bryan (01/26/83)
Take two objects and bring them together, so that they are touching. Touching means to bring together so that there exists no space between the two objects. Right? But wait, if there is no space between the two objects then it follows that they are occupying the same space, at the point where they are touching each other. But two objects can't occupy the same space,(at the same time) so they are not touching. !ihlpb!bryan Bryan DeLaney
leichter (01/27/83)
...all of which illustrates once again why mathematics exists. If you insist on using vague English descriptions "touching" "occupying the same space" etc. you will easily produce contradictions. So what? Phrase this rigorously and STILL find a contradiction, and you might have something there. 'Till then...consider the following "proof". Thm: A ham sandwich is better than complete happiness in life. Pf: Everyone will agree that nothing is better than complete happiness in life. On the other hand, a ham sandwich is better than nothing. Hence, by the transitivity of "better than", we have our theorem. QED -- Jerry decvax!yale-comix!leichter
mcewan (01/28/83)
#R:ihlpb:-27400:uiucdcs:28200009:000:195 uiucdcs!mcewan Jan 28 12:48:00 1983 ... if there is no space between the two objects then it follows that they are occupying the same space, at the point where they are touching each other... Huh?!? How do you figure this?
csc (01/30/83)
It doesn't follow that "if there is no space between the two objects then it follows that they are occupying the same space". -jan
lew (01/31/83)
Matter does not reside in the classical continuum. The continuum is an abstract mental construction which models our macroscopic experience. Do not confuse it with physical reality.