My Bicycle Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Why didn't AV reply to this post?

Why should I?

1) I'm only looking for two numbers.

2) It looks like he is basically agreeing with me.

3) He said we are not talking about bicycles, but I clearly am; and one bicycle in particular.

If he doesn't want to respect my OP, that's his prerogative; but I don't feel I'm obligated to answer.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Why should I?

1) I'm only looking for two numbers.

2) It looks like he is basically agreeing with me.

3) He said we are not talking about bicycles, but I clearly am; and one bicycle in particular.

If he doesn't want to respect my OP, that's his prerogative; but I don't feel I'm obligated to answer.

He wasn't agreeing with you, he was pointing out how pointless the OP is.

 

[Tiberius]

Does it matter?

Let's say I'm a factory outlet, and I placed them there from inside the factory, just a few yards away.

If you're a factory outlet, can I be a steam engine?

I want to be a 747 that was magically assembled from the parts in a junkyard being randomly blown about by a tornado.

 

[AV1611VET]

I want to be a 747 that was magically assembled from the parts in a junkyard being randomly blown about by a tornado.

QV please:

AV, if you aren't going to add anything of value, please go and play somewhere else. If you are going to post, play by the rules I laid down in the OP, okay?

 

[keith99]

This is the inverse of the philosophical conundrum known as The Ship of Theseus. The Athenians preserved the original ship of the hero Theseus for hundreds of years. As one board rotted or was infested with vermin, etc, it would be replaced with new wood. Eventually there was no original wood left on the ship. Is it still the same ship? If not, at what point did it cease to be the Ship of Theseus?

Another conumdrum, which combines the original Ship of Theseus with the inverse is "Which is the real Nick Chopper?" In the later Oz books, we learn that the Tin Woodsman was originally a real human being named Nick Chopper, who was cursed by one of the wicked witches. (I don't remember which one, but that's not important.) Under the curse, a missed swing of his axe took off an arm, and he had a tinsmith build him an artificial one. But the curse was not finished, and one by one he lost and replaced aAnd ll of his body parts until he was entirely made of tin.

In the meantime, the witch had made a golem or robot for herself, and every time Nick lost a body part, he would get it and would use it to replace the corresponding body part on her creation. So once the woodsman was all tin, the robot was all flesh -- Nick's flesh. So which was the "real" Nick Chopper?

Each of these versions of the conundrum has several proposed solutions, but there is no

Another interesting question is how old is a army regiment? For simplicity let's assume one copmpletely new. Most of us would say it was 'born' when the regiment was created. But is that when authorized or when ther are actual men in it? If it persists it starts with all its parts older than the regiment, but over time it may have some and eventually all teh men in the regiment beingyounger than the regiment itself.

So far nothing new. But with War new regiments are formed and when the war ends some are deactivated. Next war a regiment may be reactivated with the same colors and often many of the same traditions.

How old is the regiment then? And which is older one that has existed without interruption for 100 years or one that was first formed 1000 years ago but was disbanded after 20 and only reactivated 5 years ago?

That is the problem with trying to sum up too much in one number.

 

[Tiberius]

QV please:

Fine, I'll play by your rules.

But first, tell me how you want me to measure age. Is it the age of the atoms, the amount of time that those atoms have been on Earth, the amount of time that they have been in a component of a bicycle, or the length of time that they have been a component of the bicycle you built from all those spare parts?

because, as you phrased the questions in your OP, both of them can have several answers.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Physically the bike may either be 3 yearsd or over, as that is at least the age of the ones the parts were taken from.

The newly assembled bike is brand new.

BTW I think that the idea of creation ex nihilo (from nothing, rather than from pre-existent material) was developed in the early church as a response to the influence of Aristotle.

 

[AV1611VET]

Physically the bike may either be 3 yearsd or over, as that is at least the age of the ones the parts were taken from.

The newly assembled bike is brand new.

BTW I think that the idea of creation ex nihilo (from nothing, rather than from pre-existent material) was developed in the early church as a response to the influence of Aristotle.

What was Australia before it was called 'Australia'?

 

[Tiberius]

What was Australia before it was called 'Australia'?

The fact that it suddenly gained a name did not alter what it was, AV. What point are you trying to make?

And, I'll ask again, how do you want me to measure the age of the bike?

 

[Freodin]

Physically the bike may either be 3 yearsd or over, as that is at least the age of the ones the parts were taken from.

The newly assembled bike is brand new.

Too simple. Too.... AV.

If the bike is "physically" as old as the age of its parts... how old are the parts? Which age of the parts do you use? Don't they as well have a "physical" and an "existential" age?

No, this way of thinking is incorrect. The examples given here - and many that could be made - show the flaw of such an approach.

The true approach is a lot more complex and complicated. There are several possible events that can signify the "beginning" of something... it is the dating of these events, and only that, that establishes the "age" of something. And thus there is only one age.

Correction: if you really want to attribute different "ages" to an object, with a "physical age" (for which I would like to see AV's definition) somehow dealing with the age of the components... the physical age of the bicycle would be [13.7] billion years.

The same physical age as of everything else.

Which makes it quite nonsensical to use as a differator.

 

[Tiberius]

The fact that it suddenly gained a name did not alter what it was, AV. What point are you trying to make?

And, I'll ask again, how do you want me to measure the age of the bike?

Still waiting for an answer, AV...

 

[AV1611VET]

Still waiting for an answer, AV...

1

 

[Tiberius]

That doesn't answer my question, AV.

What technique do you want me to use to measure the bike?

 

[AV1611VET]

That doesn't answer my question, AV.

What technique do you want me to use to measure the bike?

I don't want you to measure the bike.

I want you to take just the information supplied in the OP and answer with two numbers, not twenty questions.

 

[Freodin]

I don't want you to measure the bike.

I want you to take just the information supplied in the OP and answer with two numbers, not twenty questions.

Knowing your habit of QVing all of your old posts, it is easier for me to ask you than to wade through your counting threads to search for informations.

So I have to ask: did you ever explain what "physical age" is in your view? If you did, can you repost or link to it?

For without such a definition, it is impossible to find out just what number you are looking for.

 

[Skaloop]

I don't want you to measure the bike.

I want you to take just the information supplied in the OP and answer with two numbers, not twenty questions.

The problem is, AV, that whenever we do answer correctly (or, at least, in the correct manner), like I did in post #31, you still don't have anything to offer by way of explanation. You challenge us to do something, we do it, and that seems to be it. There's no payoff. It's like finding that the treat at the bottom of the cereal box is a little bag of cereal; people expect something more.

 

[Tiberius]

I don't want you to measure the bike.

I want you to take just the information supplied in the OP and answer with two numbers, not twenty questions.

You want me to tell you the age of the bike.

Define "Age".

Is it the number of times that the bike in that configuration has gone around the sun? (That seat on that frame with those handlebars with those wheels)

Is it the number of times that the individual parts have gone around the sun? (The time since they were created)

Is it the number of times the atoms making up those parts have gone around the sun?

 

[Freodin]

I want you to take just the information supplied in the OP and answer with two numbers, not twenty questions.

25.95

176322

Happy now?

 

[AV1611VET]

I have a lot containing 100 brand-new shiny bicycles that I leave sitting out in the elements.

After three years, they are rusty & dirty.

I then build a bicycle, using one part from each of the bicycles: a seat from one, handlebars from another, front tire from another, chain from another, etc.

Two questions:

1. How old is the new bicycle physically?
2. How old is the new bicycle existentially?

Well?

 

[quatona]

Well?

You want to talk about creatio ex materia, for a change?