A Conversation for H2G2 Scapegoat Service

I would like to volunteer

Post 161

Marjin, After a long time of procrastination back lurking

We can offer it to Cupid Stunt as prize for two days of smiley - run without going anywhere.


I would like to volunteer

Post 162

Ming Mang

If he'll accept it. smiley - smiley

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 163

Cupid Stunt

Erm, nothing to do with murphies law, not my department. Lets all share it!

This bloke probably wasn't called xenon or xerox... smiley - smiley


I would like to volunteer

Post 164

Ming Mang

OK then! smiley - smiley
*takes her share of the blame*

Probably not, no.

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 165

Marjin, After a long time of procrastination back lurking

While we savour the blame, let's look at the origin.

A581096 contains:

Zeno's Paradoxes

Zeno of Elea (aka 'Xeno') was a student of Parmenides the pre-Socratic philosopher. He travelled with Parmenides to Athens where he interacted with Socrates, Plato and other notable thinkers, sages and luminaries. Parmenides used to claim that All was an indivisible, immutable One, and that change and motion were illusions. Zeno attempted to prove these claims mathematically by showing that motion implied certain contradictions. This gives rise to paradoxes, with his proofs showing that motion is impossible, while our experience cries out that motion happens all the time.

Zeno's most popular paradox A541937 runs something like this; suppose you want to cross the room, first you have to walk halfway across, then you have to cross half the remaining distance, then half the remaining distance, and so on. There are, eventually, an infinite number of distances you have to cross to get across the room, and this is impossible to do in a finite time, therefore, all motion is impossible.

** sips smiley - tea whilst thinking that it is impossible to reach your mouth with the cup **


I would like to volunteer

Post 166

Ming Mang

smiley - laugh
That's the guy! smiley - biggrin He makes me laugh... smiley - winkeye

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 167

Cupid Stunt

Laugh? He's great for confusing physics teachers with!


I would like to volunteer

Post 168

Ming Mang

Good idea! smiley - biggrin I'll try and remember to do that. smiley - winkeyesmiley - biggrin

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 169

Cupid Stunt

It almost confused one of mine a lot, then she realised you could disprove it with a distance/time graph. Or she she thought! smiley - smiley


I would like to volunteer

Post 170

Ming Mang

smiley - laugh

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 171

Cupid Stunt

The logic used above is similar to his proof that you can not get hit by an arrow just by running away from it. Unfortunately, this relies on there being an infinitely small division that space can be divided up into. And time as well. I think someone calculated the smallest amount of time possible.


I would like to volunteer

Post 172

Ming Mang

Er.. smiley - erm

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 173

Cupid Stunt

I remember reading it somewhere...


I would like to volunteer

Post 174

Ming Mang

Oh, OK. smiley - erm

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 175

Cupid Stunt

I've run out of answers to that statement...


I would like to volunteer

Post 176

Ming Mang

I do apologise. smiley - erm
Actually we came across Zeno in RE today - he was showing that using impeccable logic in every step you can prove something that is obviously not true... smiley - winkeyesmiley - biggrin

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 177

Cupid Stunt

Of course he could have been lying... What did he prove in RE then?


I would like to volunteer

Post 178

Ming Mang

He didn't as far as I know. It was only a little side thingy that probably a third of the class didn't get because they don't get things. It was his tortoise vs rabbit or whatever proof that the rabbit can never overtake the tortoise. Just showing that although every step he takes is logical and follows on logically from the previous step, the conclusion is obviously false - but logically right. Showing that even though an argument may be logically flawless, it could also be completely wrong. But then who didn't know that? smiley - erm I reckon one person at least in my RE class. smiley - erm

¦M¦


I would like to volunteer

Post 179

Cupid Stunt

I think it's the same proof as with the man and the arrow. Isn't logic wonderful?


I would like to volunteer

Post 180

Ming Mang

It's brilliant! smiley - biggrin So is being pedantic... marvellous oppotunities to irritate people with both. smiley - winkeye

¦M¦


Key: Complain about this post