Fran Meana

...

Z: Let´s say I shoot this arrow. Hmm, well let´s rather think I am this arrow…

H: Alright mate! You are an arrow.

Z: I am!. So if we were to think my path we would agree it is a linear trajectory. As any other line does, this trajectory will made up of a sequence of points and positions. A sequence of positions that in the commonsense way I, the arrow, occupy one after the other.

H: Well, I suppose if we were to think of you as an arrow, we might as well consider your trajectory.

(Z sets to drawing in a piece of paper)

Z: The problem is that between one point on a line and the next, there is an infinity of intervening points. Of course is in the nature of infinity that you can never get to the end of it. So if I occupy the first point along my path I will never reach the next unless I occupy each of the infinity of points in between.

H: I-dont-un-der-stand-what-you-are-try-ing-to-say.

Z: No? You see! (Z points at the drawing) My path implodes and the trajectory becomes an infinity of points. I am stuck. I get swallowed up in the transitional infinity.

H: You are stuck in thought!

Z: Aaaargghhh! I knew you´d deny it!

H: Or if you moved it is because it was never any point. A path is not composed of points. It´s just the passage across them all, a dynamic unity. It doesn´t stop till it stops! Then, and only then, your trajectory can be plotted. Retrospectively. Once you Mr. Arrow hit the target and working backward from the movement´s end. Before that you just throw yourself into the future.