I don't follow what you are claiming here. — Banno
May I ask, have you studied differential calculus and limits?
I'm claiming that it's impossible to count in order the rational numbers between 0 and 1 and that for the exact same reason it's impossible to pass through in order the rational-numbered distances between 0m and 1m. — Michael
Tough. It is possible to travel a metre. I've even done it a few times. Bet you have, too. SO there is something wrong with your account. — Banno
Now, why do you feel the need to replace the geometric sequence in Zeno with the rational numbers?
That there's a finite sum to a geometric series of time intervals is a red herring.
2h — Michael
That question can only be fairly answered by an Aristotelean. I am not one, but I think there are plenty on this board. IIRC Metaphysician Undercover is one (apologies in advance if I have misread your position MU). — andrewk
Does anyone philosopher still think that they prove that change is impossible? — Walter Pound
I'm claiming that it's impossible to count in order the rational numbers between 0 and 1 and that for the exact same reason it's impossible to pass through in order the rational-numbered distances between 0m and 1m. — Michael
Rather the sum tends to a finite limit - exactly what we need to resolve the paradox. — TheMadFool
Zeno's paradoxes are a good example of theory-worship--you take the theory to trump reality, and when the theory results in something absurd, you conclude that we must have reality wrong rather than realizing that we're f---ing up theoretically somehow. — Terrapin Station
Or the paradox shows that reality isn't as we think it is, e.g. space isn't infinitely divisible — Michael
A unit of distance can be infinitely halved, but these mathematical "tasks" are not required for motion. — Luke
"Space is infinitely divisible" is theory. So, right, when that theory leads you to conclude something obviously absurd, you don't go with the absurdity. You realize you screwed up somewhere. — Terrapin Station
You assume that mathematical tasks must be completed before motion can begin. I reject this idea. Motion does not require the completion of any mathematical tasks. — Luke
So why do I need to figure out "the first distance I pass through" before I can pass through any? — Luke
Again, you seem to be saying that I need to figure out the first distance before I can pass through it. I still don't see why this mathematical step is necessary. — Luke
I'm not saying you have to figure it out. I'm saying that, assuming the infinite divisibility of space and continuous motion, each 1/(2n)m mark must be physically passed in ascending order, but that because there's no first 1/(2n)m mark, movement cannot start, just as because there's no first 1/(2n) number one cannot start to count each 1/(2n) number in ascending order. — Michael
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.