Zeno's Paradox (Logic)

>>9349
>Does this falsify that there are infinite numbers between two rational ones?
No.
>Or is movement a mere illusion?
I don't get this either/or of yours.

>>9349
Zeno's paradoxes are reducto ad absurdums designed to support Parmenides' ontological monism and ridicule the Ionian notion of a pluralistic world. He wasn't trying to falsify the notion of an infinitude of numbers between two numbers, I don't know where you got that from.

>>9349

The zenon paradox is just a jab at ancient math while making the point that reducto ad absurdum is a thing
It doesn't make any sense

>>9398

Not either/or, I phrased it badly
So how are you supposed to complete infinite tasks if they do exist?

>>9535
>Parmenides' ontological monism and ridicule the Ionian notion of a pluralistic world

Can you elaborate please? I'm not well informed about this

>>9349
itt: idiot goes on wikipedia for five minutes and thinks he's disproven all of mathematics

>>9614

No asshole I was just curious, it was mentioned in a course I'm taking
if you want to be a dick go back to /b/

>>9570
>reducto ad absurdum is a thing

Isn't reducto a valid rule of inference? Yes it is used here, but I still cant see what it entails

>>9695

Guess cancer spreads here too after all

To everyone who thinks I'm trying to make a specific point: I am not. I just do not understand this, and had the idea that this would somehow disprove the notion if infinitude of numbers between the numbers, because it states the impossibility to complete infinite tasks

>>9706

It is a thing
But we are talking about ancient niggers shitposting at each other via paradoxes

>>9791

So how do we explain this? Is motion really completing an infinite series of tasks, or is it limited by some sort of atomic task that can not be further divided into 2?

>>9786

It don't state the impossibility to complete infinite tasks
It just proves, via an absurdity that two moving objects moving at different speeds and at the same direction, having two different starting points can never meet despite if one is going faster or slower

>>9602
The hot topic of the Pre-Socratic days was over the metaphysics of change and the ultimate constitution of the world, whether that entailed being, becoming, or both. Parmenides' Eleatic school of thought, to which Zeno found himself a part of, believed the world consisted of the One, consisting only of static Being and denied the reality of change (or generation). It's actually rather simple logic predicated on acknowledging that nothing cannot exist and thus the world must have always been and something cannot be generated from nothing. The founder of the Ionian school, Heraclitus, thought the world, at its core, was only that of Becoming; everything's in constant change, nothing ever just is. Hence the famous mantra "you cannot walk into the same river twice."

Zeno was just trying to show that Heraclitus was stupid for believing the world could be divided into parts, because it inevitably leads to several paradoxical accounts of motion and the like.

File: 1400498613058.gif (2MB, 275x275px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 275x275px

>>9836

Space-time isn't discrete, most likely. I dunno.

>>9349
Google Asymptotic/asymptote retard
/thread

File: ishygdyryr.jpg (28KB, 500x445px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x445px

>>9349
>idiots can't into calculus
>still claims Zeno's "paradox" is unsolved
SHIGGY

>>9981
It isn't, or energy-momentum wouldn't be conserved. It's fucking stupid to think that only denumerable motion is possible.

>>10167

Who claimed it was "unsolved" again?

>>10302
Many. Mostly continentals.

>>9973

Excellent, thank you for your contribution.
Unfortunately they don't explain it this well anywhere else, so we're left wondering what it is even about

>>10167

So just because every question was solved does it mean all of us know the answer to it?

File: 1446256599637.jpg (113KB, 1247x922px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1247x922px

>>10387
it means literally try doing a minute of research next time you 12 year old

>>9349
>Does this falsify that there are infinite numbers between two rational ones?
Not sure where you get that from. If anythin it proves there are infinite numbers as you continue dividing the units between two integers and still receive a new number that exists between two numbers.

As for moment being a mere illusion the answer to that comes from Calculus. Movement is simply the convergence of an infinite series.