Can you solve this paradox? (page 3)

zen nudist

here is a better paradox

why are things reversed right to left in a mirror, but not up and down?

aniron

Do you see the problem? In other words, before an arrrow can travel anywhere, it must first travel half-way, no matter how short or how small the distance. It will always be half way before it can reach the whole of any distance. This half-way can divide and sub-divide, and sub-sub-divide ad infinitum. Therefore logically, the arrow can never reach its final destination. Yet we all know that the arrow does reach Point B from Point A.

Point A must be half way to point X.

nicolaou

I like Protagoras' Legal Paradox, it goes like this...

Euathlus [the student] wanted to become a lawyer but could not pay Protagoras [the teacher].

Protagoras agreed to teach him under the condition that if Euathlus won his first case, he would pay Protagoras, otherwise not. Euathlus finished his course of study and did nothing. Protagoras sued for his fee. He argued:

If Euathlus loses this case, then he must pay (by the judgment of the court).
If Euathlus wins this case, then he must pay (by the terms of the contract).
He must either win or lose this case.
Therefore Euathlus must pay me.

But Euathlus had learned well the art of rhetoric He responded:

If I win this case, I do not have to pay (by the judgment of the court).
If I lose this case, I do not have to pay (by the contract).
I must either win or lose the case.
Therefore, I do not have to pay Protagoras

Now that's a paradox!

iggy_the_fish

zen, you total hole! That bloody mirror thing's been on my mind all evening, and I've got better things to do with my time!

Here's my crack at an explanation, and I haven't even cheated and googled. To see an object in a mirror, we've rotated the object round the "up" axis, thus flipping the left-right and not the up-down. I think that if we had instead tumbled our object over the sideways axis to see it in the mirror, we would now have up and down reversed, but left&right preserved. Humm. It's the best I've come up with so far.

Here's something I've always wondered about - if I hold my heavy briefcase at arms length, my arm quickly becomes fatigued, and I have to expend energy keeping the briefcase still. However, when I rest the briefcase on my desk, the desk holds it up for a great length of time without getting tired. Why do need to expend energy and my desk does not, when we're both doing exactly the same job? If anyone tells me I'm doing work against gravity, I'll send you to the back of the class with the pointy cap on your head! Work = force x distance, and if I'm holding the briefcase still, I should be doing no work, right? Yet I expend energy to do this no work...

ig

Double Edge

why are things reversed right to left in a mirror, but not up and down?

the mirror does not know left from right, top or bottom .... it is only reflecting back a "straight-on" image.

Terry

which brings up heisenberg's uncertainty principle... there are physical reasons why one cannot know the exact location and the exact speed at the very same moment....the better you know one the less you know the other, etc.
and this is as above shows, because we are imposing our measurements upon something which is in motion... there is no time and there is no distance, these are things we invent by our imposition of a grid work upon what we are observing.... the grid work of time is to compare any motion to a clock [which is a cycling event which can be counted] the grid work of distance is any form of measure stick, which of course cannot be subdivided to infinity as there is no way to measure such a subdivision, there are practical, physical limits.

The Uncertainty Principle deals with a very practical fact: we locate things by hitting them with something. We locate an object by bouncing either a photon (light) or an electron off of it which is what CAUSES the change in course. And THAT is why you are uncertain about either its location or its speed. You can't bounce an electron or a photon off a very very small particle without CHANGING either its speed or its location.

Nothing mysterious in that.

T.

Rod P

Double Edge,

I have heard of that one many years ago; now you have brought it all up again.

But no, I cannot remember the answer. Just don't know what it is, at the moment.

So now, I am going on a random search, based on this understaindting (Halleluja! Hallejuja!)

So why do I suddenly feel go sad???!!!!.

.

iggy_the_fish

LOL, that legal one's very good! This thread is making my brain melt...

ig

Simon

This half-way can divide and sub-divide, and sub-sub-divide ad infinitum.

This is a false premise. There is a limit that you cannot divide things by (eg. down to sub atomic particles) and even if you do, you are assuming that the speed that the arrow is travelling is halfing as well. In effect, each time you half the distance you also half the time it takes for it to cover the 'unit'.

trevor

Rod P

Your paradox illustrates the problems that occur when the logical mind tries to quantify everything. The arrow does reach its target. It simply is reality. The conscious mind will deny reality if it does not fit into its present set of rules or paradigm. Many things that happen in life are dismissed as impossible for this reason.

Even the flight of an arrow or the ability of a bumble bee to fly, can reasoned away. At the same time, we can imagine into existence that which does not exist and create an imaginary world. This is why there will always be debates between mystics and scientists about what is real and what is a trick of the mind.

Anyway - must fly!

Can you solve this paradox?

Share this