Brain-Twisters

Postby Gothit » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:55 pm

Also known as Brain Busters and Brain Candy.
In your post, try to make a Brain Twister.
What is a brain twister?
Its hard to explain. Heres an example.

'I am a lier'

By saying it, I'm telling you I lie, but if I am a lier, then I lied about being a lier, thus meaning I'm not. But then I'd be lying, as I said I was a lier, but this means that I can't be lying as I lied about lying.

@_@
So, think you can get someone's brain in a twist?

Postby Fesselfan » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:09 am

I am allmighty.

Why is this a twister? If I were allmighty, I could create something which I can't destroy. Thus I am not allmighty. If I could destroy it, I am not allmighty either- because I couldn't create something I can't destroy.


Cheers!

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Postby Nuclearo » Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:06 am

EVERY rule has an exception, that's a rule.

Sort of a mild one. If every rule has an exception, this rule must have one too, creating an exeptionless rule making this one false.


btw, why make up weird names for paradoxes?
Join our irc channel!! http://chat.mibbit.com/#tugsnet It's fun!!

Postby Daniel » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:06 am

This scentence is not true.

If the above scentence is true, the scentence is not true, thus contradicting itself. On the other side, if the scentence is not true, then it isn't true that it's not true, making the scentence true. The scentence is true, but only when it's not true.

Think about that one.

Postby K.C. » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:56 pm

If you really wanna go "old school", you could bring up the age old question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Postby Nuclearo » Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:20 am

I thought I'd never see a true chicken or egg debate. Isn't the whole point of the question to end up in a cycle and make little kids think about it for hours? I truly have no idea how this is, too, a religious debate.

new paradox: let's say there are two people, A runs 10 times faster than B. They have a race, and B gets to start 10 meters ahead.
Who will win?

The idea of this one is as follows: by the time the A to where B was at the start, B is 1 meter ahead. When A gets there, B is 10cm ahead of him and so on, so theoretically, A can never pass B, even if he's faster and the race never ends.
Join our irc channel!! http://chat.mibbit.com/#tugsnet It's fun!!

Re: Id have to say...

Postby Nuclearo » Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:33 am

vailaholic wrote:I have not given a clear answer on the chicken question yet. My answer is neither. The question's purpose was simply to make people think and confuse the crap out of them. Clearly.... it's working. I don't think that the question was really meant to be analyzed to this extent.


Haven't I said this already?
Join our irc channel!! http://chat.mibbit.com/#tugsnet It's fun!!

Postby zme » Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:18 pm

*runs to find the ib profin... *

Postby K.C. » Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:45 pm

I guess you could consider it an oxymoron...

Postby OGgrl93 » Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:13 pm

Do you walk to work, or carry your lunch?
my dad says thats all the time :P

Re: Brain-Twisters

Postby Sounder » Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:16 pm

From Wikipedia:
The name 'Sorites' derives from the Greek word for heap. The paradox is so-named because of its original characterization, attributed to Eubulides of Miletus. The paradox goes as follows: consider a heap of sand from which grains are individually removed. One might construct the argument, using premises, as follows:

1,000,000 grains of sand is a heap of sand. (Premise 1)
A heap of sand minus one grain is still a heap. (Premise 2)
Repeated applications of Premise 2 (each time starting with one less number of grains), eventually forces one to accept the conclusion that a heap may be composed of just one grain of sand (and if you follow premise 2 again, composed of no grains at all! (and then a heap of zero grains minus one will have to be a heap too...)).

On the face of it, there are some ways to avoid this conclusion. One may object to the first premise by denying 1,000,000 grains of sand makes a heap. But 1,000,000 is just an arbitrarily large number, and the argument will go through with any such number. So the response must deny outright that there are such things as heaps. This is Unger's proposal. Alternatively, one may object to the second premise by stating that it is not true for all collections of grains that removing one grain from it still makes a heap. Or one may accept the conclusion by insisting that a heap of sand can be composed of just one grain.

Alternatively, one may define a heap inductively instead of by reduction, and make the rules as follows:

100,000 grains of sand is a heap of sand.
A heap of sand plus one grain is still one heap of sand.
and adjust the number in the first premise to an arbitrary, but well-defined value for a heap.


[edit] Variations
This paradox can be reconstructed for a variety of predicates, for example, with "tall", "rich", "old", "blue" and so on. Bertrand Russell argues, in his paper titled 'Vagueness', that all of natural language, even logical connectives, are vague; most views do not go that far, but it is certainly an open question.

Re: Brain-Twisters

Postby Sounder » Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:18 pm

Image

Re: Brain-Twisters

Postby Soul_Rebel » Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:27 am

^^ Lol to sounder's!
Whips and chains may break my bones, but ropes and gags excite me!

The image in my avatar is the work of Vonnart

"Duct tape makes you smart." - Michael Weston