1. This makes no sense because it's impossible and anyone could probably solve this.

2. Originally Posted by Margherita
This makes no sense because it's impossible and anyone could probably solve this.
Wow. The average IQ on this forum must be around 50.

You just said anyone could solve an impossible problem...

3. Originally Posted by _corn_

I know that the runner passes the turtle, I admitted it in my first post. I do understand how physics and logic works, obviously more so than you.

This paradox, as I said before, has baffled the world's top mathematicians for over 2000 years, what makes you think you are smarter than them?

If you actually try and understand the paradox, you will see what the paradox is about - and you actually tried to say the paradox is a fallacy with the main concept of the paradox. If the runner catches up with the turtle, it seems he must have completed an infinite number of steps in a finite time, which is impossible. That is the paradox.
The paradox asumes that you can infinitely reduce the time segments and distances and therefore, Achilles can never overtake the turtle.
But you can't infinitely reduce distance. At some sub-atomic level, distance simply seizes to exist because there are no more "markers".

4. Originally Posted by maximon555
The paradox asumes that you can infinitely reduce the time segments and distances and therefore, Achilles can never overtake the turtle.
But you can't infinitely reduce distance. At some sub-atomic level, distance simply seizes to exist because there are no more "markers".
You have a point there. Although I'm not sure what you are trying to say about distance "seizing" to exist. If distance doesn't exist at some sub-atomic level, how can you say it is a sub-atomic level?? Sub-atomic means the distance you are talking about is less than an atom, but if distance doesn't exist...wtf?

EDIT: Or do you mean that the smallest unit of distance is reached at a sub-atomic level, so you cannot divide the distance any more? Is distance discrete or continuous?

5. tl;dr

Can I have a third grader version?

6. Originally Posted by _corn_

You have a point there. Although I'm not sure what you are trying to say about distance "seizing" to exist. If distance doesn't exist at some sub-atomic level, how can you say it is a sub-atomic level?? Sub-atomic means the distance you are talking about is less than an atom, but if distance doesn't exist...wtf?

EDIT: Or do you mean that the smallest unit of distance is reached at a sub-atomic level, so you cannot divide the distance any more? Is distance discrete or continuous?
the paradox says that you can divide an object infinitely or as you put it approach a value, but never reach it, however, this paradox is completely mathematical and has no application in the real world. The thing about quantum mechanics though is that it requires a natural limit of space, Planck's constant which is equivalent to approximately (6.626 x 10^-34 Joules). Infinite doesn't exist in nature because they lead to contradictions as seen in the case of cavity radiation. The Planck length is about 10^-35 meters and is the smallest distance possible in the universe because at this scale quantum fluctuations cause distances smaller than this length impossible to be determined.

7. Originally Posted by _corn_

I know that the runner passes the turtle, I admitted it in my first post. I do understand how physics and logic works, obviously more so than you.

This paradox, as I said before, has baffled the world's top mathematicians for over 2000 years, what makes you think you are smarter than them?

If you actually try and understand the paradox, you will see what the paradox is about - and you actually tried to say the paradox is a fallacy with the main concept of the paradox. If the runner catches up with the turtle, it seems he must have completed an infinite number of steps in a finite time, which is impossible. That is the paradox.

See this video:

LOL I know................

THIS IS A BLOODY PARADOX NOT A SIMPLE PHYSICS QUESTION
I'm not sure you are understanding me here. The presmise of the paradox states that he must do infinite steps within a finite period of time. The only way for that to be possible scientifically is for him to break constant velocity. Zeno's literally states that the pursuer only makes steps to where the tortoise HAS been. If he were to maintain constant velocity then Zeno's paradox relies on the assumption that both time and distance are infinitely divisible. Geometrically Achilles velocity will eventually reach and surpass the assymptote, in which the units of distance covere to reach where the tortuise HAD been becomes finite. Mathematicians have already made a standard solution to the paradox centuries ago and it's a lot simpler than what you're making it out to be.

8. It's not a paradox.. nor it's even a mathematical theory. Just because the distance between the runner and the turtle changed in a specific factor up to a particular point, You still cannot prove any pattern.

9. Originally Posted by Youtro
It's not a paradox.. nor it's even a mathematical theory. Just because the distance between the runner and the turtle changed in a specific factor up to a particular point, You still cannot prove any pattern.
Exactly, This is one of the Stupidiest Paradox i ever heard...or maybe its just his explanation

10. this is probably the most retarded paradox iv'e ever heard of

11. You, are fucking stupid.
Of course he will run past him, it's not like he's slowing down his run the closer he gets to it.

Congratulations, nobody lost their mind, except for you, who clearly didn't have one to begin with.

12. ## The Following User Says Thank You to Xenocide For This Useful Post:

maximon555 (10-22-2013)

13. Mathematics wise, no matter how many times you divide by 10, you will never reach 0.

14. Originally Posted by _corn_

I don't see any rule saying the pursuer must get progressively slower. The pursuer and the turtle both run at a constant velocity, and the pursuer runs 10 times as fast as the turtle.
It's not a fallacy, and no theory is being set up, this is a paradox.

EDIT: I should have known better than to post this on here...
If the pursuer runs 10 times as fast as the turtle then the pursuer would pass the turtle. The way that the "puzzle" is written states that the person never passes the turtle, but to do that, the person would have to slow down consistently to keep the decreasing distance between them constant. There.

16. Meh, the guy will pass him in a few meters, not really that hard

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last