How to refute the theory that the arrow does not move, and how to explain the arrow does not move .

You stand there and let the arrows shoot you, and the throwing knives are the same, and the knives are the same, and then you die, don't blame anyone else. Because those are things that don't move.

In fact, the first step is to have a measured measure.

For example, if you are asked how many kilograms you are, how tall you are, if the standard of measurement is constantly changing, it can be said that your height is also constantly changing. Or you can say that your height is getting longer. Because the length of the standard of measurement decreases every time, just as the standard of time in the theory of flying arrows is constantly decreasing.

The sophistry lies in the fact that in the theory of immobility of the arrow, the measure is that it is constantly moving, not a unit of time, such as minutes, seconds, or milliseconds.

Neither, but something else is measured by it. It's like if you want to buy 1 kilogram of something, but you say it's not 1 kilogram, but how much is a kilogram, and you don't have a clear statement. You're not eligible to buy anything.

In the Flying Arrow Theory, there is no specific reference to time, such as the standard of unit time. There is no specific reference to the distance, such as the same distance. None of them. Without standards, there is no qualification to draw conclusions.

Although the theory of immobility seems to be correct, it is actually wrong, but let me explain. If an arrow is going to shoot a person, divide the arrow into many positions, and on the surface each position is stationary, but the arrow has to have a transition period from point A to point B, and this period is in motion, and don't forget, motion and rest appear together, and if there is no movement, there is no rest. When the arrow is about to hit the person, it is another period, and the arrow has to move from movement to stationary and then from movement to the person's body and then to rest, so that people will be harmed, and movement echoes stillness.

Overall, the theory of immobility is completely wrong.

The explanation is as follows:

"Flying Arrows Don't Move" is a well-known argument against the movement put forward by Zeno, a philosopher of the ancient Greek school of Elea. The content is that a moving thing always occupies a certain space that is the same as itself at any time, and the same is true for the arrow, so the arrow cannot move in the same space as itself, but it cannot move in the place where it is not, so the arrow cannot move.

Introduction:

Imagine a flying arrow. At each moment, it is located in a specific location in the space. Since moments have no duration, arrows have no time at each moment and can only be stationary.

Given that the whole period of motion contains only moments, and each moment contains only stationary arrows, Zeno concludes that the flying arrow is always stationary and that it cannot be in motion.

The above conclusion also applies to the case where there is a duration at all times. For this case, the moment will be the smallest unit of time. Suppose the arrow moves at such a moment, then it will be located in different positions in space at the beginning and end of that moment.

This means that the moment has a beginning and an end, and thus contains at least two parts. But this clearly contradicts the premise that the moment is the smallest unit of time. Therefore, even if there is a duration at the moment, it is impossible for a flying arrow to be in motion. In short, the arrow does not move.

It is a movement of denial, insisting on the idea of absolute stillness. It is a mistake to think that the flying arrows do not move, but only stand still at one point at a time.

This phrase is generally used to describe "absolute rest", which means that after the arrow is fired, it breaks down its motion and is immobile at every point, which is used to refute that "things are always in motion".

This needs to be applied to the relative velocity of physics, which is motionless from a certain point of view.

The immobility of the arrow means that the arrow must be at a certain point in space at a certain moment. Since the arrows are stationary at every point in the path, the arrows that are flying are not actually moving. This statement expresses the philosophy of "stillness in motion".

The flying arrow does not move: it is the paradox between the "movement" of the "flying arrow" and the "immobility" of a certain moment.

At a certain moment, or a certain point in time, the arrow does not move. For example, if you take a picture with your camera at the fifth, tenth, and fifteenth seconds of the arrow's flight, then what you see are three still **s.

Therefore, the arrow is moving, but the arrow is immobile at a certain moment, which leads to two opposite conclusions, which are paradoxes. It is not a fallacy, nor is it a conclusion.

The encyclopedia says: This is a stealing concept, confusing the concept of time and time. This kind of ambiguity, yes and no, is the most hateful.

The concept of time is not exactly defined right now.

For physics, time is a physical quantity of magnitude; And moment is not a physical quantity, it has no size. For example, you can't say "the 10th second is bigger than the 5th second, or the 10th second is longer than the 5th second", it's just that the number 10 is bigger than the number 5.

The very concept of moment is a paradox. The so-called moment or time point is that time is infinitely close to zero, which is a mathematical limit concept, so time tends to zero, which is mathematically equal to zero; But time is not zero, it is only infinitely close, and it cannot be equal to zero, because time is equal to zero and has no physical meaning.

Therefore, it cannot be said that Zeno is "stealing the concept and confusing the concept of time and time." "What's the concept of stealing? It's a paradox that the arrow doesn't move, there's nothing wrong with it; At that time, there was no concept of time and time, and there was no concept of the limit of calculus.

The paradox of the flying arrow not moving.

Originally proposed by the ancient Greek mathematician Zeno, so there is a paradox called Zeno, simply put, the arrow will have a temporary position at every moment of flight in the air, and it is not much different from not moving when it is in this position, the key point of this statement is whether time and space can be infinitely divided, and the contradiction point is on the measurement of time.

There are also many paradoxes in life, such as the paradox of unexpected exams, the paradox of God, and so on. Zeno proposes that the arrow has a temporary position at every moment it travels through the air, and that when it is in this position, it is not much different from not moving.

The crux of Zeno's paradox is whether space-time can be infinitely divided, and the contradiction lies in the measure of time. The types of time measured in our lives are all periodical and according to certain laws. For example, the rise and setting of the sun, the change of the moon, etc., people use the number of cycles to find the pattern and finally use it as a standard.

The paradox of the flying arrow holds that time is divisible, but he does not consider that time is continuous and time cannot be divided. If time could really be divided, then the moment of time would not exist.

The philosophical view of the flying arrow

Zeno assumes that the arrow is stationary at every moment, while also occupying a certain amount of space. Then there will be an arrow in every time and space, and what you see is only the arrow of a certain time, and the arrow of the past is no longer in everyone's consideration.

But in reality, objects move from one dimension to another, and time changes. But the problem is that if the displacement in space does not exist, the displacement in time does not exist either.

If you want to be unable to judge the state of an object at one point in time, you can only move from one point in time to another, so that you can really start discussing this problem.

The paradox of flying arrows does not move is a relatively complex paradox, which is actually not very easy to explain clearly, and if you are interested, you can think more and understand and recognize.

The paradox of the flying arrow not moving.

It is a philosophical contradiction between motion and stillness, which is also called Zeno's paradox.

In ancient Greece, the philosopher Zeno once asked his students to come up with a paradox, an arrow shot is moving, but the arrow has its position at a certain moment and is not moving, and any other moment is also not moving, then the arrow is immobile from the moment of view, and this contradicts the previous movement, thus forming a paradox.

The paradox of immobility means that when an arrow is motionless at any moment during flight, this is the opposite of the result that it is in motion, thus forming a paradox. In fact, in ancient China, some people have put forward similar views, such as Hui Shifu once said that "the scene of flying birds is not moving", that is, the flying birds are not moving, that is, they admit that movement can be separated.

In fact, there are many paradoxes like the paradox of the flying arrow, such as the paradox of God, etc., in fact, the key to the paradox of the flying arrow is whether time and space can be divided, and the reason why the two views are contradictory is because their standards are different, in fact, from the point of view of physics, this paradox is not established, because quantum theory believes that time is continuous, and it is indivisible, so there is no instantaneous immobility of the flying arrow.

This is mainly because in physics, space and time have a minimum limit, which is called Pu Jing Jalange, and motion is the teleportation between two Planck lengths, and in terms of time, there is no smaller time between Planck time, which means that time is moving at a very high frequency, so it is completely coherent, so it is inseparable in pure science.

In fact, the "instant" mentioned in the flying arrow does not divide it into how many seconds and minutes, but is generally divided into small time, so if you look at it this way, in fact, time is inseparable, because whether it is in a small moment, in fact, the arrow will move to a certain extent, which means that in fact, time cannot be regarded as countless fine points, so this paradox cannot exist.