```Date: Apr 22, 2013 7:27 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology §252

On 21 Apr., 21:32, netzweltler <reinhard_fisc...@arcor.de> wrote:> On 21 Apr., 18:06, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > On 21 Apr., 16:56, netzweltler <reinhard_fisc...@arcor.de> wrote:>> > > If non-measurable distances don't exist, don't we face another> > > problem? Let's say, d is the smallest distance that can be measured.> > > Distances below d don't exist. So, d/2 is a non-existing distance. Is> > > it still valid, that d/2 + d/2 = d then? I mean, how can distance d> > > exist, if it is composed of two non-existing distances d/2?->> > The old problem of Aristotle: How can a resting body come to move?> > There must be a point of time where rest and movement are> > simultaneously realized. But that is impossible.>> > Concerning mathematics, there is d/2 even for d = 10^-1000000 fm.> > Thats facilitated by invention of the system of fractions. But you had> > asked for real atoms.>> Yes. I am still asking for _real_ distances.>> If there is a d/2 for any d, how can we say, that the number of> positions of an atom is finite?In reality there is not a d/2 for every d. The shortest possible wavecannot be shortened and cannot be used to find a shorter d than itswavelength or a finite fraction of it. Further, if the shortestpossible wave is created, there are no atoms marking a distance anylonger and no men to measure it, because all energy has been used tocreate the wave.Regards, WM
```