Fran Meana (Spain)

... 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.

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.

H: Before that you just throw yourself into the future.