RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (14) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: The Joe G Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 160
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,16:09   

If D(x) denotes the set {x, descendants of x} you have taken away the original argument of a paternal family tree.

Stop.  Do we agree that the following structure:
Code Sample

             /           \
D(sam's first son) D(sam's second son)

forms a nested hierarchy?  A simple yes or no will suffice.  (Call this structure example 1)

Ya see in your scheme the correct rendition would have D(sam, sam's first son, sam's second son), and would grow with every additional male descendant.

I do not know what you mean by "correct rendition".  

In a paternal family tree the father sits on top, alone

Do we agree that example 1 forms a nested hierarchy?  Yes or no.  Do we agree that example 1 describes a "paternal family tree"?  Yes or no.

  409 replies since June 27 2007,11:33 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (14) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]