Java-Gaming.org Hi !
 Featured games (84) games approved by the League of Dukes Games in Showcase (604) Games in Android Showcase (171) games submitted by our members Games in WIP (654) games currently in development
 News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
Pages: [1]
 ignore  |  Print
 Paradox  (Read 2911 times) 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Posted 2006-07-12 11:57:44 »

If A is B, but B is A and C, then assuming that A is not C is it possible that B = C, or is it certain that B = C (assuming obviously that A = A, B = B etc)

Riven
« League of Dukes »

« JGO Overlord »

Medals: 1022
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years

 « Reply #1 - Posted 2006-07-12 12:04:59 »

Option 1:

A = B
B = A & C

thus: B = A   &   B = C
thus: A  = B = C
so that B == C

Option 2:
A = B
B = A + C

thus: B = B + C
thus: C = 0
so that B != C (if A and B are not 0)

So... it depends.

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings!
superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Reply #2 - Posted 2006-07-12 12:10:54 »

Option 1:

A = B
B = A & C

thus: B = A   &   B = C
thus: A  = B = C
so that B == C

Option 2:
A = B
B = A + C

thus: B = B + C
thus: C = 0
so that B != C (if A and B are not 0)

So... it depends.

nice try but if A is equal to C then A cannot not be equal to C
endolf

JGO Coder

Medals: 7
Exp: 15 years

Current project release date: sometime in 3003

 « Reply #3 - Posted 2006-07-12 12:22:52 »

A = B
B = A & C

thus

A = A & C

if A = 101 and C = 111 then A & C = 101, but A != C

QED

Endolf

Riven
« League of Dukes »

« JGO Overlord »

Medals: 1022
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years

 « Reply #4 - Posted 2006-07-12 14:00:27 »

Quote
nice try but if A is equal to C then A cannot not be equal to C

it can, if A, B and C are all 0.

 1  2 `If A is B, but B is A and C, then assuming that A is not C is it possible that B = C, or is it certain that B = C (assuming obviously that A = A, B = B etc)If 0 is 0, but 0 is 0 and 0, then assuming that 0 is not 0 is it possible that 0 = 0, or is it certain that 0 = 0 (assuming obviously that 0 = 0, 0 = 0 etc)`

clearly the assumption is wrong, because 0 is always 0

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings!
superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Reply #5 - Posted 2006-07-13 00:52:20 »

Quote
nice try but if A is equal to C then A cannot not be equal to C

it can, if A, B and C are all 0.

 1  2 `If A is B, but B is A and C, then assuming that A is not C is it possible that B = C, or is it certain that B = C (assuming obviously that A = A, B = B etc)If 0 is 0, but 0 is 0 and 0, then assuming that 0 is not 0 is it possible that 0 = 0, or is it certain that 0 = 0 (assuming obviously that 0 = 0, 0 = 0 etc)`

clearly the assumption is wrong, because 0 is always 0

You need to revise your axoims
kevglass

« JGO Spiffy Duke »

Medals: 272
Projects: 25
Exp: 18 years

Coder, Trainee Pixel Artist, Game Reviewer

 « Reply #6 - Posted 2006-07-13 01:00:31 »

I really hate questions where the "clever" bit is to interpret the english language of the questioner - which obviously can be typoed or just poor use

More to the point this response:

Quote
nice try but if A is equal to C then A cannot not be equal to C

doesn't seem to negate this answer:

Quote
Option 2:
A = B
B = A + C

thus: B = B + C
thus: C = 0
so that B != C (if A and B are not 0)

Where A and B can be the same non-zero value as long as C is zero. i.e. C and A are not the same value.

Kev

superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Reply #7 - Posted 2006-07-13 03:43:27 »

I really hate questions where the "clever" bit is to interpret the english language of the questioner - which obviously can be typoed or just poor use

More to the point this response:

Quote
nice try but if A is equal to C then A cannot not be equal to C

doesn't seem to negate this answer:

Quote
Option 2:
A = B
B = A + C

thus: B = B + C
thus: C = 0
so that B != C (if A and B are not 0)

Where A and B can be the same non-zero value as long as C is zero. i.e. C and A are not the same value.

Kev

existence is not a property, and referring to it as a property confuses the distinction between a concept of something and the thing itself

Riven
« League of Dukes »

« JGO Overlord »

Medals: 1022
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years

 « Reply #8 - Posted 2006-07-13 06:32:40 »

to be or not to be, that's the question

Let me rephrase that for you: get a life

This is a Java forum, not some place for semi-elevated enlightened wannabe philosophers.

And Kev, Option 2 is not 'an option' as he didn't seem to mean + but =.
In that case the set of conditions is just wrong, instead of a paradox.
It's like saying, if 13 = 14, and we assume they are equal, they cannot be equal.

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings!
superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Reply #9 - Posted 2006-07-13 07:37:11 »

to be or not to be, that's the question

Let me rephrase that for you: get a life

This is a Java forum, not some place for semi-elevated enlightened wannabe philosophers.

Bitterness, my friend, is the enemy of all...
purpleguitar

Junior Devvie

 « Reply #10 - Posted 2006-07-13 12:42:56 »

If A is B, but B is A and C, then assuming that A is not C  is it possible that [snip]

That's all you need to show that your antecedent is a contradiction.  Convert this into first-order logic, and it's simply a conjunction of equalities.  I'll use a plus for conjunction since this board doesn't seem to support LaTeX's \wedge.

(A=B) + (B=A) + (B=C) + (A!=C) -> [anytthing]

The left hand side is clearly a contradiction:
A=B + B=C <=> A=C
which yields A=C + A!=C in the antecedent.

Now, once you have a contradiction as the antecedent of a material impliciation, you can imply anything at all.  Remember the truth table for material implication:

A  B  A->B
T  T  T
T  F  F
F  T  T
F  F  T

Hence, the consequent is true.  The general scientific rule here is that if your assumptions contain a contradiction, you can prove absolutely anything.  Insert discussion of evolution vs. creationism here.

The author is probably trying to be clever by inserting an ambiguous "or" in the consequent.  If this is inclusive, then we're done.  If it is exclusive, then only one of the components of the disjunction can be true.  However, once we've shown a contradiction in the antecedent, pragmatic philosophers wouldn't care.

I wouldn't call it armchair philosophy:  I would call it a mean homework assignment from a discrete maths course.
superjames

Senior Newbie

 « Reply #11 - Posted 2006-07-13 13:35:32 »

If A is B, but B is A and C, then assuming that A is not C  is it possible that [snip]

That's all you need to show that your antecedent is a contradiction.  Convert this into first-order logic, and it's simply a conjunction of equalities.  I'll use a plus for conjunction since this board doesn't seem to support LaTeX's \wedge.

(A=B) + (B=A) + (B=C) + (A!=C) -> [anytthing]

The left hand side is clearly a contradiction:
A=B + B=C <=> A=C
which yields A=C + A!=C in the antecedent.

Now, once you have a contradiction as the antecedent of a material impliciation, you can imply anything at all.  Remember the truth table for material implication:

A  B  A->B
T  T  T
T  F  F
F  T  T
F  F  T

Hence, the consequent is true.  The general scientific rule here is that if your assumptions contain a contradiction, you can prove absolutely anything.  Insert discussion of evolution vs. creationism here.

Incorrect
Riven
« League of Dukes »

« JGO Overlord »

Medals: 1022
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years

 « Reply #12 - Posted 2006-07-13 13:50:20 »

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings!
Pages: [1]
 ignore  |  Print

You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 SHC (37 views) 2015-08-01 03:58:20 Jesse (24 views) 2015-07-29 04:35:27 Riven (44 views) 2015-07-27 16:38:00 Riven (24 views) 2015-07-27 15:35:20 Riven (27 views) 2015-07-27 12:26:13 Riven (18 views) 2015-07-27 12:23:39 BurntPizza (39 views) 2015-07-25 00:14:37 BurntPizza (48 views) 2015-07-24 22:06:39 BurntPizza (33 views) 2015-07-24 06:06:53 NoxInc (40 views) 2015-07-22 22:16:53
 theagentd 51x wessles 49x basil_ 33x KaiHH 26x orangepascal 25x Riven 22x ags1 18x mooman219 17x bornander 15x KudoDEV 13x princec 11x pquiring 11x CelestialCreator 11x klaus 10x Jesse 9x Spasi 8x
 List of Learning Resourcesby gouessej2015-07-09 11:29:36How Do I Expand My Game?by bashfrog2015-06-14 11:34:43List of Learning Resources2015-05-31 05:37:30Intersection Methodsby Roquen2015-05-29 08:19:33List of Learning Resources2015-05-05 10:20:32How to: JGO Wikiby Mac702015-02-17 20:56:162D Dynamic Lighting2015-01-01 20:25:42How do I start Java Game Development?by gouessej2014-12-27 19:41:21
 java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org