Continuous motion possible or impossible

[bahman]

The size of a point is non-contrbutary here. The size of a point is not the definition of a point, just as the sizee of a ladder does not define what a ladder is. The size of a point is very small, but irrelevant to showing that anything is ill-defined.

No, it is very important to know what is the size of a point is. Any geometric entity is defined by a set of numbers, length, height, etc.

As I told you, a point is very small.

No, a point's size is zero.

[simplicity]

Tell me what is the size of a point first.

All of those thoroughly indoctrinated in the sciences "understand" that a point is an imaginary construct, yet one critical to making both science [and it's language, mathematics] work.

If a point doesn't really exist, what makes anyone believe that any of the other non-sense does?

We are talking about mathematics here so a point exists on a line since if a point does not exist on a location on a line then we are dealing with two segments of the line. What is the size of a point?

Moreover, we use mathematics to describe reality so we are having a problem if the mathematical tool that we use is ill-defined.

On top of this if a point does not exist then the line does not exist so continuum.

Now you're catching-on. None of it exists. It was made up in order to make sense of the physical world. I like to give the following example...

I would suggest that all things are unique in the Universe because [if for no other reason] they occupy an unique location and are subject to unique physical forces. If you would agree with that, it would follow that there is no such thing as "2." Therefore, what does "2" mean? Seems like just a way to make things considerably simpler to deal with in a world where you can ignore something as obvious as uniqueness.

One could go on and on down this path, but the takeaway from this little exercise is that nothing appears as it truly is. Our language and thinking has created a false reality [as humans always do] which might explain why our species seems to continuously suffer through life.

[bahman]

All of those thoroughly indoctrinated in the sciences "understand" that a point is an imaginary construct, yet one critical to making both science [and it's language, mathematics] work.

If a point doesn't really exist, what makes anyone believe that any of the other non-sense does?

We are talking about mathematics here so a point exists on a line since if a point does not exist on a location on a line then we are dealing with two segments of the line. What is the size of a point?

Moreover, we use mathematics to describe reality so we are having a problem if the mathematical tool that we use is ill-defined.

On top of this if a point does not exist then the line does not exist so continuum.

Now you're catching-on. None of it exists. It was made up in order to make sense of the physical world. I like to give the following example...

But mathematics was successful in explaining reality to a great degree. No mathematics, no physical formulation of reality.

I would suggest that all things are unique in the Universe because [if for no other reason] they occupy an unique location and are subject to unique physical forces. If you would agree with that, it would follow that there is no such thing as "2." Therefore, what does "2" mean? Seems like just a way to make things considerably simpler to deal with in a world where you can ignore something as obvious as uniqueness.

One could go on and on down this path, but the takeaway from this little exercise is that nothing appears as it truly is. Our language and thinking has created a false reality [as humans always do] which might explain why our species seems to continuously suffer through life.

In fact, we would suffer a lot without mathematics. Without physical formulation of reality, we have to live in the cave. Physical formulation of reality works, so some branch of mathematics such as calculus is useful.

[simplicity]

In fact, we would suffer a lot without mathematics. Without physical formulation of reality, we have to live in the cave. Physical formulation of reality works, so some branch of mathematics such as calculus is useful.

I am not suggesting that mathematics is not useful [just like having all kids of gods to explain everything was useful way back when], but it is not what [Reality] is. It is a system that works for our purposes [most of the time].

At the same time, it prevents folks from going beyond to get to the nitty gritty of matters. Reality suggests that things like time need to be left at the door. Without time, science falls apart.

Like all things, you just have to understand its limitations.

[bahman]

In fact, we would suffer a lot without mathematics. Without physical formulation of reality, we have to live in the cave. Physical formulation of reality works, so some branch of mathematics such as calculus is useful.

I am not suggesting that mathematics is not useful [just like having all kids of gods to explain everything was useful way back when], but it is not what [Reality] is. It is a system that works for our purposes [most of the time].

Mathematics, physical formulation, describes reality to such a great degree. What is reality if it is not what is described by mathematics?

At the same time, it prevents folks from going beyond to get to the nitty gritty of matters. Reality suggests that things like time need to be left at the door. Without time, science falls apart.

Like all things, you just have to understand its limitations.

If the reality is lawful then there exists a physical formulation that describes it. At the end of the day, if you believe that reality is continuous, then there must exist a physical formulation that describes it. What is a continuum to you and how do you describe it mathematically?

[simplicity]

Mathematics, physical formulation, describes reality to such a great degree. What is reality if it is not what is described by mathematics?

Reality is not accessible through human perception/intelligence.

If the reality is lawful then there exists a physical formulation that describes it. At the end of the day, if you believe that reality is continuous, then there must exist a physical formulation that describes it. What is a continuum to you and how do you describe it mathematically?

Reality is not this "movie" that our intellects present us with. It's just the best we can do. What exactly it is I can not tell you.

[Veritas Aequitas]

To move, it must not be at now at the current location and then be at the next instance at another point. But something cannot be and not be at the same instance, now (it exists at now and must not exist in order to move). Therefore, continuous motion is impossible.

Here is a conclusive point.

The Big Bang is proven theoretically within Science and it is a very coherent truth that reinforces all other scientific truths.
The force of the Big Bang had been pushing the universe to expand, thus moving and has not stopped.
Thus in this case, continuous motion is a scientific fact, as such no need to deliberate continuous motion is possible or not.