For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Ok.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:23 pmIf you are open, you should be able to restate the argument(s) that they are trying to use to discredit what you are saying. Try to do that, in order to find out how open you are.
Do you dare post it in the thread? Maybe, maybe not I suppose.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:30 pmOk.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:23 pmIf you are open, you should be able to restate the argument(s) that they are trying to use to discredit what you are saying. Try to do that, in order to find out how open you are.
Maybe it becomes a new thing at not the same time. That would make the whole matter of continuous motion separate from when the something exists twice.
Yes, I dare to explain what people mean and I would accept if they are right.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:03 pmDo you dare post it in the thread? Maybe, maybe not I suppose.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:30 pmOk.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:23 pm
If you are open, you should be able to restate the argument(s) that they are trying to use to discredit what you are saying. Try to do that, in order to find out how open you are.
Yes, it becomes a new thing later but it should not exist at now in order to become a new thing later. That is the whole point that one needs to understand. Another point is that it also exists at now. And these two points lead to a contradiction at now. In another word, the key point is a contradiction at now rather than whether the thing becomes a new thing or not later.
The sequence of existence is forbidden by conservation laws since it requires a constant injection of energy to the system to ensure that the sequence is possible. In fact in quantum field theory, the motion is defined by a term that consists of two fields, one is the destruction operator at now and the other one creation operator at a later time.commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:09 pm That would make the whole matter of continuous motion separate from when the something exists twice.
In mathematics and physics, we only have the continuous limit instead of the continuous regime. Continuous limit is defined as a discrete process when the distance between two events in the process is arbitrarily small but never zero. This just allows us to do calculations but people do not know what exactly happens in the continuous regime when the distance between two events is really zero. You are dealing with the same event when the distance between two events is zero otherwise you are dealing with a discrete process rather than continuous.
This is only a problem for Xeno.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 6:40 pm To move, it must not be at now at the current location and then be at the next instance at another point. But something cannot be and not be at the same instance, now (it exists at now and must not exist in order to move). Therefore, continuous motion is impossible.
There is no mathematical model for the continuous regime but the continuous limit. The reality seems continuous but we might get fooled by our brain. We in fact know that a film is made of frames but the movie seems continuous to us.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:23 pmThis is only a problem for Xeno.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 6:40 pm To move, it must not be at now at the current location and then be at the next instance at another point. But something cannot be and not be at the same instance, now (it exists at now and must not exist in order to move). Therefore, continuous motion is impossible.
The fact is that we are all in constant motion. The earth goes round, it cucles the sun, the entire sole system id orbiting the centre of the Galaxy and there are other motions related to proximity of the vicinity cluster.
If there seems to be a problem with our notion of movement, then the problem is with the maths model.
Yes it is absolutely a mathematical problem. Xeno's paradox is caused by maths which is a digital phenomenon, whereas reality is purely analogue.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:53 pmThere is no mathematical model for the continuous regime but the continuous limit. The reality seems continuous but we might get fooled by our brain. We in fact know that a film is made of frames but the movie seems continuous to us.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:23 pmThis is only a problem for Xeno.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Nov 21, 2021 6:40 pm To move, it must not be at now at the current location and then be at the next instance at another point. But something cannot be and not be at the same instance, now (it exists at now and must not exist in order to move). Therefore, continuous motion is impossible.
The fact is that we are all in constant motion. The earth goes round, it cucles the sun, the entire sole system id orbiting the centre of the Galaxy and there are other motions related to proximity of the vicinity cluster.
If there seems to be a problem with our notion of movement, then the problem is with the maths model.
Ok.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:21 pmBy the same instant, I mean the same time.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:25 am Continuous motion is possible when something is pushed in a vacuum like in space where there is nothing to stop it.
Since the Big Bang, all things are supposedly in continuous motion.
Something which is allowed by math is possible otherwise is impossible.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 5:09 amOk.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:21 pmBy the same instant, I mean the same time.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:25 am Continuous motion is possible when something is pushed in a vacuum like in space where there is nothing to stop it.
Since the Big Bang, all things are supposedly in continuous motion.
Note my second point and also this;
In other words, continuous motion is possible as conditioned by a realistic Framework and System of Knowledge which is ultimately mind-interdependent.
- If an object is not changing relatively to a given frame of reference, the object is said to be at rest, motionless, immobile, stationary, or to have a constant or time-invariant position with reference to its surroundings.
As there is no absolute frame of reference, absolute motion cannot be determined.[1] Thus, everything in the universe can be considered to be in motion.[2]: 20–21
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion
Your OP is confined to logic and Pure Mathematics which are not realistic.
The point is logic and pure mathematics are highly theoretical. Logic and Pure Mathematics will only work within their defined framework where things are stripped off ALL the realistic elements therein and what they work with are merely Forms, pro-forma and the abstract, i.e. not the real.
So to be realistic, whatever is inferred therefrom must be verified by experience and empirical justifications to confirm they are real.
Continuous motion as conditioned by whatever the specific framework can be relatively impossible and relatively possible but not absolutely impossible.
Could you explain continuous motion without using a discrete process?Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 10:45 pmYes it is absolutely a mathematical problem. Xeno's paradox is caused by maths which is a digital phenomenon, whereas reality is purely analogue.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:53 pmThere is no mathematical model for the continuous regime but the continuous limit. The reality seems continuous but we might get fooled by our brain. We in fact know that a film is made of frames but the movie seems continuous to us.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:23 pm
This is only a problem for Xeno.
The fact is that we are all in constant motion. The earth goes round, it cucles the sun, the entire sole system id orbiting the centre of the Galaxy and there are other motions related to proximity of the vicinity cluster.
If there seems to be a problem with our notion of movement, then the problem is with the maths model.
It is based on existing as a mathematical "value" of position. To acquire the next position that values has to change continually rather than atomistically. Maths assumes atomistic place values such as 1, 2, &3. But nature abhors an integer.
I do not need to. Continuous motion is a fact. The problem is the math's failure to adequately describe it, that is the point I am making.bahman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 5:58 pmCould you explain continuous motion without using a discrete process?Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 10:45 pmYes it is absolutely a mathematical problem. Xeno's paradox is caused by maths which is a digital phenomenon, whereas reality is purely analogue.
It is based on existing as a mathematical "value" of position. To acquire the next position that values has to change continually rather than atomistically. Maths assumes atomistic place values such as 1, 2, &3. But nature abhors an integer.
Why it is a fact?Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 6:45 pmI do not need to. Continuous motion is a fact. The problem is the math's failure to adequately describe it, that is the point I am making.bahman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 5:58 pmCould you explain continuous motion without using a discrete process?Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 10:45 pm
Yes it is absolutely a mathematical problem. Xeno's paradox is caused by maths which is a digital phenomenon, whereas reality is purely analogue.
It is based on existing as a mathematical "value" of position. To acquire the next position that values has to change continually rather than atomistically. Maths assumes atomistic place values such as 1, 2, &3. But nature abhors an integer.
None of these explains that the motion is continuous.