paradox thread

If pinocchio said "my nose will grow right now" will his nose grow?

Generic user #1538 wrote:

If pinocchio said "my nose will grow right now" will his nose grow?

It would grow, just not immediately.

This paradox relies on trying to get past the fact that we are talking about a living wooden puppet, that was cursed to have his nose grow when he lied. I don't know about you, but I find that the hardest part to believe.

Next.

C_Mill24 wrote:

Generic user #1538 wrote:

If pinocchio said "my nose will grow right now" will his nose grow?

It would grow, just not immediately.

When you say not immediately you obviously imply a set amount of time before the nose evidently grows. But you see if the nose does not grow the instant pinnocchio finishes his sentence he would be lying (since his statement implied an action that happens immediately ) ergo his nose should grow, but if it does grow at that instant then that means that the little wooden puppet was telling the truth ergo his nose should not grow at all.

Ganon wrote:

This paradox relies on trying to get past the fact that we are talking about a living wooden puppet, that was cursed to have his nose grow when he lied. I don't know about you, but I find that the hardest part to believe.

Next.

This is a "what if" scenario as most, if not all, paradoxes are. It's a way that let's you use logic regarding a set of rules (which in this case is pinnocchio's nose growing when he tells a lie) to solve statements that are presented to you. If you want something a bit more realistic how about the barber paradox? 

In this one we have a town. Every single resident of said town are of the male sex (a bit unreal, but this is all hypothetical of course). Now for the "rule" : every man is always cleanly shaven. Keep in mind that the town only has one barber. That means only one man of the many men is the barber. Now there are two types of men in this town: the group that shave themselves, whom do not go to  the barber ergo the barber doesn't shave them. And the group that goes to the barber, whom don't shave themselves. So the million dollar question is: who shaves the barber? From the rule presented above we can deduce that :-
1) if the barber shaves himself then he must abide by the rule and not shave himself.
2) if the barber does not shave himself then he must also abide by the rule and shave himself.

Then if the rules are as you put it are like this.

1: "The group that shave themselves"
2: "The group that goes to the barber, whom don't shave themselves"


Then the barber is clearly in group one, because he does not "Go" to himself, he's already there. Besides, he can do it in his own home and he would not be at the barbers, assuming the barbers refers to the place of shaving rather than the person.




Next.

IS THE DAMN CAT ALIVE OR DEAD?

Ganon wrote:

Then if the rules are as you put it are like this.

1: "The group that shave themselves"
2: "The group that goes to the barber, whom don't shave themselves"


Then the barber is clearly in group one, because he does not "Go" to himself, he's already there. Besides, he can do it in his own home and he would not be at the barbers, assuming the barbers refers to the place of shaving rather than the person.




Next.

The barber refers to the person. If it refered to the place then it wouldn't be a paradox now would it?

Imagine that you have the innate ability to time travel. One day, your future self appears in front of you with an bread bun and says that they are you from five minutes in the future. They give you the bun and explain that you must bite this bread bun ONE TIME and then in five minutes, travel back five minutes ago and give it to yourself (in essence, you must do exactly as they did). Now, assuming that this happened, it means that your future self has already taken a bite from the bun. But they also received this bun from THEIR future self who must have also taken a bite. And their future self's future self must have also taken a bite. Essentially, this bread bun should have an infinite number of bites in it, but if that is so, why does a piece of bread with finite volume still exist? And if it IS completely gone, who started the chain?

that was a comment on a game grumps video im ashame

Generic user #1538 wrote:

Ganon wrote:

Then if the rules are as you put it are like this.

1: "The group that shave themselves"
2: "The group that goes to the barber, whom don't shave themselves"


Then the barber is clearly in group one, because he does not "Go" to himself, he's already there. Besides, he can do it in his own home and he would not be at the barbers, assuming the barbers refers to the place of shaving rather than the person.




Next.

The barber refers to the person. If it refered to the place then it wouldn't be a paradox now would it?

Then it conforms to what I have bolded.

madam im adam wrote:

Imagine that you have the innate ability to time travel. One day, your future self appears in front of you with an bread bun and says that they are you from five minutes in the future. They give you the bun and explain that you must bite this bread bun ONE TIME and then in five minutes, travel back five minutes ago and give it to yourself (in essence, you must do exactly as they did). Now, assuming that this happened, it means that your future self has already taken a bite from the bun. But they also received this bun from THEIR future self who must have also taken a bite. And their future self's future self must have also taken a bite. Essentially, this bread bun should have an infinite number of bites in it, but if that is so, why does a piece of bread with finite volume still exist? And if it IS completely gone, who started the chain?

Going by Doctor Who logic time can be rewritten, so the universe would update itself to account for the lost bite. Eventually when the bread is eaten the one who took the last bite would probably not bother with the task seeing as it is gone, and wouldn't go back in time.