The complex dialectic formed by the 4 arguments concerning motion will be exposed.

Source of illustration image: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z%C3%A9non_d%27%C3%89l%C3%A9e#/media/Fichier:Zeno_of_Elea_Tibaldi_or_Carducci_Escorial.jpg

I gladly agreed to give my opinion on the manuscript in question; but as it was not exactly the Zenon paradoxes that I had already examined in detail, I had to (re)immerse myself in the bibliography concerning specifically the paradox under discussion (i.e. either read again in detail articles that I had previously read diagonally, or discover other articles). In short, after a full week of work on this subject, I have produced 8 pages of comments (which I tried to be as constructive as possible)!

This little experience encourages me well to continue my (solitary) work in HPS, with as a bonus a thanks from the editor (below) that I see as a little extra encouragement.

“Dear Mael, thanks so much for your detailed referee report on the Zeno manuscript for JGPS. Your comments are very much appreciated and will greatly help the author(s). Thanks for the efforts you have put into this.”

It is in the ‘Notable Writings’ section of the book ‘The Best Writing on Mathematics 2019’ : https://books.google.fr/books?id=9yaWDwAAQBAJ (direct access to the quote here)

It is quite surprising that my article is cited in this type of book, given that I am explaining that mathematics is absolutely useless for solving the paradoxes in question. It is thus necessary to believe that the purely logical aspect of my resolution of the paradoxes pleased the mathematicians who proposed my article.

It’s certainly rather long, but it should be remembered that I was starting from almost nothing (i.e. that I had a big bibliographical research to do), that I didn’t work at all on this article project during my two full time positions in chemistry (which is why I then negotiated part-time post-doc contracts afterwards), and that I sometimes had periods of discouragement (always working alone on a project is not ideal in this respect!), and/or periods when my passion for panoramic photography was a bit (too) out of control !!

My participation proposal was selected for the “Illusion and Disillusionment” Study Day on June 16, 2020 organized by the Philo’Doctes association

more info here (french) : http://philo-doctes.paris-sorbonne.fr/spip.php?article236 and there : http://philo-doctes.paris-sorbonne.fr/spip.php?article239

Source of illustration image: http://www.sorbonne-universite.fr/universite

Connections between mathematics and the paradoxes of Zeno’s movement will then be examined in great detail.

Source of illustration image: https://www.futura-sciences.com/sciences/actualites/mecanique-quantique-effet-zenon-nouvelle-preuve-cette-etrangete-quantique-60252/

I am happy to have had the opportunity to present part of my research work during the conference on March 3 of the HiPhiS 2020 seminar cycle

more info here (french) : https://epistemologie.umontpellier.fr/hiphis/conferences.html#4634

The main content of this presentation comes largely from my first article (Foundations of Science 2018) to which was added results from the very first version of this article (which was refused for publication, partly because of too much long, then had to be shortened).

Here are the slides (in french) of my presentation below:

Sources de l’image d’illustration : https://www.babelio.com/auteur/Parmenide-dElee/15651 https://www.matierevolution.fr/spip.php?article4371 http://coyote-physique.e-monsite.com/pages/ts/energie-matiere-et-rayonnement/thermodynamique.html https://www.centredessciencesdemontreal.com/blogue/de-quoi-est-compose-l-atome

The results of my work concerning the famous paradoxes of Zeno of Elea, where I conclude that they are in reality paradoxes of immobility!

Why Zeno’s Paradoxes of Motion are Actually About Immobility. Foundations of Science, 2018, 23 (4), pp.649-679. ⟨10.1007/s10699-017-9544-9⟩

Published on-line on Nov. 8th 2017

Abstract : Zeno’s paradoxes of motion, allegedly denying motion, have been conceived to reinforce the Parmenidean vision of an immutable world. The aim of this article is to demonstrate that these famous logical paradoxes should be seen instead as paradoxes of immobility. From this new point of view, motion is therefore no longer logically problematic, while immobility is. This is convenient since it is easy to conceive that immobility can actually conceal motion, and thus the proposition “immobility is mere illusion of the senses” is much more credible than the reverse thesis supported by Parmenides. Moreover, this proposition is also supported by modern depiction of material bodies: the existence of a ceaseless random motion of atoms—the ‘thermal agitation’—in the scope of contemporary atomic theory, can offer a rational explanation of this ‘illusion of immobility’. Our new approach to Zeno’s paradoxes therefore leads to presenting the novel concept of ‘impermobility’, which we think is a more adequate description of physical reality.

Read the article below:

Download article from HAL

Télécharger la version en français sur HAL

Open Bibliography #1: All articles and books cited in this article are available here

Source of the illustration image : https://www.futura-sciences.com/sciences/actualites/mecanique-quantique-effet-zenon-nouvelle-preuve-cette-etrangete-quantique-60252/