[AntonioLao]

The title is the title of Joseph Mazur’s new book published this year. This book begins and ends with the unsolved enigma of Zeno’s logical argument that motion is impossible. After more than 2000 years no counter argument yet comes to the surface of absolute clarity. So even with Einstein’s theories of relativity and all the quantum field theories put together still could not prove or disprove the statement that absolute motion is impossible.

The truthfulness of this statement is the same as the statement stating that taken as a whole the entire singular universe is motionless. To prove any of these statements the proof must be derived by stepping outside the physical universe or at the least by circumnavigating around it. As what was done in proving that the world is round like a ball. However, these two analogies are both logically deficient simply because the underlying assumption is that the space-time dimensionality does not change (decrease or increase). On the other hand, if space-time dimensions are allowed to change only spatially, for example, allowed by superstring theories then the problem could be simplified to whether time direction is singular, doubly periodic, or multi-periodic. If time is doubly periodic then the period of one cycle would still have duration of at least one googol years.

[dleviwing]

That’s what happens when you make false assumptions and believe in paradoxes. Nature has no paradoxes and therefor the assumptions are wrong.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao The title is the title of Joseph Mazur’s new book published this year. This book begins and ends with the unsolved enigma of Zeno’s logical argument that motion is impossible. After more than 2000 years no counter argument yet comes to the surface of absolute clarity. So even with Einstein’s theories of relativity and all the quantum field theories put together still could not prove or disprove the statement that absolute motion is impossible.

Just the sort of challenge I like!....I'll be back with locigal solution to Zeno's argument.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Nature has no paradoxes

I agree there are no paradoxes in nature but there are also conjectures which can never be proven. Goldbach's conjecture, for an example.

Originally Posted by Tina I'll be back with locigal solution to Zeno's argument

Will be waiting eagerly for your argument.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao I agree there are no paradoxes in nature but there are also conjectures which can never be proven. Goldbach's conjecture, for an example. Will be waiting eagerly for your argument.

I'm working on it right now - and it's 2:00 AM in the morning!

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Tina it's 2:00 AM in the morning

That's the best time to concentrate. My question is whether it's 2 am October 11 or 2 am Oct 12? By the way, it's 11 am here in Dallas, Texas, Oct 11, 2007.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao That's the best time to concentrate. My question is whether it's 2 am October 11 or 2 am Oct 12? By the way, it's 11 am here in Dallas, Texas, Oct 11, 2007.

Lucky I had a sleep earlier this evening but I love the early hours of the morning - but allways frapped the ensuing day.

The Time?
Interesting question in light of Zeno's paradox I am in the future it is Friday Oct 12, 2007.

Now back to work - better turn this damned computer off - too many interesting diversions. Good night/day.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Tina I am in the future it is Friday Oct 12, 2007.

Not to assume too much condescending, seem you sacrifice future prospect going back in time participating in TOEQUEST. On the other hand this makes you live longer.

[dleviwing]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao I agree there are no paradoxes in nature but there are also conjectures which can never be proven. Goldbach's conjecture, for an example.

I view “Goldbach's conjecture” as more of an axiom. When we refer to mathematics of any kind, we are delving into abstract thinking. This is a human creations, not natures. To a mathematician this stuff is probably better than sex but not to the rest of us.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by dleviwing more of an axiom

David Hilbert thought the same way that's why his school to axiomatize mathematics failed see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hilbert