What are some cool paradoxes, /b/?

Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network issues. Refreshing the page usually helps.

The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.

Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.

You are currently reading a thread in /b/ - Random

The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.

Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.

You are currently reading a thread in /b/ - Random

Thread images: 15

What are some cool paradoxes, /b/?

>>

>>613276711

impossible to time travel

>>

>>613276861

How is that a paradox?

It's just not possible.

>>

>>613277045

I think he's talking about the grandfather paradox

If you go back in time to kill your grandfather you would have never been born thus you would never be able to travel back in time and kill your grandfather

>>

>>613276861

>paradox

>impossile to time travel

>>

>>613277437

Yeah.....that would be a paradox if time travel was possible, which it isn't.

>>

OP may, in fact, find women sexually attractive, but is still a fag.

>>

>>613277830

Just a hypothetical

>>

>>613277863

kek'd

>>

>>613276861

Traveling to the future is not only possible buy very real. An atomic clock was placed on an airplane and scientists found that it was like a few nanoseconds slower than an equivalent one kept on earth. It's estimated that pilots will have gained a few seconds in their life compared to everyone else.

>>

>>613276861

>>613277045

>>613277830

you're traveling through time right now.

>>

>>613276711

The entire works of Berkeley.

>>

Minos Paradox

>>

>>613278666

Well "estimated" is pretty vague

that's not timetravel that's general relativity and very calculable

>>

>>613279106

But what about special relativity???

>>

>>613276861

The clocks in the ISS have to update all the time to keep up with earth time. It's called gravitational time dilation. The clocks up there literally go slower because time speeds up as you approach objects with mass.

>>

>>613279306

what about it

>>

greekfag here got some cool ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_the_Court

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes

>>

Omnipotence paradox is not a paradox. God could make a rock that he couldn't lift and then lift it but you can't understand how or why because you're not omnipotent

>>

>>613279106

That is time travel. They are traveling faster through time than everybody else. If earth was really big, dense, and had a large gravitational pull, it would be extremely obvious. What more do you want?

Also, I'd like to bring up the Twin Paradox

>>

>>613278712

this nigga gets it

>>

>>613278712

no way

>>

>>613278712

see Zeno's Paradox

>>

>>613276711

Not a pardox...but my life

For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing.

>>

>>613279562

the paradox is about an omnipotent being not being able to limit its own power and not a fucking rock you, imbecile

>>613279646

Oh yea i guess you could say that

what does the twin paradox say?

>>

>>613278712

>implying you aren't actually stationary and the world is just moving around you

>>

>>613279470

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_the_Court

protagoras is just a con-man. the case would be dismissed out of hand because protagoras is clearly not abiding by the terms of the agreement but then his student technically wins the case so the terms are fulfilled.

>>

Here's one.Is it the final proof of god's omnipotence that he need not exist in order to save us?

>>

>>613279470

>Ship of Theseus

i love this shit

>>

>>613276861

>implying I'm not traveling through time right now

>>

>>613276711

the statement "everything is possible" is a paradox, if you start with that assumption then, is it possible to find an impossibility? it must be, or else it is impossible to find one and therefore an impossibility

>>

>>613280342

>travels through time

>pauses at may 1st 2015 to momentarily make a comment on a related 4chan thread

>>

A bit late to the thread but what if killing your grandfather just not create a different dimension? thus not changing your own dimension

>>

This statement is false.

>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2#Pythagorean_Theorem_Proof

The square root of 2 is both even and odd.

Another Greek one, btw.

>>

>>613280579

i'm pretty sure we don't know enough about how time works in order to predict what would happen

>>

>>613279982

It has to do with relativity.

The twin paradox says:

Suppose one of two twins decides to go on a relativistic ride through outer space. According to relativity, as he approached the speed of light, time would slow down for him, but not his brother. Therefore, when he returns, he should be younger than his brother. However, since there is no frame of reference outside the the earth and the ship, the problem could also be thought of as the earth moving away from the ship at relativistic speeds and the ship staying in the same position. This would mean the brother who stayed on earth would be younger. So the question is, who is younger?

>>

>>613280491

I think that's also called the Exception Paradox, which states that every rule has an exception, but does that rule have an exception?

>>

>>613276711

Paradoxes are some of the most beautiful things in this world. Below I present the most common paradoxes as well as their more popular solutions. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask.

The Liar Paradox is probably the best, most prolifically examined example.

(1) Everything I say is a lie.

Is (1) true? Well, as Tarski so puts it: it depends on whether (1) is a metalinguistic truth predicate to language. If it is the case that we're speaking of language an order above the language order in which our "conversation" - so to speak - occured, then it is acceptable to speak in this manner.

Another paradox that's quite troublesome is that of Sorite's Paradox - or the paradox of a heap.

(1) X is a heap of sand.

(2) If I remove 1 grain of sand at a time from X, when will it no longer be a heap?

There are numerous solutions to this, none more well-accepted than the next. One way to solve the problem is to distinguish between continuous relationships and discrete relationships.

This is the most common solution, and the solution provided by Aristotle around 300 BCE. The solution is similar to Zeno's arrow paradox.

Zeno's arrow paradox:

(1) Suppose I shoot an arrow, and that arrow travels from A to B.

(2) Suppose every second the arrow travels half of the remaining distance.

(3) There will always be an infinitesimally small distance between B and the arrow.

(4) Thus, the arrow doesn't travel from A to B.

(5) All motion is impossible.

Aristotle considers the paradox and realizes that we don't treat physical objects in such continuous patterns - and as such if anything in the physical world were considered in such a way, nothing would <i> happen </i>. But Aristotle's solution, as is the same for Sorite's paradox, is to suggest that an arrow, or a heap occupy a discrete space in time which can only be identified as such by some subject observing said space. The space is considered discretely, not as an object traveling over an infinite plane

>>

>>613277045

>>613277830

Traveling forwards in time is technically possible, what with relativity and such.

>>

>>613281020

>>613281105

good lord that's some good shit

>>

>>613281105

And so, to determine whether a pile of sand is indeed a heap at point X in time would simply require one to observe the heap and label it as a heap or "not a heap". Similarly, we treat the arrow as occupying discrete moments in time, with lapses in the continuity of some theoretical n-dimensional hyperplane.

>>

>>613276711

achilles and the tortoise is awesome,

achilles is faster than tortoise

>tortoise gets 10 meter head start

>achilles runs 10 meters

>tortoise has now gone 3 more meters in that time

>achilles runs 3 meters

>tortoise has gone 1 meter in that time

>achillies runs... you fucking get it,

>>

>>613276861

>>613277045

>>613277437

go to bed

>>

Barber paradox:

There is a town with just one barber, who is male.

In this town, every man keeps himself clean shaven by exactly one of the following methods:

1. Shaving himself

2. Being shaved by the barber

The barber is a man in town who shaves all those, and only those, men in town who do not shave themselves.

Who shaves the barber?

>>

>>613281628

A modern approach to solving Zeno's arrow paradox would simply be to solve the geometric series:

lim n -> infinity of ∑i=1 to n of (1/2)^i

Such that the sum approaches 1, as was proved by Newton. This way we show that regardless of whether you treat the problem as continuous or discrete, an acceptable mathematical solution still exists.

>>

>>613282003

thats not a paradox, does the barber shave the barber, or does he shave himself, it's just wordplay

>>

>>613282003

Deez Nutz

>>

Berry's paradox:

"The smallest positive integer not definable in under eleven words."

>>

>>613277830

i am your grandfather sent forward in time to warn you that youre a faggot

>>

>>613281105

The solution to Zeno's paradox is rather simple: if one treats objects as discreet, the observer can conclude that the answer is imperceptible because the object will never disclose any information.

Also, calculus. Pretty neat.

>>

There is no such thing as paradox, only confusion.

No one ever told you to stick the global result back into the algorithm again. This need to "loop" comes from the "process of narration" that is to say, everything we understand is a narrative, and narratives are dynamic. It would be tiresome and impossible to have to explain all aspects of our narratives, so we use the literary concept of cause and effect, and from shared first principles, set the action of our narratives in motion, letting the reader fill in the blanks.

This dynamic narrative works independent of the linear flow of time, allowing us to glean from conclusions the underlying rules of the cause and effect, as well. However, this timelessness creates a fallacy in our narratives when in the case of a paradox, we "loop" the results of the cause and effect back into the narrative again.

Everything I say is a lie

I am lying

therefore I am telling the truth

the end.

But you can't leave it alone, so you stuff the conclusion back into the narrative and say,"but wait! You are telling the truth, so it can't be that everything you say is a lie!" Then you continue to go full retard by then doubting the first premise, and plugging that back in and saying the second premise must be false, which confirms the first....There you are.

Stuck because your dynamic narrative bent forced you to not stop the algorithm when you should have.

>>

>>613282003

If he shaves himself he doesn't shave himself.

That's awesome

[ ] Action A

[ ] Action B

[ ] Last Box unchecked

>>613282383

Look at it this way:

The barber, per definition, only shaves men who do not shave themselves

>>

I live every day as a paradox.

Existance.

Nonexistance.

Both exactly at the same time.

>>

>>613282383

no him, but it is a paradox for the following reasons:

(1) If the barber does not shave himself, then he is one of the men who do not shave himself, and so the barber must shave him. But he is the barber, therefore he must shave himself. Contradiction.

(2) If the barber does shave himself, then he does not shave only those who do not shave themselves. Because he is shaving himself, he is shaving a person who shaves himself. Contradiction.

>>

>>613280491

Cogito ergo sum, Renee Descartes

>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paradoxes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3x1q5_lYMRA

Basically most of these.

>>

>>613282383

If the barber shaves himself, then he is being shaved by the barber, who only shaves men who don't shave themselves.

If the barber is shaved by the barber, then he is shaving himself, and the barber doesn't shave men who shave themselves.

It is a paradox.

>>

>>613282596

The solution to Zeno's paradox is that Greeks understood division but not subtraction and that it's not a fucking paradox in the first place.

>>

>>613276711

The Münchhausen trilemma

>>

Curry's paradox (Warning: logic)

If this sentence is true, then Germany borders China.

>>

>>613283427

wha..

care to explain?

>>

Someone's been watching vsauce and is trying to be smart

>>

>>613282688

>>613282803

ah i get it now, answer is he is a biological female, whos gender identity is that of a man BOOM! tumblr to the fucking rescue

>>

>>613282003

the question is set up in a fallacy

>The barber is a man in town who shaves all those, and only those, men in town who do not shave themselves.

apparently not.

>>

>>613283427

>Curry's paradox

Naive set theory was discredited in the early 20th century - and oddly enough because of another paradox: Russell's Paradox. In any case, modern set theory doesn't allow Curry's paradox to exist: See Zermelo Frankel Set Theory

>>

No such thing as a paradox...

Only bad definitions, axioms and/or propositions.

>>

>>613282649

Ah, but what defines a global result?

>Everything I say is a lie

Therefore:

>[You] are lying

I arrive at that conclusion based on the assumption that you are a reliable narrator, that the statement given is a fact, and that it means what it means. I.e., I'm assuming that your statement is a truth written in plain, interpretable English.

Where does the narrative begin? With the assumption that your statement is true, or the content that your statement is false?

>>

>>613283395

wouldn't say it's a paradox by definition, but by virtue of existing as a theory. It is in itself a paradox, but semantically it is not.

For all those unclear of the trilemma:

When trying to prove the existence of anything, we resort to 3 means of proof:

(1) Assume some premise P must be true.

Ex: God exists.

(2) Circular reasoning

Ex: Assume X which depends on A which depends on X.

(3) Infinite Regression

Ex: A child asking "Why?" over and over ad infinitum.

The argument is that all three modes of reasoning are fallacious, and so we can never be 100% sure of anything because we can never reason correctly about anything.

>>

Look through a window. Do you see the window pane or do you see what's beyond?

>>

This is a pretty cool pair o docs

>>

>>613278712

Time is an invention, the faster an object moves the quicker it decays. giving an illusion of time distortion...

>>

the spooky paradox:

there is a skeleton inside us controlling our body but it lets us think we are controlling it.

>>

>>613283571

I can with formal logic:

1. X = (X=>Y) - The sentence in question.

We know Y is false:

2. X = (X => false)

X can only imply false if X is false or the statement is false. For those who don't know formal logic, think of it like you are promised ice cream if you do good on a test. If you do good on the test, and get ice cream, the promise was true. If you do bad on the test, and get ice cream, the promise is still true since that case wasn't implied. If you do bad on the test and don't get ice cream, the promise was still true for the same reason. If you do good on the test, and you don't get ice cream, the promise is false. Use the last two conditions to arrive at this (V is or in formal logic):

3. X = (~X V false)

Because of the way the OR operator works, the second part can only be true if ~X is true, so we can reduce the statement to:

4. X = ~X

Which is a contradiction

>>

>>613279470

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

This kind of thing just pisses me off. It's just so pointless...

But it's so goddamn fascinating. I don't want to, but I begin to really get invested in this shit.

>>

>>613281411

Not just technically possible, it's done all the time and has been proven to happen when we launch things into space.

>>

>>613280722

In going to go with true. Yeah. Definitely true.

>>

>>613282003

>>613282383

>>613282688

Only Jeshush shaves

>>

>>613281411

this faggot knows. but the other faggot is kinda right too.

>>

>>613282494

GOT EEEEEEEEEEEEEEM!

>>

>>613284048

Ya got me, well met

Ignore this: >>613285364

>>

>>613277045

you are kind of right, but not for the reasons you think, physicsfag here.

>>

>>613285555

Nice

>>

>>613284341

Yes... agree.

eg "everything i say is a lie"

is similar to saying "my wall is both blue and red"

There is absolutely no paradox... you have simply misslabeled 1 or more cases.

This just goes to prove how silly phd philosophers are .. and they should get into math.. or at least listen to mathematicians more.

>>

>>613285628

How say you?

>>

>>613280491

It's like saying

"1. God can do anything.

2. God can make a mountain so big, He can't move it."

>>

>>613276711

Crusader kings II

>>

>>613281070

Every rule cannot have an exception...by definition a rule is always true, but certainly rules can be formulated without exception.

Hell, I'm sure just about everyone in this THREAD CA THING ONFONE

>>

>>613285555

are quads double dubs, or are dubs just half quads paradox that bitch...

>>

>>613285789

a.k.a. the omnipotence paradox (see OP)

>>

>>613284164

That picture angers me.

>>

Grelling-Nelson paradox:

Autological is an adjective that describes a word iff it describes itself (for example, unhyphenated or pentasyllabic)

Heterological is an adjective that describes a word iff it does not describe itself (for example, unwritten and monosyllabic)

Is "heterological" a heterological word?

>>

>>613285555

Dang

>>

>>613284164

This would actually chop wood if you went with the grain, it probably wouldn't last long though

>>

>>613281685

>Anonymous 05/01/15(Fri)22:20:10 No.613279106▶>>613279306 >>613279646

>>613281685

This paradox is bullshit. In reality the tortoise and Achilles travel the same distance, and the tortoise is always one turn ahead. So, Achiles is not faster, because if we keep going on and on for many more turns, their speed will almost become the same. And the first 10 m turn should take the same amount of time, as any further turns. So this entire paradox relies on perception of time as fragments with certain amount, any amount. But since we don't know what time really is, we cant possibly percieve what a portion of time really is, we have nothing bigger to compare it to.The same paradox would arise in the question - what is bigger than infinity?

>>

>>613285742

In physics it is possible due to all events happening, and at the last second you get thrown into a certain reality, so you can kill your grandfather but it is another grandfather in another reality. As well as other forms of time-travel such as you'd only be able to go back in time as far back as when you first invented the time machine. and 3. there is one more way to create a wormhole in where you take a blackhole near a neutron star, to be able to cause some sort of collapse in order to either hold up the Einstein-Rosen bridge or create one, which is pretty much impossible right now to move things this big.

>>

>>613282383

this whole goddamn thread is wordplay

get with the program

>>

Derka derka..

>>

>>613286377

Someone please give pikachu some eyes.

>>

>>613276711

The omnipotence paradox isn't a paradox.

Its solved simply.

I'm not even religious.

>Could god make a rock so heavy even he couldn't lift it?

>god could make himself so powerless he couldn't even lift a pebble if he/she/it chose to.

Simple

>>

>>613285838

Jesus what happened to my post?

>Hell, I'm sure just about everyone in this thread can think of one

>>

>>613285218

2spooky4me

>>

wow this thread is 95% retards... if you are retarded why are you attracted to intellectual threads ?

Unless you are so stupid you dont know your stupid... thats the worst kind.

>>

>>613286333

yes the paradox was solved a long time ago, it's basicly the same as zenos arrow, but it puzzled people for centuries and is a well known paradox

also nice trips

>>

>>613286706

>you dont know your stupid

>dont know your stupid

>know your stupid

>your stupid

>your

Thread images: 15

Thread DB ID: 57768

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.

This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.

If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at wtabusse@gmail.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.