Anyways, feel free to read the poem or story, and for anyone interested, here are the notes I used for my philosophy paper presentation as the paper is longer and more tedious.
ZENO'S
PARADOX ON MOTION : THE ARROW
UVU
PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE
So.
Zeno's metaphysical paradox on how there is no motion. I mean, you
take an arrow--shoot it and if you imagine it at some given instance
of time it is frozen in that place. So, obviously, there is no
motion. Got it? OK.
But
really, What do these ideas do to our perception of reality? Is it
altered at all? I mean, how important is having actual motion,
really? We’ve gotten by this long with not moving . . . or moving,
(who knows) and seem to be fine--sort of. The way I see it, though,
is that these questions, maybe seemingly simple help define the human
condition. They are important to out being and how we interact within
the world.
So
back to the arrow.
_______________________________________________________________________
Again,
just to make this clear Zeno gave the example of an arrow being shot.
He has us imagine the arrow in flight then we consider it frozen at a
single point in time. He then says that the arrow, at that point is
stationary, and so, in all other instances of time the arrow must
also be stationary.
Basically,
what we have in stead of motion is a string of individual moments in
time lined up to give us the illusion of motion.
The
official argument is as follows: (1) when the arrow is in a place
just its own size, it's at rest. (2) at every moment of its flight,
the arrow is in a place just its own size. (3) therefore, at every
moment of its flight, the arrow is at rest.
_______________________________________________________________________
Little
did Zeno know when contemplating the nature of reality that thousands
of years later, what he said would show up in quantum mechanics. The
QUANTUM ZENO EFFECT. This shows that an
object moving through time, in quantum states, does not in fact move,
but shifts between each collapsing wave function.
The
best way to illustrate this is with a movie reel. The eye can only
process so many frames per second from a reel, and when we watch a
file we see motion as the reel is played at a certain speed. But
really, what we are seeing are hundreds, or thousands of individual
frames. What the naked eye sees does not prove or indicate what is
actually, physically taking place.
Quantum
mechanics gives us the illusion that there is motion when really
there is none.
*Example
of 64 bit game*
_______________________________________________________________________
However,
there are other methods of looking at Zeno’s metaphysical claims of
motion scientifically. For instance, it would seem that there must be
more than just instances that somehow correspond with one another.
William Poundstone asks, “There
must be some information attached to a moving arrow that identifies
it. Otherwise, how does it “know” to jerk forward in the next
instance?” How would we be able to tell that the arrow was “moving”
or would continue to move?
The
motion, (or at least perceived motion) of an object brings about
results. One of those is kinetic energy. An expression of the fact
that an object in motion can bring about work on anything it hits or
comes in contact with. It limits the amount of work an object could
do as a result of that objects motion.
And
what’s more this kinetic energy can be measured. For instance, the
output of an arrow traveling at 90 meters per second would be 33.45
joules. This is a direct result of the arrows motion.
*Story
of William Tell*
There
is a measurable force that would need to interact with each object in
order for such a result to come about.
What caused that force or energy? It would seem that it was motion.
However,
the main purpose of the paper is not to examine the differences or
arguments but rather to redefine our notion of . . . motion.
The
great Aristotle said that time is the measure of motion. Or rather,
ANY change is motion. *Leibniz*
In this light, movement can be defined as an object change through
time. And since we are aware of time, it must, on some level exist,
if not only a construct of our minds.
Therefore,
I argue that movement can be categorized as an objects experience
through time.
For
instance – If
a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to SEE it, does it
still have motion? – YES. There was an experience even if not
conscious that took place.
Furthermore,
in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, the rate of a clock as
well as material changed is lowered within a fast moving system. The
closer the object moves to the speed of light, the slower time moves.
Motion effects time. In fact, time
is merely a by-product of motion. Essentially clocks “clock up”
motion, not time. Time is simply how we understand that motion.
And
so, when incorporating just these two different idea's about motion
it seems that we
must then reevaluate not how we perceive motion, but what we perceive
as motion.
Motion cannot be defined as an objects physically moving through
space consecutively–even at a quantum level, for we can see that
there can be illusions in this, like the movie reel—but that it
must be defined by the results that we see come from an object moving
through space or space-time.
I
feel that redefining our view of motion all together must be the most
conclusive resolution. When science can no longer, (so far) give an
answer to a question seemingly so simple, maybe it is time to
redefine the original problem—motion.
Motion
= our experience through time.
No comments:
Post a Comment