Theory of Everything - View Single Post

N0B0DY · **Re: "Xeno's Paradox": revisited -** 01-16-2008, 12:10 AM

I think I would add the speed factor, RP. Which if proportionately decreased as the infinite number of incremental halves increased, then the objective B would never be reached while the subject would never reach absolute stillness.

I think there are "real-life" measurements which are based on finite quanta, so naturally what is observed as finite will be covered by a finite means; there is the infinite divisions of Zeno, which I agree is unobservable and deduced inaccurately; and lastly there is the absolute which not only reaches B, but reaches it even before it leaves A.

	(#2 (permalink))
N0B0DY 9th degree Black Belt Status: Offline Posts: 1,941 Thanks Given: 0 Thanked 110x in 104 Posts Join Date: Jan 2007 Rep Power: 26	Re: "Xeno's Paradox": revisited - 01-16-2008, 12:10 AM I think I would add the speed factor, RP. Which if proportionately decreased as the infinite number of incremental halves increased, then the objective B would never be reached while the subject would never reach absolute stillness. I think there are "real-life" measurements which are based on finite quanta, so naturally what is observed as finite will be covered by a finite means; there is the infinite divisions of Zeno, which I agree is unobservable and deduced inaccurately; and lastly there is the absolute which not only reaches B, but reaches it even before it leaves A.