sushi April 23, 2015 Share April 23, 2015 Haha. I was wondering about that. But then I took the wrong side of what I said and went with it. "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsSwissmas April 23, 2015 Share April 23, 2015 Are you sure it isn't forty two? ;) After all it is the answer to life, the universe, and everything. (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy anyone...? ;_; ) What do you MEAN you don't agree with me? Do you know who you're dealing with!? *Mashes button* *Quarter of the world explodes* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakumo April 23, 2015 Share April 23, 2015 One does not greedily eat zero pieces of chocolate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinemaphobe April 24, 2015 Author Share April 24, 2015 One does not greedily eat zero pieces of chocolate. I threw in the word greedily to test the power of assumption. Even if I didn't throw in the word greedily though, one could easily say that eating three times more than another person is greedy. The entire paradox was designed to test how assumption and facts collide to separate one from the truth. Are you sure it isn't forty two? ;) After all it is the answer to life, the universe, and everything. (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy anyone...? ;_; ) LOL I just now got that reference, my bad lol Here's a new paradox I created that is much easier. You can probably find something like it on the internet, but here we go: Object 1 and Object 2 start from the same point (Point A). Their destination (Point B) is 10 miles away. Object 1 and 2 instantly reach a speed of 5 miles per second simultaneously. If they both travel at exactly 5 miles per second from the same point with no obstacles in their way, then why does Object 1 always reach Point B within 3 seconds? Gravity and air resistance are constant while both objects are traveling, so surely something is not right. What is different about these two objects if they have the exact same physical properties while the forces of the universe act on them indiscriminately? Hint: The answer is common-sensical. "Sanity is the playground of the unimaginative." Yumi + Cinema Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NekoiNemo April 24, 2015 Share April 24, 2015 Only sensible answer i see is that they use different routes and "10 miles away" is the long route while short route is only .25 miles. UPD: Missed "per second" part. Well, same thing i said but other way around. o2 travels the long 15 mile route. 現実に抗え! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STeeK April 24, 2015 Share April 24, 2015 The routes are not straight lines The path of the object 1 is curved and have 15 miles, and the path of the object 2 is not relevant here, but also curved Like always path =/= translating -> Roseluck's Art Gallery and Requests <- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminesce April 24, 2015 Share April 24, 2015 Wrote this without really reading the previous two responses, but from what I saw it looked like they were tricked. You purposely wrote that in a way that made us assume object 2 did not reach point B in the same amount of time, and then followed it up with nonsense to further the point. But object 2 could just as well reach point B in the same amount of time. So.. To answer your actual question, because an object travelling 5 miles per second will travel 10 miles in less than 3 seconds. (Not the point I think, but) As far as how object 1 and 2 can occupy the same space.. Maybe they're the same object. Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn. Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature. My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sushi April 24, 2015 Share April 24, 2015 Yeah, my first guess is that Object 1 is not traveling in a straight line. My second guess would be that Object 2 is large enough to exert a *constant* gravitational pull, and pull Object 1 into orbit around it. "Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinemaphobe April 25, 2015 Author Share April 25, 2015 Wrote this without really reading the previous two responses, but from what I saw it looked like they were tricked. You purposely wrote that in a way that made us assume object 2 did not reach point B in the same amount of time, and then followed it up with nonsense to further the point. But object 2 could just as well reach point B in the same amount of time. This would be extraordinary reasoning if someone else created this seemingly absurd question to test assumption, so I'll still give you credit for it. However, this is not the answer I'm looking for, as this isn't a trick question in any way, and requires technical knowledge of what affects the travelling of objects. My choice of words will not be your enemy in this problem, but my exclusion of words will be. In my paradox, I ask what the difference between the two objects are if every physical property of theirs is the same. Which brings me to my final hint: The answer to the puzzle is a single word. Sushi and STeek are on the right track. All they have to do is convert their answer to a single word. "Sanity is the playground of the unimaginative." Yumi + Cinema Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiahdaj April 25, 2015 Share April 25, 2015 I threw in the word greedily to test the power of assumption. Even if I didn't throw in the word greedily though, one could easily say that eating three times more than another person is greedy. Not when the number in question is zero. That logic would make me a heinous murderer, as I have killed hundreds of thousands of times more people than my roommate has. It is simply an illogical thing to say. The whole thing was just a cheap trick, since it is truly illogical in a real-world situation to come to any conclusion based off the fact that 0x = 0. If they both travel at exactly 5 miles per second from the same point with no obstacles in their way, then why does Object 1 always reach Point B within 3 seconds? Based on your other hints, I know this isn't going to be the answer you are looking for, but it is the correct answer, nonetheless. Because 2 seconds is within 3 seconds. "If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.