virgil said:
> > > >
> > > > > > Same tree, same labels on branches, no labels on nodes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > No, you have two different trees.
> > > >
> > > > Since all maximal binary trees are tree-isomorphic, any difference
> > > > would
> > > > make no difference. So the issue is irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > Aren't all balls ball-isomorphic?
> >
> > TO's balls are not in any way isomorphic to anything real.
> >
> My point is that the labels don't matter. Just examine what happens to the
> number of the balls going in and out and you have the answer.
Every one in before noon is out before noon!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: infinity
- From: David R Tribble
- Re: infinity
- References:
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Virgil
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Virgil
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- From: Virgil
- Re: infinity
- From: aeo6
- Re: infinity
- Prev by Date: Re: infinity
- Next by Date: Re: Snake lemma-Five lemma
- Previous by thread: Re: infinity
- Next by thread: Re: infinity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|