Xeno

Actually, if I can recall 1992 properly, that isn't quite what 
Xeno/Zeno's point was.  He created a SET of 4 paradoxes (not just one) 
in which time and space were considered both as irreducible continua AND 
as a contiguous series of points such as what you refer to.

Explaining one paradox seems to push you into another paradox.  Last I 
heard many philosophers think the solution to Xeno's time/space 
paradoxes will be solved someday via quantum physics.

Xeno was not arguing that space DOES contain an infinite number of 
midpoints, instead his argument was that saying space is thus 
constructed runs into some logical inconsistencies.  Still, it's a good 
reference.

-p

Pizzaslot wrote:
> Glad to see the thousands of dollars are paying off for your advanced degree
> in mathematics.
>
> This is kind of like Xeno's Paradox, which states that there are an infinite
> number of  midpoints between two points.  So, does that explain why you
> don't catch the disc?  Because there are infinite number of midpoints?  Or
> do you just suck, and then have to think of mathematical reasons for it?
>
>
> "Bob Koca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Rule IX A  The entire playing field is in-bounds. The perimeter lines
> > are not part of the playing field and are out-of-bounds.
> >
> > Rule Viii 8  If the pull is caught, the disc is put into play at the
> > spot on the playing field closest to where the disc is caught.
> >
> >
> >  The problem is that there is no spot on the playing field closest to
> > where
> > the disc was caught. Since the lines are not part of the playing field
> > the playing field itself is an open set (in the topological sense).
> > It would be like trying to find the closest real number to 2 that is
> > less than 2. Any proposed answer could be improved.
> >
> > ,Bob Koca