World's best suggested paradox

[Sallix]

A man walks up to you and says "I'm a compulsive liar", can you trust him?

 

[TWRule]

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

Actually oscillation of air-pressure is just that, until it is interpreted by an observer...his brain will turn the pressure oscillations into sound...the oscillations will be generated without an observer, too, but it will not be sound

Sorry, the scientific definition of sound is the oscillation itself. Pretty much any professional scientist in the field will agree with that.

First off this is a thought experiment, not a paradox, as someone else pointed out.

Second, the debate here is purely semantic. If you're talking about whether sound exists by the scientific definition, then of course the answer is "yes, there will be a sound."

If you're talking about where a sound will be perceived (assuming there is no one around to perceive it) then the answer is "no."

 

[InnerRebellion]

Not a paradox, but...

1+1=1.

You have one pile of dirt here, and one pile of dirt there. You push them together, and you still have one, bigger pile.

 

[blalien]

Since sound is defined as an oscillation of pressure in the air, the existence of sound does not depend on anybody hearing it.

Actually oscillation of air-pressure is just that, until it is interpreted by an observer...his brain will turn the pressure oscillations into sound...the oscillations will be generated without an observer, too, but it will not be sound

Sorry, the scientific definition of sound is the oscillation itself. Pretty much any professional scientist in the field will agree with that.

First off this is a thought experiment, not a paradox, as someone else pointed out.

Second, the debate here is purely semantic. If you're talking about whether sound exists by the scientific definition, then of course the answer is "yes, there will be a sound."

If you're talking about where a sound will be perceived (assuming there is no one around to perceive it) then the answer is "no."

But asking a question about reality and then not using science to answer it is lazy. That's what science is there for, to analyze the world and solve the tough problems.

And of course the sound wouldn't be perceived. That's kind of the whole point. But sound doesn't only affect living things, either.

 

[Stephanos132]

Sorry, but purple is not a wavelength of light. In fact it is the only color that doesn't exist as a wavelength. Visible light goes from red (long) to blue (short); purple would be shorter than blue and at the same time longer than red...

Surely that'd be the other way round, unless purple is ultraviolet and infrared at the same time...

 

[FalloutJack]

Best paradox? Here you go.

Oh, and on the subject of irresistable force VS an immovable object? The universe moves instead...

 

[TWRule]

First off this is a thought experiment, not a paradox, as someone else pointed out.

Second, the debate here is purely semantic. If you're talking about whether sound exists by the scientific definition, then of course the answer is "yes, there will be a sound."

If you're talking about where a sound will be perceived (assuming there is no one around to perceive it) then the answer is "no."

But asking a question about reality and then not using science to answer it is lazy. That's what science is there for, to analyze the world and solve the tough problems.

And of course the sound wouldn't be perceived. That's kind of the whole point. But sound doesn't only affect living things, either.

That's what I'm saying - the answer only depends upon what aspect of the sound you are discussing, so neither of you is wrong, so you have no reason to disagree.

 

[Undead Dragon King]

Here's one that's a few hundred years old:

Can an omnipotent God create a stone He cannot lift?

 

[GWarface]

If a crocodile steals a child and promises its return if the father can correctly guess what the crocodile will do, how should the crocodile respond in the case that the father guesses that the child will not be returned?

 

[TWRule]

If a crocodile steals a child and promises its return if the father can correctly guess what the crocodile will do, how should the crocodile respond in the case that the father guesses that the child will not be returned?

If you're talking about the intent of the croc, then he should us that as a basis (i.e.: if he originally intended not to return the child, he should return them, and if he originally intended to return the child, he should not). If you're talking purely about the actions of the croc, he must ultimately return the child, because he could not start to leave without breaking his word, or he'd have to return the child anyway.

 

[velcrokidneyz]

What happens if Pinochkio says: my nose will grow now!

ninja'd! damn you lol

 

[brodie21]

if a dwarf is late to a party is it ok to point out that he's a little tardy?

 

[Sinker]

What if you put toast butter side up on the back of a cat then pick up the cat and drop it.

 

[matt_newgrove]

How long will it take you to cross a crosswalk if with each step, you cut the distance you walked with the prior step by half?

Sounds like something a calculus teacher would use to introduce the concept of limits (or whatever it's called in english, lim when x nears zero and whatnot)

 

[zega frega omega]

If I take something that is six pounds, and turn it over, would it become nine pounds?

This doesn't make any sense. Explain it.

Because 9 is an upside-down 6. So if I take something that is 6 pounds and turn it over, it gets heavier. Science!

 

[The_Evermind]

One fine day in the middle of the night, two dead men got up to fight, back to back they faced eachover, drew the swords and shot eachover.

best paradox story i know

If you wanted to take it logically, 2 vampires at the north pole, at noon, in winter, back to back, shot each other with gun blades.

You're mixed up between just not doing anything to the apples and dividing them by zero

I can't see the difference between those. No matter now many times it's explained to me.

How about this is multiplying by zero the same thing as not doing anything? No, because if you got 2 apples 0 times you wouldn't have any apples.

 

[TilMorrow]

what happens if you glue some toast butter side up to the back of a cat, and then drop the cat?

Toast has been proven to fall unbuttered side down. Your paradox has been beaten!

OT:Okay I got one.

IF this sentence is true then it is false.

 

[Dragonpit]

Uh...huh. The thing about the immovable object and the unstoppable force is that it is meant to describe two equal but opposing forces clashing, in which there are only three possible outcomes.

1: They clash for all eternity.
2: They destroy each other completely and simultaneously.
3: A third force intervenes, thereby changing the course of things, regardless of whether or not the third force survives.

Now, here are things to think about. I'm not sure if they're paradoxes, but I'll leave that to all of you.

Has anyone ever spoken Japanese with a British accent?
Why have they not made a orange-flavored Coca-Cola?
Would a rainy day constitute as a form of twilight?

 

[blankedboy]

Oh, and on the subject of irresistable force VS an immovable object? The universe moves instead...

OMFG THEY JUST PASS THROUGH EACH OTHER IT'S NOT HARD

 

[TWRule]

Has anyone ever spoken Japanese with a British accent?
Why have they not made a orange-flavored Coca-Cola?
Would a rainy day constitute as a form of twilight?

1) Absolutely, there's nothing about a language that forces a particular accent.
2) Because "Cola" is actually a flavor of soda. Cherry cola is a mix of a cherry flavor with a cola flavor. Orange added to cola would probably be unpopular.
3) No, because twilight is defined by the time of day, not merely by light being refracted.