There is movement, but it's not possible to reach your goal if each next step is half of your last step ánd when the first step doesn't cover more than half of the total distance you want to move. If you keep dividing a cake by two forever, you'll only get smaller and smaller crumbles, but never the full cake. There will always be a next crumble (infinitely small and beyond) that gets divided by two. I tends to zero, but never reaches it.
I do understand that in practice you should not think in terms of distance dividing by two, however íf you would do so... basically the 'formula' you would use to move is one of slowing down for infinity dividing your distance by two.
One thing that I don't quite get though is how you can mathematically go from infinitely small, to zero, to negative numbers. In a logical way this doesn't quite make much sense. Perhaps that's your problem with this "paradox"?
Quote:
You are simply playing with words, same as many phylosopher normally do
What does it mean ?
If you claim : It is not possible to move from A to B , you must be aware, first of all, that B does actually exist
Actually, I didn't say that we aren't aware of A and B, nor did I say that it's impossible to move from A to B. It ís however impossible to reach your goal when you use the method of movement as Zeno said. His conclusion of 'ow then there can't be movement' is ridiculous though,
Cheers
