118
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by Daft_ish@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

The monotheistic all powerful one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MxRemy@lemmy.one 24 points 3 months ago

Zeno's Paradox, even though it's pretty much resolved. If you fire an arrow at an apple, before it can get all the way there, it must get halfway there. But before it can get halfway there, it's gotta get a quarter of the way there. But before it can get a fourth of the way, it's gotta get an eighth... etc, etc. The arrow never runs out of new subdivisions it must cross. Therefore motion is actually impossible QED lol.

Obviously motion is possible, but it's neat to see what ways people intuitively try to counter this, because it's not super obvious. The tortoise race one is better but seemed more tedious to try and get across.

[-] mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 months ago

So the resolution lies in the secret that a decreasing trend up to infinity adds up to a finite value. This is well explained by Gabriel's horn area and volume paradox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZOi9HH5ueU

[-] Jayjader@jlai.lu 3 points 3 months ago

If I remember my series analysis math classes correctly: technically, summing a decreasing trend up to infinity will give you a finite value if and only if the trend decreases faster than the function/curve x -> 1/x.

[-] mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 months ago

Great. Can you give me example of decreasing trend slower than that function curve?, where summation doesn't give finite value? A simple example please, I am not math scholar.

[-] Jayjader@jlai.lu 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

So, for starters, any exponentiation "greater than 1" is a valid candidate, in the sense that 1/(n^2), 1/(n^3), etc will all give a finite sum over infinite values of n.

From that, inverting the exponentiation "rule" gives us the "simple" examples you are looking for: 1/√n, 1/√(√n), etc.

Knowing that √n = n^(1/2), and so that 1/√n can be written as 1/(n^(1/2)), might help make these examples more obvious.

[-] mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago

Hang on, that's not a decreasing trend. 1/√4 is not smaller, but larger than 1/4...?

[-] Jayjader@jlai.lu 1 points 2 months ago

From 1/√3 to 1/√4 is less of a decrease than from 1/3 to 1/4, just as from 1/3 to 1/4 is less of a decrease than from 1/(3²) to 1/(4²).

The curve here is not mapping 1/4 -> 1/√4, but rather 4 -> 1/√4 (and 3 -> 1/√3, and so on).

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 3 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=yZOi9HH5ueU

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

load more comments (11 replies)
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
118 points (87.8% liked)

Asklemmy

42432 readers
2597 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS