Fran Meana: Difference between revisions
Fran meana (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Fran meana (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
... | ... | ||
Z: Let´s say I shoot this arrow. | Z: Let´s say I shoot this arrow. | ||
H: | H: Hmm. | ||
Z: I am | Z: Well let´s rather think I am this arrow… | ||
H: Alright. | |||
Z: So if we were to think my path we would agree it is a linear trajectory. | |||
H: Well, I suppose if we were to think of you as an arrow, we might as well consider your trajectory. | H: Well, I suppose if we were to think of you as an arrow, we might as well consider your trajectory. | ||
Line 13: | Line 17: | ||
(Z sets to drawing in a piece of paper) | (Z sets to drawing in a piece of paper) | ||
Z: | Z: 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. | |||
Z: The problem is that between one point on a line and the next, there is an infinity of points. | |||
Z: No? You see! (Z points at the drawing) My path implodes and the trajectory becomes an infinity of points. I am stuck | Z: Of course is in the nature of infinity that you can never get to the end of it. | ||
So if I occupy any 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. (Frantically | |||
Z: No? You see! (Z points at the drawing) | |||
My path implodes and the trajectory becomes an infinity of points. I am stuck. | |||
H: You are stuck in thought! | H: You are stuck in thought! | ||
Z: Aaaargghhh! I | Z: Aaaargghhh! No. I get swallowed up in the transitional infinity. | ||
H: Or if you moved it is because it was never any point. A path is not composed of points. | |||
It´s a dynamic unity. It doesn´t stop till it stops! | |||
Then, and only then, your trajectory can be plotted. Retrospectively. | |||
Once you Mr. Arrow´d hit the target. Then, working backward from the movement´s end. | |||
Before that you just throw yourself into the future. | |||
Revision as of 03:57, 13 March 2012
...
Z: Let´s say I shoot this arrow.
H: Hmm.
Z: Well let´s rather think I am this arrow…
H: Alright.
Z: So if we were to think my path we would agree it is a linear trajectory.
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: 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.
Z: The problem is that between one point on a line and the next, there is an infinity of points.
Z: Of course is in the nature of infinity that you can never get to the end of it.
So if I occupy any 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. (Frantically
Z: No? You see! (Z points at the drawing)
My path implodes and the trajectory becomes an infinity of points. I am stuck.
H: You are stuck in thought!
Z: Aaaargghhh! No. I get swallowed up in the transitional infinity.
H: Or if you moved it is because it was never any point. A path is not composed of points.
It´s a dynamic unity. It doesn´t stop till it stops! Then, and only then, your trajectory can be plotted. Retrospectively. Once you Mr. Arrow´d hit the target. Then, working backward from the movement´s end.
Before that you just throw yourself into the future.