Das Paradox

[artanis_neravar]

There is no life in the universe (operating under the assumption that there are an infinite number of planets) There are an infinite number of planets in the universe, however we know that no all planet have life, therefore only a finite number of planets in the universe have life. to figure out the percentage of planets with life you need to divide a finite number by infinity. For simplicity sake I'm going to use 1 for the finite number and % to represent infinity. in order to solve 1/% you must take the limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity, as x gets large 1/x gets smaller (1/4 is smaller then 1/2). The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is 0 therefore there is no life in the universe and everyone you meet is just a figment of your imagination.
(From the Hitchhikers Guide to Galaxy I just used calculus to prove it)

 

[theultimateend]

What you have there is not a paradox, because you used faulty logic steps to generate it:

1. You shoot an arrow.
(Implicit: Shoot arrow -> arrow moves)

2. The arrow is at rest.
Reason: The arrow occupies space.

3. So: The arrow is at rest.

Leaving aside the fact that you created a circular argument there, you also misused the definition of "rest" since being at rest is not defined as "something occupies space"

You also overstep certain basic discoveries of quantum mechanics. Things actually chance their lenght when moving. But that of course is entirely secundary here.

Regarding your questions:
There are very little true paradox. Most, if not all of them are the result of fallacious logic or the use of unclarified terms.

The unfortunate thing about most paradoxes is that they are written out of ignorance.

Because as it turns out ignorance is good at creating paradoxes.

 

[ipop@you]

Well I like the old going back in time with a purpose thing. If you go back in time to let's say kill Hitler then you go back and shoot him but then in your time he is already dead so there is no reason to come back and kill him so you don't go, but if you don't go then he is still alive so you have a reason to go and kill him and the cycle starts again. Another one I like is not much of a paradox but just an interesting thing: what happens if an unstoppable force hits an immoveable (immoveable also means you can't go through it) object? Finally I love Schroedinger's cat, the cat is both alive and dead as well as neither alive and dead.

 

[deathandtaxes]

There is no life in the universe (operating under the assumption that there are an infinite number of planets) There are an infinite number of planets in the universe, however we know that no all planet have life, therefore only a finite number of planets in the universe have life. to figure out the percentage of planets with life you need to divide a finite number by infinity. For simplicity sake I'm going to use 1 for the finite number and % to represent infinity. in order to solve 1/% you must take the limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity, as x gets large 1/x gets smaller (1/4 is smaller then 1/2). The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is 0 therefore there is no life in the universe and everyone you meet is just a figment of your imagination.
(From the Hitchhikers Guide to Galaxy I just used calculus to prove it)

Fortunately the universe is finite.

 

[slacker09]

OK some other not-realy-a-paradox, but a mathematical weirdness:

Three people enter a motel and request a room. The room costs 30 dollars, so every guest pays 10 dollars.

In the morning, the hotel manager realizes the room actually costs only 25 dollars. Being unable to split 5 dollars evenly, he decided to give back 3 dollars to the guest (1 to each guest) and he kept the other 2.

So, each guest basically paid 9 dollars.

That's 3 x 9 = 27 dollars paid by guests.

The manager kept 2 dollars. 27 + 2 = 29 dollars.

Where is the missing dollar?

there isnt a missing dollar if the room only costs $25 and he gives them $3 back out of that $5 it would work out (if they added their $1 each to the $25) to $28 leaving the $2 that the manager kept

Actually it's just bad math. The guests paid $27, it's true. The manager kept $2, so $27-$2=$25, the cost of the room. The $2 tip is included in the $27 paid by the guests, so there is no need to add it in.

The real question isn't "where did the dollar go?", but "where did the extra $2 come from?". $27(paid) + $2("kept") + $3(returned) = $32.

Yay math!

Wouldn't that be $25(Paid)+3(returned)+2(kept). There is no extra 2.

 

[artanis_neravar]

There is no life in the universe (operating under the assumption that there are an infinite number of planets) There are an infinite number of planets in the universe, however we know that no all planet have life, therefore only a finite number of planets in the universe have life. to figure out the percentage of planets with life you need to divide a finite number by infinity. For simplicity sake I'm going to use 1 for the finite number and % to represent infinity. in order to solve 1/% you must take the limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity, as x gets large 1/x gets smaller (1/4 is smaller then 1/2). The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is 0 therefore there is no life in the universe and everyone you meet is just a figment of your imagination.
(From the Hitchhikers Guide to Galaxy I just used calculus to prove it)

Fortunately the universe is finite.

Prove it

 

[amppi1236]

Say you go back in time to give yourself a rock. You tell your past self to later go back in time to give your past self the same rock and tell him to do the same, and he does it. Here's the question: Where did the rock come from?

Your making the assumption that the first you is indeed the one who gave the second you the rock. This feeds into the question about whether there is only one universe or multiple universes.

Let's make the assumption that all people with the rock are the same. No you's from an alternative universe or anything. Just this universe. Just you. And your rock buddy "Boon". Having fun adventures trough time. By the means of TARDIS or something.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

Scholongers cat.
I have no idea if i spelt that right but its amazing how the cat is DEAD and alive.

AT THE SAME TIME PARADOX!

see what i did there.

The cat is not alive alive and dead at the same time. That's mis-interpretation. When writing the possibilities down mathematically, you must do the math taking into consideration the possibility of the cat being alive, and the possibility of it being dead. So on paper, mathematically, the cat is both alive and dead at the same time, but only because we need to take both points of view into consideration in the same equation.

Off the page, we know that there is a box, in the box is a cat. The cat can be dead OR alive, we have no idea which though. Therefore there is exists the possibility of the cat being alive and dead at the same time, the probability of which one is true is influenced by certain factors (leaving the cat in the box for a longer period of time with no food increases probability of death).

Since the possibility of the cat being alive or dead exists within our mind, the cat is thought to be both alive alive an dead by our brains in order to take both outcomes into consideration and to be prepared for the sight you see when it comes out.

 

[Redingold]

There is no life in the universe (operating under the assumption that there are an infinite number of planets) There are an infinite number of planets in the universe, however we know that no all planet have life, therefore only a finite number of planets in the universe have life. to figure out the percentage of planets with life you need to divide a finite number by infinity. For simplicity sake I'm going to use 1 for the finite number and % to represent infinity. in order to solve 1/% you must take the limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity, as x gets large 1/x gets smaller (1/4 is smaller then 1/2). The limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity is 0 therefore there is no life in the universe and everyone you meet is just a figment of your imagination.
(From the Hitchhikers Guide to Galaxy I just used calculus to prove it)

Fortunately the universe is finite.

Prove it

It started out as a point, and has expanded at a finite rate for 13.7 billion years. It cannot have grown to infinity in this time. Besides, even if it was infinite, you'd still be wrong, because infinity (the number of planets) minus any finite number (the number of known uninhabited planets) is still infinity (the number of potentially inhabited planets left).

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Oh yeah, paradoxes are fun, but cheap science jokes and statistics are even more fun.

I still love the old 2+2=5 for large quantities of 2.

No because 2=2

No, because 2 = 1.5 < 2 < 2.49 so 2 + 2 = 3 < x < 5

It plays on simple trickery of rounding and boundaries. If you say 2.0~ + 2.0~ then your answer would be 4.0~.

 

[2xDouble]

Actually it's just bad math. The guests paid $27, it's true. The manager kept $2, so $27-$2=$25, the cost of the room. The $2 tip is included in the $27 paid by the guests, so there is no need to add it in.

The real question isn't "where did the dollar go?", but "where did the extra $2 come from?". $27(paid) + $2("kept") + $3(returned) = $32.

Yay math!

Wouldn't that be $25(Paid)+3(returned)+2(kept). There is no extra 2.

Yes. That's what it should be. But that's not what is being presented in the problem. The problem pulls $2 out of thin air.

It's like asking two tens for five.

 

[Halceon]

I think this is called Curry's paradox:

If this statement is true, then Santa Claus exists.

It can be used to prove anything.

And what if it isn't true? Not much of a proof, is it?

 

[DSK-]

"All Cretans are liars" or something like that

 

[ssgt splatter]

I've got a time paradox from a Family Guy episode.

It was the episode in which Mort Goldman goes back in time to WWII and Brain and Stewie have to go back to save him. After they do they bring Mort back 30 seconds before he runs up to use the bathroom but here's the catch; if the Brian and Stewie that the story followed arrived 30 seconds before Mort ran upstairs then the Brain and Stewie who exsist in that particular time line when Mort ran upstairs is still downstairs in the living room watching the Oscar's so now there are 2 Stewies and 2 Brians...ok this is a little hard to write down but trust me it works.

 

[slacker09]

Actually it's just bad math. The guests paid $27, it's true. The manager kept $2, so $27-$2=$25, the cost of the room. The $2 tip is included in the $27 paid by the guests, so there is no need to add it in.

The real question isn't "where did the dollar go?", but "where did the extra $2 come from?". $27(paid) + $2("kept") + $3(returned) = $32.

Yay math!

Wouldn't that be $25(Paid)+3(returned)+2(kept). There is no extra 2.

Yes. That's what it should be. But that's not what is being presented in the problem. The problem pulls $2 out of thin air.

It's like asking two tens for five.

I see what you are saying now, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Redingold]

So let me look this over. There are three panels. I choose one, then I have the chance to choose a different one instead of choosing the one of I have. Since I still only have one panel, why aren't my chances are still 33%?

Because one of the panel is turned and you have two remaining. One would guess there's 50:50 chance now, but it's actually 33:66. It took me a while to understand, check Wikipedia - Monty Hall problem [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem].

But once you pick another panel, isn't it still a 33:66 chance?

Edit: Here's my problem with it. Say you're looking at the three panels and you think "I want to pick number three, but there's a better chance to get it right if I switch." So instead of picking three and sticking with it, you pick panel one and then switch to three. That doesn't make it so the prize is more likely to be behind the third panel... or does it... is that a paradox within itself?

You're assuming that the host doesn't open door 3 to demonstrate that there's nothing behind it. He has a 50% chance of doing that, so it brings the odds back in line.

 

[kayisking]

This sentence is false.
Simple but effective.

 

[Thunderios]

Zeno's paradox:
a fox and a turtle are racing each other. Because the turtle is ten times as slow as the fox, he gets a 100 meter advantage.
After the fox ran the 100 meters, the turtle ran 10, still having an advantage.
After the fox ran the extra 10 meters, the turtle had been able to run another meter.
The fox runs that meter, but by that time the turtle is still 10 centimeters ahead.
And so on. The fox will never overtake the turtle.

 

[ultimateownage]

Wow, you only just now discovered paradoxes?
Also, the arrow one isn't really a paradox. More of a logical fallacy through viewing an event from a different angle. Like the one which states that if the arrow half's the distance between it and the target in 1 second, then half's the new distance in .5 seconds and so on, it will never hit it's target.

 

[dogenzakaminion]

You've got a sword that can penetrate any shield and a shield invincible to any sword or sharp object. What happens when your special sword hits your special shield?

Is this that Captain America vs. Juggernaut thing?

The thing is that paradoxes are only fun when they are real. There is no invincible shield or sword so it doesn't matter. Personally I prefer the "Set of all sets" one. Had that in Math class a couple years back and loved it in Portal 2.