Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: Virgil <Virgil@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:06:09 -0600
In article
<12b278d3-544c-4322-a269-50e19b0a453d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
LudovicoVan <julio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 29 Sep, 20:47, "G. A. Edgar" <ed...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In article
<36da9a22-353b-4a59-b222-36c755be8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
David R Tribble <da...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mariano Suarez-Alvarez
You seem to mean by this that you have a last level, the one
indexed by w.
LudovicoVan wrote:
I can drop the "informally": A tree with w levels! What is the problem
with that?
Nothing at all.
However, you have a huge problem if you are saying there
is a level that has index w.
It may make perfectly good sense, depending on your definition of
"tree".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(set_theory)
Thanks for the pointer, indeed that's it.
Then which of the several definitions of a tree in Wiki, or elsewhere,
do you use?
.
- References:
- Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: LudovicoVan
- Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
- Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: LudovicoVan
- Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: David R Tribble
- Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: G. A. Edgar
- Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- From: LudovicoVan
- Approaching the infinite binary tree
- Prev by Date: What's C?
- Next by Date: Re: Subgroups of direct products
- Previous by thread: Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- Next by thread: Re: Approaching the infinite binary tree
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|