## The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!

# Questions that make you think...

## Logic and knowing

In this forum, questions are asked which are really tough to answer. Some philosophical, some regarding morality and many others. Have fun, and post your own personal tough questions!

## Re: Logic and knowing

chrisv25 wrote:but it does raise an interesting point. Zeno's paradox can be true from certain inertial reference points.

Well the main thing is that, yes, there is always half of the current distance to go until the finish line BUT (what is often neglected to mention), the smaller half is traversed in less time.

Is ultimate truth a paradox and not always true ?

What's the difference between truth and ultimate truth?
"it is easy to grow crazy"

at1with0

Posts: 9183
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

## Re: Logic and knowing

at1with0 wrote:Well the main thing is that, yes, there is always half of the current distance to go until the finish line BUT (what is often neglected to mention), the smaller half is traversed in less time.

up to the speed of light, at which, all motion stops. so from the reference frame of someone watching a ship accelerating exponentially we get a true result. however inside the ship nothing appears to happen. So it's false.

at1with0 wrote:What's the difference between truth and ultimate truth?

42?

One is a boolean operator and the other is a place of transcendental enlightenment.
chrisv25

Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:05 am

## Re: Logic and knowing

chrisv25 wrote:
at1with0 wrote:Well the main thing is that, yes, there is always half of the current distance to go until the finish line BUT (what is often neglected to mention), the smaller half is traversed in less time.

up to the speed of light, at which, all motion stops. so from the reference frame of someone watching a ship accelerating exponentially we get a true result. however inside the ship nothing appears to happen. So it's false.

Huh?
The speed isn't increasing because the distance covered is half.

at1with0 wrote:What's the difference between truth and ultimate truth?

42?

One is a boolean operator and the other is a place of transcendental enlightenment.

And what do the two have to do with each other?
"it is easy to grow crazy"

at1with0

Posts: 9183
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

## Re: Logic and knowing

What's that one saying?
"Two steps forward, one step back'
Willie Wonka quotes..
What is this Wonka, some kind of funhouse?
Why? Are you having fun?
A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men.
We are the music makers, we are the dreamers of dreams

bionic

Posts: 9889
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

## Re: Logic and knowing

I think it's one step forward, two steps back.
"it is easy to grow crazy"

at1with0

Posts: 9183
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

## Re: Logic and knowing

Time can be a tricky thing. For example, from Relativity, if you were falling into a black hole, you would appear to move slower and slower to the stationary observer. If you reached the speed of light, you would appear to stand still. But in reality you would continue to fall into the black hole. You would only appear to stand still. That means that what the stationary observer sees isn't real. Its virtual. And this means that time is virtual.

So what do you see? Does the universe appear to spin faster and faster? No, the universe appears to spin slower and slower until it stops too. Both are frozen in time, relative to each other. But the light each produces is not stationary nor is it infinite. So what happens to the light from each source over time? It gets dimmer and dimmer. So, what does this mean to the universe trying to feel the effects of something moving at the speed of light? No light, no force, no effect.

Another question, what if you could slow down and escape the black hole? Would your clock re-sync with the stationary observer? Yes. So would you see the universe rapidly catch up to where it should be? Pretty weird.

This is the distant, moving clock problem.

CodeBlackv2

Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:29 pm

## Re: Logic and knowing

at1with0 wrote:Huh?
The speed isn't increasing because the distance covered is half.

Ok this going to be a sort of long post, I will assume that you know very little about relativity (I have however included the famous energy-mass equation at the beginning so if you do you can just skip the explanation if you do). What I said had nothing to do with the velocity but the reference frame from which the velocity is determined.

so what is an inertial reference frame? My favorite way to explain it is straight from special relativity, so I will explain it in 1905 terms; with no blackholes or exotic matter; we will instead use a train.

Imagine yourself on a train and in your hand is a rubber ball. Now the the train is moving forward at 35 miles an hour. You bounce the rubber ball and it moves away from you at 1 mile an hour:

To you the ball moves forward at 1 mph and you are standing still, however to someone watching from the banks of the the train tracks; you are moving at 35mph and the ball is moving at 36 mph. And to confuse the matter even further the person sitting on the bank is traveling at 35 mph in the opposite direction if you measured his motion! So who is standing still? Who is moving? How fast is the ball really going?

Believe it or not this was a very confusing question at the time. All of the scientists up to that point had held that there was an 'absolute reference point' an inertial frame by which all others could be measured, to determine the true velocity of you and him and the ball and really it was a philosophical constraint of the newton clockwork universe.

Einstein the fuzzy haired, upstart, anarchist that he was; held up his hands and said 'wait, wait, wait!!! motion is relative! They are all correct!!'

everyone gaffed and grunted and screamed 'rabble, rabble, rabble' at this silly notion. How could science ever be objective? How do you separate you from your experiment? Einstein smiled and published the formula above. Which not only predicts all of the behavior of newton, but predicts new behavior, all of which can be proved and all of which is relative to your motion. ie the theory of relativity.

That is why bionic is so freaking brilliant! Zeno's paradox can be true, or it can be false and even both at the same time, depends on who you ask!

So perhaps there is no ultimate truth or maybe only to some people...there still will however, always be a yes/truth/affirmative/Wahrheit /الحقيقة /αλήθεια /真理 /Q.E.D however you want to say it, operator, that represents an affirmation.

at1with0 wrote:
chrisv25 wrote:One is a boolean operator and the other is a place of transcendental enlightenment.

And what do the two have to do with each other?

Ok now, I think you're just being difficult...
chrisv25

Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:05 am

## Re: Logic and knowing

That is why bionic is so freaking brilliant!

she blushes and smooches Chris.

this song makes me thinkof you guys, here...
YOU'RE brilliant!!!
for real
Willie Wonka quotes..
What is this Wonka, some kind of funhouse?
Why? Are you having fun?
A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men.
We are the music makers, we are the dreamers of dreams

bionic

Posts: 9889
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

## Re: Logic and knowing

yea brilliant absolutely brilliant...

awwwww look at the pretty words and letters.

ok on to something interesting...Lol
“Living backwards!” Alice repeated in great
astonishment. “I never heard of such a thing!”
“—but there’s one great advantage in it, that one’s
memory works both ways.”
— Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass

sandra

Posts: 3704
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:27 pm
Location: Minnesota US

## Re: Logic and knowing

chrisv25 wrote:That is why bionic is so freaking brilliant! Zeno's paradox can be true, or it can be false and even both at the same time, depends on who you ask!

Now where in there did you prove that a moving object never reaches its destination?

In Zeno's paradox, each interval of time is half as much as the previous one, but the distance covered is also half as much as the previous one. In relativity, is velocity not (directed) distance divided by time?

I am glad you invoke Taylor series because that is one way to argue against Zeno's paradox, at least in the Newtonian limit.

at1with0 wrote:
chrisv25 wrote:One is a boolean operator and the other is a place of transcendental enlightenment.

And what do the two have to do with each other?

Ok now, I think you're just being difficult...

Sorry if it's a difficult question. I do not think the two have much to do with each other.
"it is easy to grow crazy"

at1with0

Posts: 9183
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

PreviousNext

• View new posts
• Who is online
• In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
• Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
• Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest