Try to get your head around this paradox!

DanTheMan

I've never heard of this motion paradox. I've been reading a book titled The Whole Shebang by Timothy Ferris. It's all about the big bang, relativity, quantum physics, time and space, the nature of matter, etc. Much of what I have read so far has blown my mind and has me totally reconsidering whether there is any such thing as an objective reality.

The paradox is as follows - Let's say you shoot an arrow at a bullseye. If your aim is true and the force used is sufficient, of course you know from experience that the arrow will hit the target. But, according to a mechanistic (i.e. traditional physics) perspective, the arrow should never reach its target, the whole concept of motion creates an absurd paradox.

The reason why the arrow should never actually reach its target? Now read this carefully and think about it. It must take a certain amount of time for the arrow to get halfway to the target. At that point in its flight, another halfway point is created, the halfway point between the first halfway point and the target. Are you with me so far? For the arrow to reach this second halfway point it must take another increment of time. When it reaches this point, yet another halfway point is created, which again must take at least some amount of time to traverse. And on and on and on. The distance from the arrow to the target can be halved an infinite amount of times, and the arrow must take some, however small, amount of time to traverse each distance. So technically, it should never reach its target! Motion cannot be fully explained by current physical models.

FREAKY! Einstein couldn't explain this, nor can anyone else.

Are we all just figments of God's imagination? Is our physical world a collective illusion?

Simon

You cannot divide things into infinitely small slices. At some point, you get to atoms etc ...

hippikon

The end point is the end of the trajectory not the target.

Just a sugestion?

Satanus

This paradox was scientifically answered in some science mag i read a few yrs ago. Forgot the answer though, sorry. But i do remember the monty python skit in which various philosphers were walking around the soccer field pondering/pontificating, when one of them suddenly had the brilliant idea of kicking the ball. Not sure why it came to mind just now.

Carry on ,dude.

SS

DanTheMan

Simon,

Can there really be a limit to how small a distance can be? I can't see how. The point is not that the arrow doesn't hit its target, it's that traditional physics cannot fully explain how (hence the search for the holy grail "Grand Unified" theory that reconciles relativity and quantum physics). If you want an interesting read, check this book out, it is very interesting and written so that a reasonably intelligent person can grasp the concepts he is presenting.

hippikon,

I don't get what you're saying.

SaintSatan,

I would like to see that explanation.

gumby

Is our physical world a collective illusion?

Yes. What you are now reading at this very moment isn't really happening. So that means I'm sitting here on a cold raining day worrying about NOTHING.

Gumby

refiners fire

Dan. Hippi is saying that the arrow has been released and has power enough to travel 1000 feet , but the target is at the 100 foot mark of the arrows journey. A good observation, I thought. Have you read Paul Davies? Hes a science who, last time I knew, was at the university of Adelaide. Written numerous books. "The Mind of God" ."The Cosmic Blueprint". "Superforce". Ita all quantum science and Big bang theory but its reader friendly.I gave up reading such stuff 10 years back myself. Eventually you get tired of turning your own head inside out in search of the unknowable.

DanTheMan

Eventually you get tired of turning your own head inside out in search of the unknowable.

The book I am reading right now will probably be the last such book I will read for a few years. It has turned my head inside out just a little too much. Especially the parts that delve into quantum physics and how outcomes of quantum experiments indicate that the observer determines the outcome, not the experiment itself.

gumby

Eventually you get tired of turning your own head inside out in search of the unknowable

Amen to that RF.

It does seem as though some progress is slowly being made that will tell us these things. The problem is......old bastards like you and me will never get the benifit of knowing. I always miss out on the good crap!

Gumby

Francois

Someone posting in this thread above hit close to the mark in my opinion, and that is that the world is as we perceive it - there not being an "objective" reality.

Say you are standing on top of a high precipice in the American Southwest. You see a horse-drawn wagon being driven by a young woman. Next to her sits a small child. Suddenly, from over the far hill come two riders making double time toward the wagon. The riders overtake the wagon, stop it, and rape the woman - leaving her alive and not harming the child.

How many realities are involved here? Some people would say one. I suggest that there are five; one each for me, the woman, the child, and each of the two riders. And in fact the entire universe is like this: we constantly create the universe via our perceptions of it.

This is a very interesting topic and can lead either to a deep and satisfying philosophical conversation, or to a free-for-all fistfight. Depends on how you look at it.

francois

Try to get your head around this paradox!

Share this