egosoft.com

P88 · Post by **P88** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 21:39

eh?

say if you were 6 feet away from a tree, and you went 3 feet forward, then went half of 3 feet, then half of that, then half of that, then half of that etc...............

would you ever reach the tree?

-TD-13- · Post by **-TD-13-** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 21:43

VoodooPriester · Post by **VoodooPriester** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 21:46

That's just a matter of your point of view.
A mathematician would never reach the tree, but a physcian would be satisfied with the distance at one point and assume that he reached the tree.

monkman · Post by **monkman** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 22:28

define reach the tree. If its when you touch it then theoreticaly u wud never touch it as youd always be twice the distant of your next "jump" from it.

Elky

Post by **X-Warrior B AS** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 22:41

monkman wrote:define reach the tree. If its when you touch it then theoreticaly u wud never touch it as youd always be twice the distant of your next "jump" from it.

Elky

Unless the distance is measured to the centre of your body, which would mean that you'd touch the tree quite soon.

Only if the distance is measured between the outer bark of the tree and the end of your toes you would never touch the tree...

esd · Post by **esd** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 23:06

Can I reach out with my arm once within an acceptable range? Or if I am carrying a stick, does that count?

The_Abyss · Post by **The_Abyss** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 23:26

Of course you would reach the tree given time, as the tree will grow

P88 · Post by **P88** » Tue, 4. Nov 03, 23:59

eventualy (if you were a mathmatician) you would come to a complete stop without actually touching the tree, as it would be impossible to reach it^

The_Abyss · Post by **The_Abyss** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 00:02

P0inter88 wrote:eventualy (if you were a mathmatician) you would come to a complete stop without actually touching the tree, as it would be impossible to reach it^

Not really

Of course you would reach the tree given time, as the tree will grow

RustiSwordz · Post by **RustiSwordz** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 00:13

I need headache tablets, or a gun............

P88 · Post by **P88** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 00:15

lol u will never reach the tree, and suppose the tree couldnt gro

Post by **BurnIt!** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 00:51

Doesn't look like someone deleted it - open your eyes - it's all there

(if you delete 1/2 post and then again 1/2 of the remaining 1/2 - will the post ever be deleted?)

P88 · Post by **P88** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 01:04

it wasnt there a few minutes ago

pixel · Post by **pixel** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 01:17

aaaah, the old tortoise and hare conundrum!!

Love it.

btw, if something (non sentient) goes bang in the middle of nowhere, can the noise be heard?

RustiSwordz · Post by **RustiSwordz** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 02:17

No offence burn it but the thread wasnt there: seriously. It was MISSING ok.

let me put it another way: perhaps its not a question of: did I (me) delete the thread aka a forum bug but more a case of: why wasnt the thread there and it wasnt me dreaming it was others too. Aka another Forum bug per se?

monkman · Post by **monkman** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 09:24

Youd never stop pointer very quickly ud get bloody slow but u wudnt stop. Hat to be a mathecian and im prety sure its wrong bu if you plot a speed time graph with that it would reach to infinity and never hit the Y axis. Youd get damn close but never there and ud never stop. But as abyss sed the tree will grow and the TREE will touch u eventually.

Elky

P88 · Post by **P88** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 09:56

what if the tree is a fully grown adult?

(or do these still grow?)

carran · Post by **carran** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 13:10

I think you would get to the tree, after an extremely long series of cycles the atoms in the nearest part of your body to the tree would begin to interact with those of the tree, at this point it could be considered you had touched the tree

This would exclude any consideration of where the measurements are from ie centre of tree to centre of body etc

Post by **CBJ** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 13:48

pixel wrote:aaaah, the old tortoise and hare conundrum!!

Zeno's Paradox to be precise, and the hare is often replaced by Achilles. The explanation can be found, amongst other places, here. About half way down the page it is also described in terms of crossing a room - not quiet walking towards a tree, but close enough.

In the terms that POinter88 originally asked the question, the answer is simply "no" because he makes no mention of time, just crossing half the distance.

Oh, and BurnIt!, stop playing with their minds.

carran · Post by **carran** » Wed, 5. Nov 03, 14:17

CBJ wrote:
pixel wrote:aaaah, the old tortoise and hare conundrum!!
Zeno's Paradox to be precise, and the hare is often replaced by Achilles. The explanation can be found, amongst other places, here. About half way down the page it is also described in terms of crossing a room - not quiet walking towards a tree, but close enough.

In the terms that POinter88 originally asked the question, the answer is simply "no" because he makes no mention of time, just crossing half the distance.

Oh, and BurnIt!, stop playing with their minds.

Maybe... time is inferred within POinter88s original phrasing as he states one travels half the distance. It takes a finite time to travel a specific distance, or else he's travelling instantaneously between two points.

Assuming the former is correct, the answer is yes (as he will eventually get so close to interact with the tree), assuming the latter is correct, the answer is no as your answer proves.