Comments on: König’s Lemma and the Kleene Tree http://math.andrej.com/2006/04/25/konigs-lemma-and-the-kleene-tree/ Mathematics for computers Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:14:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Andrej Bauer http://math.andrej.com/2006/04/25/konigs-lemma-and-the-kleene-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-60 Andrej Bauer Wed, 03 May 2006 13:38:42 +0000 http://math.andrej.com/2006/04/25/konigs-lemma-and-kleene-tree/#comment-60 Thank you, I incorporated your corrections and made a couple of other changes. The new version is online. Thank you, I incorporated your corrections and made a couple of other changes. The new version is online.

]]> By: bou http://math.andrej.com/2006/04/25/konigs-lemma-and-the-kleene-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-59 bou Wed, 03 May 2006 09:17:06 +0000 http://math.andrej.com/2006/04/25/konigs-lemma-and-kleene-tree/#comment-59 Congratulations for this short summary. I have enjoyed its reading. Let me write some misprints (at least in my opinion) I have found in the last page. 1. The equality stated in Theorem 3.6 si simply an inclusion \subseteq (by cardinality reasons it is obvious they are different) 2. In the first case of the definition of f(n) you must use p(n+1) and not p(n). Congratulations for this short summary. I have enjoyed its reading.

Let me write some misprints (at least in my opinion) I have found in the last page.

1. The equality stated in Theorem 3.6 si simply an inclusion \subseteq (by cardinality reasons it is obvious they are different)

2. In the first case of the definition of f(n) you must use p(n+1) and not p(n).

]]>