My Smyth Challenge

[[serious]]

On behalf of AV, I would like to issue this challenge:

Billy was the 3rd child born to Mrs Smyth. 9 years later, Mrs Smyth had a 4th son.

Using this definition of mythology:
"ideas that are believed by many people but that are not true"

... was Billy being the youngest son a myth?

And I would like to personally invite AV to come here, as the guest of honor, and answer it either YES or NO.

 

[juvenissun]

On behalf of AV, I would like to issue this challenge:

Billy was the 3rd child born to Mrs Smyth. 9 years later, Mrs Smyth had a 4th son.

Using this definition of mythology:
"ideas that are believed by many people but that are not true"

... was Billy being the youngest son a myth?

And I would like to personally invite AV to come here, as the guest of honor, and answer it either YES or NO.

No. It could be true for a while, but it most likely violates the first part of the definition.

 

[AV1611VET]

... was Billy being the youngest son a myth?

No.

(May I explain?)

 

[[serious]]

No.

(May I explain?)

Sure.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sure.

Billy, Mrs. Smyth's third son, is also his last son -- for nine years.

That is, from the outside looking in, Mrs. Smyth only has three children.

Then she has a fourth son added to the family.

In the case of Pluto -- (and I won't derail this thread with this) -- but in the case of Pluto, seen from the outside looking in (or down), Pluto never was our solar system's ninth planet, except on paper.

Yes, she was called our ninth planet from 1930-2006, but it was based on the limited information available at the time.

Getting back to Mrs. Smyth, suppose the person on the outside looking in happens to see, while she is pregnant with her [fourth] child, a son come home from the service.

Now the observer has to update his information.

She has four children, and is pregnant with her fifth child.

Using the definition in your OP then:

"ideas that are believed by many people but that are not true"

Billy being the youngest son is still true, but Billy being the "3rd child born to Mrs. Smyth" is a myth.

But then I'm adding to your OP ... so, whatever.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[Freodin]

Billy, Mrs. Smyth's third son, is also his last son -- for nine years.

That is, from the outside looking in, Mrs. Smyth only has three children.

Then she has a fourth son added to the family.

In the case of Pluto -- (and I won't derail this thread with this) -- but in the case of Pluto, seen from the outside looking in (or down), Pluto never was our solar system's ninth planet, except on paper.

Yes, she was called our ninth planet from 1930-2006, but it was based on the limited information available at the time.

Getting back to Mrs. Smyth, suppose the person on the outside looking in happens to see, while she is pregnant with her [fourth] child, a son come home from the service.

Now the observer has to update his information.

She has four children, and is pregnant with her fifth child.

Using the definition in your OP then:

Billy being the youngest son is still true, but Billy being the "3rd child born to Mrs. Smyth" is a myth.

But then I'm adding to your OP ... so, whatever.

I hope that makes sense.

To relate that back to the planetary question...

Let's say we have a system that provides financial support for children, up to the third child.

Billy is the third child of Mrs. Smyth. Nine years later, another son is born. Billy's oldest brother didn't survive his first week.

Will Mrs. Smyth get support for her newborn son?

 

[TillICollapse]

Billy, Mrs. Smyth's third son, is also his last son -- for nine years.

That is, from the outside looking in, Mrs. Smyth only has three children.

Then she has a fourth son added to the family.

In the case of Pluto -- (and I won't derail this thread with this) -- but in the case of Pluto, seen from the outside looking in (or down), Pluto never was our solar system's ninth planet, except on paper.

Yes, she was called our ninth planet from 1930-2006, but it was based on the limited information available at the time.

Getting back to Mrs. Smyth, suppose the person on the outside looking in happens to see, while she is pregnant with her [fourth] child, a son come home from the service.

Now the observer has to update his information.

She has four children, and is pregnant with her fifth child.

Using the definition in your OP then:

Billy being the youngest son is still true, but Billy being the "3rd child born to Mrs. Smyth" is a myth.

But then I'm adding to your OP ... so, whatever.

I hope that makes sense.

Billy is the 3rd child born to Mrs. Smyth whether she has 4 or 5 children born to her. If it's the 3rd child she gives birth to ... it's always the 3rd child she gives birth to, whether she has more or not. So it's not a myth that Billy is the 3rd child born to her.

Perhaps you meant to say that Billy being the youngest is a myth, while being the 3rd born is still true.

 

[Gottservant]

It's not a myth, it just subsequently needs to be further qualified.

From youngest, to youngest apart from number four.

 

[[serious]]

Billy, Mrs. Smyth's third son, is also his last son -- for nine years.

That is, from the outside looking in, Mrs. Smyth only has three children.

Then she has a fourth son added to the family.

In the case of Pluto -- (and I won't derail this thread with this) -- but in the case of Pluto, seen from the outside looking in (or down), Pluto never was our solar system's ninth planet, except on paper.

Yes, she was called our ninth planet from 1930-2006, but it was based on the limited information available at the time.

Getting back to Mrs. Smyth, suppose the person on the outside looking in happens to see, while she is pregnant with her [fourth] child, a son come home from the service.

Now the observer has to update his information.

She has four children, and is pregnant with her fifth child.

Using the definition in your OP then:

Billy being the youngest son is still true, but Billy being the "3rd child born to Mrs. Smyth" is a myth.

But then I'm adding to your OP ... so, whatever.

I hope that makes sense.

So it's almost like a change can occur outside of the object or person in question that changes how labels are applied to them. The fact that those changes will eventually occur does not make the use of those labels before the change incorrect. Instead, it only changes it going forward.

Hey wait a second, that sounds like pluto!