In article <tbCdnURtDtB9so3MnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@giganews.com>, fom <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote:
> > From the beginning (I showed up when Zuhair was asking questions) > I have not understood terminology. A CIBT is the Cantor space. > It is a topological construct and the C refers to topological > completeness.
In my disputes with WM, a "CIBT" or "COMPLETE INFINITE BINARY TREE" is a countably infinite set of nodes, with a unique root node and such that every node has two child nodes, a "left child" and a "right child", and every node but the root node has one parent node for which it is either a left child or a right child.
One can model it with its nodes being positive naturals:
1 / \ / \ 2 3 / \ / \ 4 5 6 7 / \ / \ / \ / \
So that the left child of any node n is 2*n and its right child is 2*n+1, and the parent of any node n except 1 is floor(n/2). > > Of course, many logicians work primarily with logical > constructs involving discrete alphabets. So, I assume > that I am just misunderstanding the jargon of a > particular branch of mathematicians. > > I do not include WM's uses in that remark. While I > understand his objections, I am still trying to understand > some of his statements. --