Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
- farid-A
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 3
- Joined: November 12th, 2019, 8:36 pm
Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
This thread is about Zeno's paradox concerning time being impossible. Zeno claimed that time cannot exist, but merely an illusion of it. The reason for the claim is Zeno's claim that for one second to pass, half of it must pass first, and half of a half of a second must pass before half a second passes, and so on and so on ad infinitum, thus he claimed that time cannot pass.
Time is number of moments that have passed. There cannot be a fraction of a moment. The smallest unit of a moment is one. The number that the number of moments increase by is one. So, if five moments have passed, it is not true that two and a half moments first passed, and one and a quarter of moments passed before that, and so on and so on. Here is how it went, one moment passed, then two moments, then three, then four and finally five.
A second is equal to X number of moments. I, at the moment do not know how many moments are a second.
- Pantagruel
- Posts: 202
- Joined: July 2nd, 2019, 5:26 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: George Herbert Mead
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
Unless you are approaching the speed of light or in a black hole, time does not compress up to a stop in that way. So, for us, after the first half second passes, so does another.
- PAntoneO
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: October 13th, 2019, 12:15 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
farid-A wrote: ↑November 30th, 2019, 12:55 pm Hi everyone,
This thread is about Zeno's paradox concerning time being impossible. Zeno claimed that time cannot exist, but merely an illusion of it. The reason for the claim is Zeno's claim that for one second to pass, half of it must pass first, and half of a half of a second must pass before half a second passes, and so on and so on ad infinitum, thus he claimed that time cannot pass.
I think the reason this is a false statement is because the infinite series
1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32...
is equal to 1, not infinity.
You can demonstrate this for yourself by drawing a square. Divide it in half, then divide the half on the right in half. Then divide that half in half, and continue in this manner until your pencil is thicker than the space you're dividing. What you'll notice is that you never actually need to jump outside of the box in order to include the next half.Thus, just as we would expect at a common sense level, one second divided into infinitely many halves simply equals one second. It doesn't equal an infinite amount of time.
I think the most logical answer would be that there are an infinite number of moments in a second--just as there are an infinite number of halves. But each half is also progressing towards being infinitely small. The moment is the conceptually actualized smallest infinite fraction.farid-A wrote: ↑November 30th, 2019, 12:55 pm Time is number of moments that have passed. There cannot be a fraction of a moment. The smallest unit of a moment is one. The number that the number of moments increase by is one. So, if five moments have passed, it is not true that two and a half moments first passed, and one and a quarter of moments passed before that, and so on and so on. Here is how it went, one moment passed, then two moments, then three, then four and finally five.
A second is equal to X number of moments. I, at the moment do not know how many moments are a second.
It's a lot like saying that when you actualize [.999...] (or complete it to infinity) it is necessarily equal to 1.0. You can't really actualize [.999...], but if you could, it would necessarily have to equal [1.000...] In the same way, you can't really reach the infinitely smallest fraction, but if you could, it would be the "moment" that you speak of.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8271
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
"Who cares, wins"
- Pantagruel
- Posts: 202
- Joined: July 2nd, 2019, 5:26 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: George Herbert Mead
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
- detail
- Posts: 171
- Joined: June 1st, 2019, 1:39 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8271
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
You find it plausible to imagine time being stopped, but change taking place? How?Pantagruel wrote: ↑December 6th, 2019, 11:34 am You have to imagine time stopping, but as Greta said, thing keep on changing.
"Who cares, wins"
- Pantagruel
- Posts: 202
- Joined: July 2nd, 2019, 5:26 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: George Herbert Mead
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
Though this doesn't relate to Zeno's paradox, I just wrote it to be annoying.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
Pity that trick doesn't work with societies.
Seriously, if the decay is halted, does that mean the particle is frozen in time, or has it just temporarily stopped decaying within the flow of time (as we all aim to do in this life)?
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
Good question, don't think anyone really knows.
It might go something like this: the system can't make the transition, can't change, as long as you/we/something is constantly observing it, the system's time-evolution is stopped. In other words, you/we/something probably keeps putting various parts of the universe in temporal stasis, as odd as that sounds. The observer lets some parts of the universe flow (mostly) normally in time, while stops/slows down/speeds up time elsewhere. But the system has to be in superposition from the observer's perspective. Yeah all this is a bit weird..
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: Zeno's Paradox Concerning Time
Actually I wouldn't be surprised at all if it turned out that our brains are exploiting these phenomena all the time. Mostly on the unconscious level. Manipulating the flow of time-evolution around you gives evolutionary advantages.Atla wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 6:04 pm Good question, don't think anyone really knows.
It might go something like this: the system can't make the transition, can't change, as long as you/we/something is constantly observing it, the system's time-evolution is stopped. In other words, you/we/something probably keeps putting various parts of the universe in temporal stasis, as odd as that sounds. The observer lets some parts of the universe flow (mostly) normally in time, while stops/slows down/speeds up time elsewhere. But the system has to be in superposition from the observer's perspective. Yeah all this is a bit weird..
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023