World's best suggested paradox

[blalien]

Holy crap this thread is a train wreck.

An unstoppable force and an immovable object cannot exist in the same universe. In fact, neither one can exist in our universe. Apply enough force and you can move or stop anything.

For the crosswalk, you will eventually reach a point where your step size is one Planck length (1.6*10^-35 meters) and you cannot cut that in half.

0.9 repeating does indeed equal 1. The proof takes four lines.

If you assume God must follow the laws of physics, then he cannot create an object so big he cannot lift it. It costs far, far more energy to create something (mc^2) than to move it (mgh). Unless he consumes every bit of usable energy in the universe creating it. And if God does not follow physics, then all logic goes out the window, and it's not even worth discussing.

A sentence that refers to its own truth value is logically acceptable but has no practical use.

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

 

[diebane]

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

Sort of true. Do you have anything you want answers to? You seem to know much.

mfG diebane

 

[MattRooney06]

The plot to Time splitters two and three

eh hem

1) Obtain the time Crystals
2) Use Time Crystals to power a time machine
3) Go back in time and destroy time Crystals

Yeah think about that for a second...for those that cant be bothered

Without the time crystals you cannot build the time machine, without the time machine you cannot destroy the crystals, this means the crystals are not destroyed....meaning you can collect the time crystals in order to use the time machine to destroy them....meaning...i think you get it

 

[MattRooney06]

One fine day in the middle of the night, two dead men got up to fight, back to back they faced eachover, drew the swords and shot eachover.

best paradox story i know

A blind old man walking by, saw the fight and began to cry, he was comforted by a wingless fly, who was told to help by a muted guy

thats a verse my Daddy taught me

 

[diebane]

The plot to Time splitters two and three

eh hem

1) Obtain the time Crystals
2) Use Time Crystals to power a time machine
3) Go back in time and destroy time Crystals

Yeah think about that for a second...for those that cant be bothered

Without the time crystals you cannot build the time machine, without the time machine you cannot destroy the crystals, this means the crystals are not destroyed....meaning you can collect the time crystals in order to use the time machine to destroy them....meaning...i think you get it

Let's say you obtain those crystals now, in 2011. You buy this time machine, power it, go back in time to the year, let's say, 1971. in 1971, you destroy those crystals. Congratulations! You're now in the year 1971, the crystals are destroyed and therefor no time machine can be build after 1971. It's the only way I can think about it and NOT shit brix, I know where you're going with that one.

mfG diebane

 

[MattRooney06]

The old one about an omnipotent being being able to do/create something that extends their own limitations seems like an easy one to me, actually.

This being, if they have true omnipotence, holds domain over physics, including the law that would negate that possibility. In this sense, the being could, say, create something too heavy for it to lift, but it would simultaneously be able to lift the object. I'm pretty sure omnipotence implies that one is not restrained in their power, even over universal laws.

Could we comprehend this act taking place? I don't know, I think I would just... who here has a picture of buddy's head blowing up?

thats like when people say can God make a rock so strong even he couldn't break it

the answer is (atheists your going to hate this ):

Being an omnipotent being The answer is Yes he could make a rock so strong that he couldent break it and Yes he could also break it

 

[Piflik]

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

Actually oscillation of air-pressure is just that, until it is interpreted by an observer...his brain will turn the pressure oscillations into sound...the oscillations will be generated without an observer, too, but it will not be sound

 

[MattRooney06]

The plot to Time splitters two and three

eh hem

1) Obtain the time Crystals
2) Use Time Crystals to power a time machine
3) Go back in time and destroy time Crystals

Yeah think about that for a second...for those that cant be bothered

Without the time crystals you cannot build the time machine, without the time machine you cannot destroy the crystals, this means the crystals are not destroyed....meaning you can collect the time crystals in order to use the time machine to destroy them....meaning...i think you get it

Let's say you obtain those crystals now, in 2011. You buy this time machine, power it, go back in time to the year, let's say, 1971. in 1971, you destroy those crystals. Congratulations! You're now in the year 1971, the crystals are destroyed and therefor no time machine can be build after 1971. It's the only way I can think about it and NOT shit brix, I know where you're going with that one.

mfG diebane

Yes thats what i thought should have happened....but he set a timer for a bomb (basically) and then traveled to his present time before they exploded

 

[Nexoram]

I say it again what's

1. The
2. Smallest
3. Number
4. Not
5. Nameable
6. In
7. Under
8. Ten
9. Words?

one million one hundred and one thousand one hundred and one.

Smallest one I can come up with.

You can't divide by zero. Yes you fucking can. I have two apples, I don't divide by anything so I still have two apples. The mathematicians just don't want to admit defeat.

Nope. If you still have two apples, then you've divided them by one, not zero. (You've split them between yourself and no one else = 1)

Dividing by zero is a bit like pouring water into buckets which are infinitely small in size. They are so small that they effectively don't exist. Therefore the water could fill an infinite number of those buckets; hence anything divided by zero = infinity.

But I haven't divided by anything, so they still exist as a pair of apples! Mind. Blown. Like I said, they just don't want to admit defeat. This is why I do literature and not maths.

Think of this this way. When you divide by 2 you divide something into 2 equal pieces. When you divide by 1 you divide into one piece. Dividing by zero divides it into zero pieces, or no pieces at all. Therefore, 2 apples divided by 2 will equal 1. 2 apples divided by 1 equals 2. 2 apples divided by zero equals zero apples.

Munch.

Oh my god, my head hurts.

 

[Piflik]

The plot to Time splitters two and three

eh hem

1) Obtain the time Crystals
2) Use Time Crystals to power a time machine
3) Go back in time and destroy time Crystals

Yeah think about that for a second...for those that cant be bothered

And this will still not prevent someone to travel back to a time before you destroyed the crystals to use them in their own time machine

 

[Piflik]

You can't divide by zero. Yes you fucking can. I have two apples, I don't divide by anything so I still have two apples. The mathematicians just don't want to admit defeat.

Nope. If you still have two apples, then you've divided them by one, not zero. (You've split them between yourself and no one else = 1)

Dividing by zero is a bit like pouring water into buckets which are infinitely small in size. They are so small that they effectively don't exist. Therefore the water could fill an infinite number of those buckets; hence anything divided by zero = infinity.

But I haven't divided by anything, so they still exist as a pair of apples! Mind. Blown. Like I said, they just don't want to admit defeat. This is why I do literature and not maths.

Think of this this way. When you divide by 2 you divide something into 2 equal pieces. When you divide by 1 you divide into one piece. Dividing by zero divides it into zero pieces, or no pieces at all. Therefore, 2 apples divided by 2 will equal 1. 2 apples divided by 1 equals 2. 2 apples divided by zero equals zero apples.

But these 0 pieces of apple would have to incorporate the complete mass of 1 apple (since you cannot destroy mass)...

 

[Lt.Snuffles]

Holy crap this thread is a train wreck.

An unstoppable force and an immovable object cannot exist in the same universe. In fact, neither one can exist in our universe. Apply enough force and you can move or stop anything.

For the crosswalk, you will eventually reach a point where your step size is one Planck length (1.6*10^-35 meters) and you cannot cut that in half.
1.6*10^-36

0.9 repeating does indeed equal 1. The proof takes four lines.

If you assume God must follow the laws of physics, then he cannot create an object so big he cannot lift it. It costs far, far more energy to create something (mc^2) than to move it (mgh). Unless he consumes every bit of usable energy in the universe creating it. And if God does not follow physics, then all logic goes out the window, and it's not even worth discussing.
God, supposidly is omnipotent, and therefore can create and do anything, and because he is God he is outside our understanding of the laws of physics

A sentence that refers to its own truth value is logically acceptable but has no practical use.

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

 

[AlexWinter]

You can't divide by zero. Yes you fucking can. I have two apples, I don't divide by anything so I still have two apples. The mathematicians just don't want to admit defeat.

Dude, you're wrong. Accept it.

Do you seriously think that you, a lit student, are smarter than the entire mathematics community, or are you just trolling?

 

[samuraiash1991]

YES, i have discovered the second part of the story!, thats one step closer to the dead mens treasure

 

[LostFable]

Taking the paradox of 'What happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmoveable object' the answer is that this can never happen as in a universe where one of the above conditions existed, then by definition, the other cannot.

 

[kikon9]

what happens when an unstoppable force hits an unmovable object?

What happens if Pinochkio says: my nose will grow now!

It could result in some kind of oscillating back and forth effect.

 

[kikon9]

You can't divide by zero. Yes you fucking can. I have two apples, I don't divide by anything so I still have two apples. The mathematicians just don't want to admit defeat.

Nope. If you still have two apples, then you've divided them by one, not zero. (You've split them between yourself and no one else = 1)

Dividing by zero is a bit like pouring water into buckets which are infinitely small in size. They are so small that they effectively don't exist. Therefore the water could fill an infinite number of those buckets; hence anything divided by zero = infinity.

But I haven't divided by anything, so they still exist as a pair of apples! Mind. Blown. Like I said, they just don't want to admit defeat. This is why I do literature and not maths.

Think of this this way. When you divide by 2 you divide something into 2 equal pieces. When you divide by 1 you divide into one piece. Dividing by zero divides it into zero pieces, or no pieces at all. Therefore, 2 apples divided by 2 will equal 1. 2 apples divided by 1 equals 2. 2 apples divided by zero equals zero apples.

But these 0 pieces of apple would have to incorporate the complete mass of 1 apple (since you cannot destroy mass)...

And since you cannot destroy mass, then obviously the original proposition (Dividing 2 by zero) is impossible.

 

[zega frega omega]

If I take something that is six pounds, and turn it over, would it become nine pounds?

 

[kikon9]

You can't divide by zero. Yes you fucking can. I have two apples, I don't divide by anything so I still have two apples. The mathematicians just don't want to admit defeat.

Nope. If you still have two apples, then you've divided them by one, not zero. (You've split them between yourself and no one else = 1)

Dividing by zero is a bit like pouring water into buckets which are infinitely small in size. They are so small that they effectively don't exist. Therefore the water could fill an infinite number of those buckets; hence anything divided by zero = infinity.

But I haven't divided by anything, so they still exist as a pair of apples! Mind. Blown. Like I said, they just don't want to admit defeat. This is why I do literature and not maths.

No, because if you are holding 2 apples then you are dividing them by 1 party (yourself).