History of CantorSet

	Revision 12 . . January 29, 2001 3:31 am by JoshuaGrosse [Bijection not bijective]
	Revision 11 . . January 27, 2001 4:53 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 10 . . January 27, 2001 4:52 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 9 . . January 27, 2001 4:51 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 8 . . January 27, 2001 4:51 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 7 . . January 27, 2001 4:51 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 6 . . January 27, 2001 4:50 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 5 . . January 27, 2001 4:50 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 4 . . (edit) January 27, 2001 4:42 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 3 . . (edit) January 27, 2001 4:34 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 2 . . January 27, 2001 4:30 am by (logged).69.30.xxx
	Revision 1 . . January 27, 2001 3:24 am by (logged).69.30.xxx

---

Difference (from prior major revision) (no other diffs)

Added: 24a25,26

That's not a one-to-one mapping. Representations of numbers in the CantorSet are unique, but binary representations aren't: 0.022222... != 0.20000... but 0.01111... = 0.10000... Of course it's still a SurJection?, so proves the objects are the same cardinality. Any ideas on how an actual BiJection could be made, though? I'm curious.