3 ms·
I'm with Hendry, the guy who said the paradox is an illusion. I figured it was rapid change within a stable envelope within a few sentences of starting the arti
by andrewflnr 3y ago
I'm with Hendry, the guy who said the paradox is an illusion. I figured it was rapid change within a stable envelope within a few sentences of starting the article, but I waited for the other shoe to drop, because there must be something trickier if people have spent so much time on it ... It turns out the other shoe is "but now we have data about the details". Which is good, but nowhere near as dramatic as they make it out to be. You can see the outline of the solution just by thinking about the question for a second.
- jibal 3y agoThat just restates the paradoxical observation, like Moliere's virtus dormativa. It doesn't explain why rapid change results in a stable envelope.
- andrewflnr 3y agoYeah, I said the data was a good thing. But your critique circularly assumes there was a paradox to begin with. It's like being mystified that an object oscillating on a spring stays close to the spring's anchor point. A question as to mechanism, sure, but not a paradox.
- jibal 3y agoThere's no circularity in what I wrote, nor did I assume that there is a paradox, and the whole comment is a whatabouting deflection.