|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Message
|
|
|
| ``Re: Well-ordered set?''
by Schneemann on 2006-02-15 12:16:34 |
|
| Thx! Exactly what I needed to know.
Though you didn't really consider my lovely example
M = { m + k/(k+1) | m, k in NN_0 }
which doesn't need the introduction of a "w". Now I'm disappointed :(
hehe
Still I'm asking myself why the set-theoretic tree definition uses the well-ordered set.. Do you know where this definition is taken from? |
| | [ reply | up | top ] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
