Paradox

[Markness]

Paradox's are always fun.

I did have a big post with a few examples and stuff but my browser crashed and now i'm just going to do this much.

eg : I always lie.

eg2 : Not really a paradox but interesting no? Two armies are surrounding a town and want to attack it at the same time. The only method of communication open to them is messenger but they don't know if the messenger will make it through the enemy territory to deliver the message. The (kinda) paradox is that they will never be able to be sure the other army will attack at the same time. Do you know why?

Also: No time travel paradox's unless you have something beyond the usual I traveled back in time and prevented myself from traveling back in time.

 

[Lukeje]

eg2 : Not really a paradox but interesting no? Two armies are surrounding a town and want to attack it at the same time. The only method of communication open to them is messenger but they don't know if the messenger will make it through the enemy territory to deliver the message. The (kinda) paradox is that they will never be able to be sure the other army will attack at the same time. Do you know why?

Because special relativity tells us that simultaneity is dependant on the observer?

 

[Nivag the Owl]

Aww, I love time-travel paradoxes You ruined my fun!

 

[Adam Jenson]

if reality is malleable, why does it it punish you for imposing your own.

For all the Mage: The Ascension fans

 

[zen5887]

A paradox, a paradox, a most ingenious paradox. (Cookie for anyone who knows that)

Paradoxes are intresting, however most of the time I'm not smart enough to grasp em.

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

Bam

 

[lordsandro]

Time travel paradoxes are imposible. If you do something in the past that will effect the future(your time), then in your time(the future) it has already happened so you actually never changed anything.
Read Terry Pratchet, he makes more sence than I do anyway.

 

[P1p3s]

i like this one - its a paradox of vagueness so I don't know if it legitimately a paradox, or if the language itself is paradoxical:
It seems like you can replace any component of a ship, and it will still be the same ship. So you can replace them all, or one at a time, and it will still be the same ship. But then you can take all the original pieces, and assemble them into a ship. That, too, is the same ship with which you started.

found that on wiki

I don't know why (well maybe I do) but this reminds me of Firefly ... and only fools and horses
"here's to trigger, he had the same broom for 20 years, 14 new handles and 17 new heads, but the same broom"

 

[rossatdi]

Could God make a sandwich so big he couldn't ever eat it?

 

[goater24]

Yeah you couldn't travel back in time to kill your grandad. This is because you would never have been created and thusly could not go back in time to kill him.

On the last fantastic episode of QI they pointed out that timetravel is possibly a stage closer due to the Collider being built in Austria. This is because a sender still needs a reciever (how much use was the first mobile phone? No use untill the second had been built to recie its call). We would need a portal in the past to be able to travel there in the future. A machine that can create (in theory) black holes, could work as such a devise.

 

[ButtonedDownParadox]

Well I'm a fan of paradoxes as well. It's a shame that they're always referred to as, "Catch-22es" now. For those of you who don't know Catch-22 is a book written Joseph Heller and the Catch-22 that the book refers to is how a combatant could only be registered as insane if he were to come forth and say so but he wouldn't be believed as the insane wouldn't refer to themselves as such. And that's my requisite paradox.

 

[Layzor]

Read Catch-22 by joseph heller

 

[Adam Jenson]

Yeah you couldn't travel back in time to kill your grandad. This is because you would never have been created and thusly could not go back in time to kill him.

On the last fantastic episode of QI they pointed out that timetravel is possibly a stage closer due to the Collider being built in Austria. This is because a sender still needs a reciever (how much use was the first mobile phone? No use untill the second had been built to recie its call). We would need a portal in the past to be able to travel there in the future. A machine that can create (in theory) black holes, could work as such a devise.

well wouldn't that make 2008 year 0 for time travel?

 

[Markness]

eg2 : Not really a paradox but interesting no? Two armies are surrounding a town and want to attack it at the same time. The only method of communication open to them is messenger but they don't know if the messenger will make it through the enemy territory to deliver the message. The (kinda) paradox is that they will never be able to be sure the other army will attack at the same time. Do you know why?

Because special relativity tells us that simultaneity is dependent on the observer?

Firstly, I don't think that applies here. Secondly, what I meant was that the two armies would never be sure that the other army would attack at around the same time no matter how many messages they sent.

 

[Bagaloo]

i like this one - its a paradox of vagueness so I don't know if it legitimately a paradox, or if the language itself is paradoxical:
It seems like you can replace any component of a ship, and it will still be the same ship. So you can replace them all, or one at a time, and it will still be the same ship. But then you can take all the original pieces, and assemble them into a ship. That, too, is the same ship with which you started.

found that on wiki

I don't know why (well maybe I do) but this reminds me of Firefly ... and only fools and horses
"here's to trigger, he had the same broom for 20 years, 14 new handles and 17 new heads, but the same broom"

I think thats called "Theseus Ship". I remember doing in in a philosophy class. Interesting stuff.

 

[Lukeje]

eg2 : Not really a paradox but interesting no? Two armies are surrounding a town and want to attack it at the same time. The only method of communication open to them is messenger but they don't know if the messenger will make it through the enemy territory to deliver the message. The (kinda) paradox is that they will never be able to be sure the other army will attack at the same time. Do you know why?

Because special relativity tells us that simultaneity is dependent on the observer?

Firstly, I don't think that applies here. Secondly, what I meant was that the two armies would never be sure that the other army would attack at around the same time no matter how many messages they sent.

(a)it was a joke
(b)special relativity always applies.

 

[Clemenstation]

Could God microwave a pizza pocket to the point where it's so hot that he couldn't pick it up?

 

[sorry user name taken.]

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci341236,00.html

=[

 

[Lukeje]

i like this one - its a paradox of vagueness so I don't know if it legitimately a paradox, or if the language itself is paradoxical:
It seems like you can replace any component of a ship, and it will still be the same ship. So you can replace them all, or one at a time, and it will still be the same ship. But then you can take all the original pieces, and assemble them into a ship. That, too, is the same ship with which you started.

found that on wiki

I don't know why (well maybe I do) but this reminds me of Firefly ... and only fools and horses
"here's to trigger, he had the same broom for 20 years, 14 new handles and 17 new heads, but the same broom"

If it has the same name, then yes it is the same ship.

 

[samsprinkle]

"SNAKE! You killed Ocelot!"

 

[n01d34]

Alright with the "I always lie" thing.

If you don't always lie but do occasionally then it ceases to be a paradox.

Cause in that case you could be lying when you say that you always lie. Thus no paradox.