Scratch

10/10 (What? It is my sig)

This is one of Zeno's paradoxes: In the arrow paradox, Zeno states that for motion to be occurring, an object must change the position which it occupies. He gives an example of an arrow in flight. He states that in any one instant of time, for the arrow to be moving it must either move to where it is, or it must move to where it is not. However, it cannot move to where it is not, because this is a single instant, and it cannot move to where it is because it is already there. In other words, in any instant of time there is no motion occurring, because an instant is a snapshot. Therefore, if it cannot move in a single instant it cannot move in any instant, making any motion impossible.

"Yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation" yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation.

deatheater wrote:

Mrnubnub wrote:

WeirdF wrote:

8/10

A detective is investigating a fire. He finds a time machine and decides to use to help with the case. He goes back in time and accidentally starts the fire himself. He dies in the flames. If he died because he came from the future, then how did he get to the future in the first place if he was already dead?

I know the answer...the fire wasn't originally his fault. Also, he simply doesn't exist in any point in time past when he entered the machine. This is a dumb paradox, no offense.

no, he started the fire, since he's still his future self he doesn't change anything in his past, thus it's not a paradox

Oh yeah, good point. Well what if I added that he also killed his grandparents in the fire?

Ahhh, the old classic. 8/10

How about this:

It is opposite day today.

Yes it is, if I said it is opposite day, that would mean that I wasn't telling the truth, which would mean that it isn't opposite day, but if it wasn't opposite day, then I wouldn't be saying an opposite in the first place, which would mean that it was opposite day, and so on...

Last edited by WeirdF (2009-09-26 10:11:03)

WeirdF wrote:

deatheater wrote:

Mrnubnub wrote:

I know the answer...the fire wasn't originally his fault. Also, he simply doesn't exist in any point in time past when he entered the machine. This is a dumb paradox, no offense.

no, he started the fire, since he's still his future self he doesn't change anything in his past, thus it's not a paradox

Oh yeah, good point. Well what if I added that he also killed his grandparents in the fire?

It doesn't change anything because he still died in the future. Also, you must be really desperate for bringing that old paradox up.

WeirdF wrote:

Yes it is, if I said it is opposite day, that would mean that I wasn't telling the truth, which would mean that it isn't opposite day, but if it wasn't opposite day, then I wouldn't be saying an opposite in the first place, which would mean that it was opposite day, and so on...

I agree

Mrnubnub wrote:

FlareBlitz wrote:

Mrnubnub wrote:

I think it was the egg, because the question doesn't say that the egg is a chicken egg, and therefore a dinosaur could have laid one, thus making the egg come first.

Of course the chicken came first! If the egg came first then who will take care of it? Not the dinasuars! Wow im using facts.

I mean a dinosaur egg. The DINO EGG was laid first.

Yes, but if the chicken came first, then how did it get born. Stop worrying about it, it's a paradox. If the egg came first then how could anything have laid it (baring in mind, that while the question does not actually say 'chicken' egg, it is still referring to one), and if the chicken came first, then surely it must have come from an egg?

steppenwulf wrote:

That's not really a paradox.

WeirdF wrote:

Yes it is, if I said it is opposite day, that would mean that I wasn't telling the truth, which would mean that it isn't opposite day, but if it wasn't opposite day, then I wouldn't be saying an opposite in the first place, which would mean that it was opposite day, and so on...

sorry WeirdF that wasn't meant for you ^.^

Not really paradoxes. That's like saying 'I didn't want to turn the light on because it was already on', so 2/10 for those.

How about this:

Is the answer to this question no?

That reminded me of one I saw in someone's sig.

"If you don't read this, you win a million dollers!"

8/10

Look below and you own the world

Keep looking

Keep looking

Keep looking

If your read this you dont own the world.

Last edited by FlareBlitz (2009-09-30 16:45:19)