Your Paradox.

[Captain Blackout]

I can see the universe from the perspective of an atheist and from the perspective of a theist.

Yes, this is a paradox. If you don't think it is, go look up paradox on dictionary.com

 

[Kiba Bloodfang]

Here's something. What happens if you put up a portal that leads somewhere say... inside yourself. If someone else were to walk through they'd end up in your belly and could get out... uhh... north or south w/e.

What if you yourself went through that portal and ended up inside yourself? If you were small enough to crawl up your own esophogus where would you end up?

Grossness aside, I think this is a truly confusing paradox.

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

Okay, say that there are an infinite number of parallel universes, and in these universes every single possible configuration for existence occurs an infinite number of times over, including a universe to which there are no parallel existences.

Your logic is flawed, stop trying to push this argument, you've already been proven wrong when you made a topic about it (I'm suspecting it was you, can't be bothered double checking)

 

[Soxafloppin]

What happens when you drop unbuttered toast?

 

[asdfbojqewrv]

Suppose every man in a village is well shaven everyday.
A barber claims he shaves every man in the village who doesn't shave himself.
Question:who shaves the barber?

Could the answer not be that the barber a child and therefore not a "man"? Or better yet, could he just have no facial hair to begin with, maybe he went through chemo or something... pretty much just grasping at straws but still. Or maybe, just maybe, the barber doesn't live/work in the village, just the men from the village come to see him for a shave.

OT: "It seems like you can replace any component of a ship, and it will still be the same ship. So you can replace them all, one at a time, and it will still be the same ship. But then you can take all the original pieces, and assemble them into a ship. That, too, is the same ship with which you started."

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Olbers Paradox

The universe in infinite, and there are countless stars in the sky.
This means that at every point in the sky relative to earth, whatever it's position, there is bound to be a star emitting light.
So how come we have night?

Spoiler

Well when he postulated the question is was unknown, there is interstellar dust and gravity wells that stop all light reaching Earth, but, not as much as would be required to block out enough light from each star as to dim the sky to only seeing dots, so the paradox does still stand to modern science as I remember it

No, your logic is faulty. Eventually, any absorbing matter would heat up until it glowed. The correct answer is that the stars were not always shining, so their light has not reached us yet.

The universe is not infinite, the big bang means its expanding, you cannot expand on infinite. Its just large beyond our understanding of the word.

Place a portal on a table and one on a wall. Now fit the table with the portal into the one on the wall longways. Where does the table go? This was in the form of a demotivational poster with a diagram but i cant find it, if you have it that would be great.

 

[soapyshooter]

Schrödinger's cat [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat] walks into a bar, and doesn't.

It's my favorite joke.

LOL, thats pretty funny. too bad most people wouldn't get it.

 

[Droa]

Can the almighty God create a rock which he cannot lift?

That's all I got at the moment.

yes he can create a rock that he cannot lift and will lift it anyway sorry had to answer that one,

its the same as "can God create a sandwich so big that not even he can finish, the answer is yes he can and will finish it anyway"

and about the paradox's just go play the soul Legacy of Kain games, they are chalk full of them

That doesn't make sense. You can't do something which you're incapable of doing. I can't explain it more than

its just one of those kinda answers to continue on with God being omnipotent and such, I dont really care to much about it but I like it, just one of those things really

 

[Crofty]

Here's something. What happens if you put up a portal that leads somewhere say... inside yourself. If someone else were to walk through they'd end up in your belly and could get out... uhh... north or south w/e.

What if you yourself went through that portal and ended up inside yourself? If you were small enough to crawl up your own esophogus where would you end up?

Grossness aside, I think this is a truly confusing paradox.

Have you ever watched Being John Malkovich? It had a similar scenario, except that those who entered the portal were inside John Malkovich's mind.

 

[reg42]

-snip-

its just one of those kinda answers to continue on with God being omnipotent and such, I dont really care to much about it but I like it, just one of those things really

That's why it's a paradox.

 

[^=ash=^]

Schrödinger's cat [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat] walks into a bar, and doesn't.

It's my favorite joke.

I think I'm a part of a small group that laughed at this well done good sir.

OT: the ship of theseus is all i can think of .. a bit vague but sorta works .. but i just depends on how you look at it.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

Stuff like this gives me a migraine, but here goes anyway:

Say you had something that allowed you to travel backwards and forwards through time (for a short distance, ie, within a year). Now say you had lost something, so you went back in time to when you last saw it and decided to take it with you, so that you had it. But in the past, you couldn't find what you had lost, so after some time, you decided to go back in time again to when you last saw it...

Again, this is only a scenario I made up... and I'm gonna stop here because my head hurts.

 

[HitsWithStyxx]

Okay, say that there are an infinite number of parallel universes, and in these universes every single possible configuration for existence occurs an infinite number of times over, including a universe to which there are no parallel existences.

Your logic is flawed, stop trying to push this argument, you've already been proven wrong when you made a topic about it (I'm suspecting it was you, can't be bothered double checking)

I didn't make that topic, I just thought that it was an interesting example of a paradox, in spite of the flawed logic (of which I was aware).

 

[HitsWithStyxx]

Stuff like this gives me a migraine, but here goes anyway:

Say you had something that allowed you to travel backwards and forwards through time (for a short distance, ie, within a year). Now say you had lost something, so you went back in time to when you last saw it and decided to take it with you, so that you had it. But in the past, you couldn't find what you had lost, so after some time, you decided to go back in time again to when you last saw it...

Again, this is only a scenario I made up... and I'm gonna stop here because my head hurts.

I like this one, because it means that said object would have to have been removed from existence for an unspecified amount of time, only to be returned into existence at the time when you retrieved it from the past; i.e. The missing keys in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure

 

[Maze1125]

That's not a paradox though. A paradox is something impossible which will fuck up the universe. Like if I went back in time to kill Hitler at birth then, in the future I'd have no reason to go back in time, thus royally fucking up the universe and creating a huge plothole that the internet will whine about for years to come.

That's not a time paradox because nothing inconsistent is caused.
A time paradox would be going back in time and killing your grandmother before she gave birth to your mother, because then you'd never be born and couldn't go back in time to kill your grandmother, and so you would be born and would go back in time and kill your grandmother, but then you couldn't be born... etc.

Except it sort of is. Killing your grandmother creates a loop without ending (you kill her -> you're never born -> you can't kill her -> you're born -> you kill her), being your own grandfather creates a loop without beginning, since in order for you to exist you need to have traveled back, but you need to exist in order to have traveled back (you're born -> you travel back -> you become your own grandfather -> you're born). It's possible that your grandmother would've met someone else if you were never born, but then you wouldn't be your own grandfather and their grandchild wouldn't be you.

That doesn't make it a paradox, if anything, it's the exact opposite of a paradox.

A paradox is something that is inconsistent for every possibility.
Becoming your own grandfather is consistent for every possibility.

If you don't become your own grandfather, then you aren't born and you don't become your own grandfather. Which is consistent.
If you become your own grandfather then you are born and you can go back in time and become your own grandfather. Which is consistent.

Another example is:
"This statement is false."
and
"This statement is true."

If you take "This statement is false." to be true, then it is false.
If you take "This statement is false." to be false, then it is true.
Both cases are inconsistent and so the claim is a paradox.

However, if you take "This statement is true." to be true, then it is true, if you take it to be false, then it is false. Making it consistent in both cases.

Killing your grandfather is like "This statement is false."
Becoming your own grandfather is like "This statement is true."

 

[Maze1125]

Suppose every man in a village is well shaven everyday.
A barber claims he shaves every man in the village who doesn't shave himself.
Question:who shaves the barber?

Could the answer not be that the barber a child and therefore not a "man"? Or better yet, could he just have no facial hair to begin with, maybe he went through chemo or something... pretty much just grasping at straws but still. Or maybe, just maybe, the barber doesn't live/work in the village, just the men from the village come to see him for a shave.

Or the barber could be lying/mistaken.

 

[Melon Hunter]

Olbers Paradox

The universe in infinite, and there are countless stars in the sky.
This means that at every point in the sky relative to earth, whatever it's position, there is bound to be a star emitting light.
So how come we have night?

Spoiler

Well when he postulated the question is was unknown, there is interstellar dust and gravity wells that stop all light reaching Earth, but, not as much as would be required to block out enough light from each star as to dim the sky to only seeing dots, so the paradox does still stand to modern science as I remember it

There are a couple of possible holes in that argument, but it is still a good one! If you assume the mass in the universe is homogeneously distributed then it could be true however it has been established that the matter in the universe is clumped up into galaxies and such like with large areas of nothingness in between giving the potential for 'gaps' relative to Earth. Also it assumes that light moves linearly without being extinguished - however if a suitably massive body is in between the Earth and the light source nothing will be seen (i.e a black hole! Which I just realised you mentioned) A final, more subjective argument is that we may simply not be able to observe all of the stars that are lighting up the sky because the amount of light from a spherical emitter arriving at a given point decreases with the square of the distance between the source and the observer and if this drops below our detection limits (of eye or telescope) we simply wont observe the star!

Fun one though! I actually had to think about this

The problem is that although there is (probably) infinite space, there is thought to be finite matter, about 10^80 atoms in the universe. So, this explains why night is not illuminated by a mass of stars because there are a finite amount in the universe.

 

[Melon Hunter]

Suppose every man in a village is well shaven everyday.
A barber claims he shaves every man in the village who doesn't shave himself.
Question:who shaves the barber?

Could the answer not be that the barber a child and therefore not a "man"? Or better yet, could he just have no facial hair to begin with, maybe he went through chemo or something... pretty much just grasping at straws but still. Or maybe, just maybe, the barber doesn't live/work in the village, just the men from the village come to see him for a shave.

Or the barber could be lying/mistaken.

The traditional answer is that the barber is a woman, although the use of 'he' makes that answer wrong...unless its a typo.

 

[AWAR]

This:

Spoiler

 

[HappyPillz]

I'm not even sure on what a paradox is.

Is something you do in the past that will fuck up the future like if you killed hitler then in the future you would have no reason for going back in time because he would already be dead.

That's more of an example of a paradox. A paradox is a statement that contains contadictory ideas.

Fine. Here's a simple one. Time paradox.

I go back in time and kill myself. Therefore my future self ceases to exist. But if my future self ceases to exist to dying in the past, how does my future self go back in time to kill myself in the past in the first place?

Thats assuming that there are divergent timelines. If time is linear, you could go back in time and try to kill yourself, but you would know that you fail, because obviously you didn't die, as you lived to make the trip.