nehaniv@purina.berkeley.edu (Chrystopher Lev Nehaniv) (04/13/91)
>In article <382@batz.enst-bretagne.fr> beugnard@batz.enst-bretagne.fr (Antoine Beugnard) writes: >Is the model wrong, or are the hypotheses of continuity false? >Why the classical model works (matches our experience) while Zeno's one don't? >Our interpretation is that the world is by essence discontinuous. This gives two, yes two , ways out of Zeno's paradox (besides limits) 1) Space is not infinitely divisible. 2) Time is not infinitely divisible. Once things get small enough, either you take that step are you don't and there is no `half that time' or ` half that distance'. >Ps: We do not call into question mathematics and its powerfull use. Even >continuous mathematics!!. It works...but it may just be an abstraction of the >reality, a usefull tool that has not to be related to the essence of world... Only the use is in question. the validity of its use depends on whether the model satisfies the axioms of the mathematical system being applied. -- C.L. Nehaniv (nehaniv@math.berkeley.edu) | " Things fall apart. Dept. of Mathematics | It's scientific." UC Berkeley, CA 94720 | -D. Byrne