What makes Zeno’s paradox a paradox is that, despite the logical requirement that moving objects must cover an infinite number of sub-intervals in order to do so, we do, in fact, observe objects move.
But we never observe that final bit of dust getting successfully swept up, so in that case the paradox is averted.
Could also be related to the Zima paradox: nobody wants to drink it, somebody keeps buying it but it still won’t disappear from the shelves despite taking a decade off from production.
Add comment