Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|
From: Colin Andrew Percival (cperciva_at_sfu.ca)
Date: 09/28/04
- Previous message: Robert Low: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- In reply to: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Next in thread: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Reply: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:44:09 +0000 (UTC)
In comp.theory Kent Paul Dolan <xanthian@well.com> wrote:
> The _simplest_ definition of a tree, that it is a
> connected, undirected graph with one fewer edges
> than vertices [...]
What a complicated definition. Much simpler to say that
a tree is a strongly connected acyclic graph.
Colin Percival
- Previous message: Robert Low: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- In reply to: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Next in thread: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Reply: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Another set with cardinality |Z|"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading