Zeno of Elea created one of the first and most perduring paradoxes

  • Thread starter Thread starter <<<GUILLE>>>
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Zeno
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Zeno of Elea's paradoxes, particularly focusing on the implications of motion and time. Participants explore the nature of movement, the concept of infinite divisibility of distance, and the relationship between time and motion, engaging with both philosophical and mathematical perspectives.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that motion cannot exist because one must traverse an infinite number of half-distances, leading to the conclusion that time and motion do not exist.
  • Another participant counters that moving halfway each time takes progressively less time, suggesting that an infinite number of actions can occur in a finite time, using the example of an infinite geometric series.
  • A participant questions the assumption that time taken for each segment is the same, proposing that if it were constant, one would never reach the destination.
  • Some participants argue that the original argument is circular, stating that it relies on the premise that time does not exist to dismiss counterarguments.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that if time and movement do not exist, alternative explanations for motion must be presented.
  • One participant mentions a similar paradox involving throwing darts at a dartboard, suggesting parallels in the reasoning of infinite divisibility.
  • A later contribution suggests that there may be a limit to how small distances can be divided, proposing that there exists a point where they can be traversed instantaneously.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus reached. Some argue for the existence of motion and time, while others maintain that Zeno's paradox illustrates fundamental issues with these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of constant versus variable speeds and the nature of time in relation to motion. There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of time and distance, as well as the applicability of mathematical models to real-world scenarios.

<<<GUILLE>>>
Messages
210
Reaction score
0
Many of you will know that Zeno of Elea created one of the first and most perduring paradoxes of all. If any of you think you have solved it.....you ARE wrong. sorry. But you can try it:

Imagin you want to fo from here to there and th distance is one meter (it works with any distance and directiona and speed), you walk, and get their. but, no. First of all, to get to the other place you have to go thorugh the whole meter, but before the whole meter, you have to cross half of it. Now you are in the middle. Then, you have to go forward, but before crossign the half you have to, you cross the half of that half. Then the half of that half. And the half of that, and that one two... But, no. Because before getting to the half, you have to get to the half of the first half, but before to it's half, and before to it's half, and so on.

So in actual fact, you can't move, so motion does not exist, so time does not exist.

I proved mine, (well, Zeno did) now someone has to disprove.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Going halfway each time takes half as much time. You can perform an infinite number of acts in a finite amount of time if the acts are small enough. For example, say you are moving at 1 meter/second. The first half meter takes you half a second; the next quarter meter takes you a quarter second; the next eighth meter takes you an eighth of a second. The sum is the sum of an infinite geometric series with first term 1/2 and ratio 1/2, which is half the sum of an infinite geometric series with first term 1 and ratio 1/2 so it sums to (1/2) * 1/(1-1/2) = 1 second.
 
BicycleTree said:
Going halfway each time takes half as much time. You can perform an infinite number of acts in a finite amount of time if the acts are small enough. For example, say you are moving at 1 meter/second. The first half meter takes you half a second; the next quarter meter takes you a quarter second; the next eighth meter takes you an eighth of a second. The sum is the sum of an infinite geometric series with first term 1/2 and ratio 1/2, which is half the sum of an infinite geometric series with first term 1 and ratio 1/2 so it sums to (1/2) * 1/(1-1/2) = 1 second.

what if the time you take in each half is always the same?

actually, there is no time, because you can't move, so you can't use time to disprove it when this disproves time.
 
The time is not the same because at a constant speed the amount of time it takes to travel a distance is proportional to the distance.

Your argument is depressingly circular. "There is no time because of my argument; and your argument is wrong because there is no time." Petitio principii.
 
Proof by contradiction: my fingers moved in order to type this message!
 
Also, the series [tex]\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{2^i}[/tex] is convergent.
 
BicycleTree said:
The time is not the same because at a constant speed the amount of time it takes to travel a distance is proportional to the distance.

Your argument is depressingly circular. "There is no time because of my argument; and your argument is wrong because there is no time." Petitio principii.

what if the speed isn't constant? I never sai dit was...what if the time taken to each half was the same as the last one?
 
All this seems to disprove is the usefulness of the concept of quantifiable time and distance in all circumstances.

If time and movement do not exist, could you present an alternative to how someone appears to get from A to B in x seconds?
 
matthyaouw said:
All this seems to disprove is the usefulness of the concept of quantifiable time and distance in all circumstances.

If time and movement do not exist, could you present an alternative to how someone appears to get from A to B in x seconds?

that question makes no sense. because time and distance, or better said, dimensions, are what state that A and B exist, and that there is a space (dimension) between them, and that x seconds exist.
 
  • #10
<<<GUILLE>>> said:
what if the speed isn't constant? I never sai dit was...what if the time taken to each half was the same as the last one?
If the time taken to complete each half was the same as the time taken to complete the last one, then the person would be slowing down geometrically and would indeed never reach the door. In most circumstances in the real world, however, the time needed for each succeeding half is about half the time of the previous one because the walker usually moves at about a constant rate.
 
  • #11
BicycleTree said:
If the time taken to complete each half was the same as the time taken to complete the last one, then the person would be slowing down geometrically and would indeed never reach the door. In most circumstances in the real world, however, the time needed for each succeeding half is about half the time of the previous one because the walker usually moves at about a constant rate.

true. But your mathematics used before (upper posts) works if indeed, we move. The fact of all, is that we don't even move, so time can't pass 8or better said, doesn't pass) and there is no dimensional motion.
 
  • #12
Your argument is entirely circular and it is not worth explaining it again to you.
 
  • #13
BicycleTree said:
Your argument is entirely circular and it is not worth explaining it again to you.

life is circular. does that mean it is wrong? no. there are many circular and infinite things in the universe.
 
  • #14
Ive seen a very simular thing but with a dart board and throwing darts at it.
 
  • #15
that is paradigma and your explenation about time and distance are close to nonsense. you cannot say that time does not exist just because you taught (or relatively to you) it doesn't.

while on the other hand, time and distance according to the paradigm does not exist. and using that hypotesis it is true. yet it does not produce a useful theory.
 
  • #16
ArielGenesis said:
that is paradigma and your explenation about time and distance are close to nonsense. you cannot say that time does not exist just because you taught (or relatively to you) it doesn't.

while on the other hand, time and distance according to the paradigm does not exist. and using that hypotesis it is true. yet it does not produce a useful theory.

I know it doesn't, I just posted it because I wanted comments on it, or even solutions to it. I just state that for this paradox dimensions do not exists. but of course they do.
 
  • #17
my assumption is that there is a limit of half ^ n, until it is small enough to be traveled in an instant.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
26K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
17K