Zeno's Paradoxes

Zeno's Paradoxes: A Thought Experiment

It is widely accepted that the solutions to the dilemma of explaining physical movement (commonly known as Zeno's Paradoxes), lies in assuming that all physical movement is comprised of a continuous, and contiguous series of 'infinitesimal' little movements, which together provide "perfectly continuous" and seamless movement.

The mathematics of calculus has been used to show that we can traverse an infinite series of such movements in finite time, thus enabling our everyday experience of physical movement.

This continuity of movement enables and fuels a machine world-view, in that the continuity of movement also implies continuity and predictabiity of operation and behaviour.

However, this widely-accepted theory relies on an absolute, never-ending continuity, which is at odds with the evidence of quantum theory - a theory now recognised as being by far the most successful physical theory in history.

Technical details revealing errors in scientific assumptions

This content is provided as a resource in the Formal Mediation called by myself over on the Wikipedia site, relating to Zeno's Paradoxes.

The arguments are as follows: (Facts and supporting evidence that the deterministic basis upon which infinite series solutions to Zeno's Paradoxese are reliant is untenable):

  1. [Reference article: An experimental test of non-local realism]:

The travesty of modern science

There are many who argue in various scientific circles and forums that mathematical theories based on unending, contiguous numerical continuity (calculus) are able to explain a series of perplexing theoretical dilemmas dating back nearly 2,500 years. Those dilemmas, widely known as Zeno's Paradoxes raise issues relating to the apparent impossibility of everyday physical movement, which is assumed to occur continguously and smoothly.

3rd Proof of the Impossiliby of Physical Movement

This proof shows that, based on standard scientific assumptions, physical movement is impossible.

The objective of these proofs is to reveal how our modern scientific views are surface-layer perceptions that do not reveal or account for deeper, nonlocal (meta-physical) rhythms and processes.

2nd Proof of the Impossibility of Physical Movement

Proving the impossibility of physical movement, based on the Assumptions of modern science. This proof, based on the assumptions of modern science and medicine, reveals how we are unable to move our bodies even for the simplest of tasks, such as blinking an eye, or lifting a finger.

Proof of the impossibility of physical movement

Proving the impossibility of physical movement, based on the assumptions of modern science

This proof, based on the assumptions of modern science and medicine, reveals how we are unable to move our bodies even for the simplest of tasks, such as blinking an eye, or lifting a finger.

Moving beyond a 2,450-year-old era

The Art and Science of Blinking

Around 2,450 years ago the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno of Elea was perhaps the first to methodically question a simple fact of life - how do we physically move, such as when blinking an eye, running, or simply falling down?

Culturally we are about to fall off a philosophical cliff. Fortunately, a safe landing in a far more compassionate, sane and exciting world awaits those who come to the edge with the understanding of how to fly.

His questions and arguments, which have become widely known as Zeno's Paradoxes, pointed to the seemingly logical impossibility of the everyday experience of physical movement.

His considerations have perplexed and troubled philosophers and scientists even since. Various assumptions that underpin our modern technologies and sciences were taken for granted. We take for granted that there is always a physical cause for every physical effect - as exemplified by scientists researching to find physical cures for disease, cancer and viruses; and to find the physical genes or brain cells responsible for thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and the experience of love, creativity and joy. 

Now, with the advances in the field of quantum physics, we know that a 2,450 year era is nearing its end .. an era in which it has been assumed that our physical brains, bodies and the entire physical universe is continuously existent. An era in which each part (atom, virus, cell, organ, person, planet) was assumed to be continuously existent and functional, with every part contributing to the running of, or dysfunction of, the machinery of life.

We stand at the edge of a grand new understanding of our universe, and ourselves. As Visa International founder Dee Hock foretells, a new era

is struggling to be born -- a shifting of culture, science, society, and institutions enormously greater than the world has ever experienced. Ahead, the possibility of the regeneration of individuality, liberty, community, and ethics such as the world has never known, and a harmony with nature, with one another, and with the divine intelligence such as the world has never dreamed."

Congruent Solutions to Zeno's Paradoxes

[Copyright Steaphen Pirie 2009]

Background:

Around 2,400 years ago a Greek philosopher (Zeno of Elea) questioned how anything or anyone moves around. Theoretically, for anyone to lift a finger, bat an eyelid, or even to fall down requires we move through a seamless but endless (never-ending) progression of ever-so-small little movements. He highlighted how there appeared to be a mismatch between our theories about life and our simple, everyday practical experiences.
The article is reprinted here* to highlight the fuller application of the scientific-method approach – of observing phenomena (particularly the results of quantum physics experiments) and working theories to fit said observations.
The resistance to asking questions and constructing new theories that explain experimental evidence, particularly anomalous phenomena, is a common human experience, and can be understood to be, in part, the practical expediency of "getting on with life" – in practical terms, if we had to question every move, or belief we held, most would get very little done.
As will be covered in other articles at this site, (e.g. "The Evolution of the Human Psyche") ignoring or avoiding gaps in our belief-systems is one means by which we form limits and frameworks for effective living.
[ Note, the following paragraph beginning "Another solution to some of the paradoxes ..." was existing content prior to the additional material by Steaphen Pirie]
Syndicate content