List of paradoxes

Last updated

This list includes well known paradoxes, grouped thematically. The grouping is approximate, as paradoxes may fit into more than one category. This list collects only scenarios that have been called a paradox by at least one source and have their own article in this encyclopedia. Although considered paradoxes, some of these are simply based on fallacious reasoning (falsidical), or an unintuitive solution (veridical). Informally, the term paradox is often used to describe a counter-intuitive result.

Contents

However, some of these paradoxes qualify to fit into the mainstream viewpoint of a paradox, which is a self-contradictory result gained even while properly applying accepted ways of reasoning. These paradoxes, often called antinomy, point out genuine problems in our understanding of the ideas of truth and description.

Logic

Self–reference

These paradoxes have in common a contradiction arising from either self-reference or circular reference, in which several statements refer to each other in a way that following some of the references leads back to the starting point.

Vagueness

See also List of Ship of Theseus examples

Mathematics

Statistics

Probability

The Monty Hall problem: which door do you choose? Monty open door.svg
The Monty Hall problem: which door do you choose?

Infinity and infinitesimals

  • Benardete's paradox: Apparently, a man can be "forced to stay where he is by the mere unfulfilled intentions of the gods".
  • Grim Reaper paradox: An infinite number of assassins can create an explicit self-contradiction by scheduling their assassinations at certain times.
  • Grandi's series: The sum of 1−1+1−1+1−1... can be either one, zero, or one-half.
  • Ross–Littlewood paradox: After alternately adding and removing balls to a vase infinitely often, how many balls remain?
  • Thomson's lamp: After flicking a lamp on and off infinitely often, is it on or off?

Geometry and topology

The Banach-Tarski paradox: A ball can be decomposed and reassembled into two balls the same size as the original. Banach-Tarski Paradox.svg
The Banach–Tarski paradox: A ball can be decomposed and reassembled into two balls the same size as the original.

Decision theory

Physics

A demonstration of the tea leaf paradox

Astrophysics

Classical mechanics

Cosmology

Electromagnetism

Quantum mechanics

Relativity

Thermodynamics

Biology

Health and nutrition

Chemistry

Time travel

  • Grandfather paradox: If one travels back in time and kills their grandfather before he conceives one of their parents, which precludes their own conception and, therefore, they could not go back in time and kill their grandfather.
  • Polchinski's paradox: A billiard ball can be thrown into a wormhole in such a way that it would emerge in the past and knock its incoming past self away from the wormhole entrance, creating a variant of the grandfather paradox.
  • Hitler's murder paradox: One can travel back in time and murder Adolf Hitler before he can instigate World War II and the Holocaust; but if he had never instigated that, then the murder removes any reason for the travel.

Linguistics and artificial intelligence

Philosophy

Mysticism

Economics

One class of paradoxes in economics are the paradoxes of competition, in which behavior that benefits a lone actor would leave everyone worse off if everyone did the same. These paradoxes are classified into circuit, classical and Marx paradoxes.

Perception

The vertical-horizontal illusion Vertical-horizontal illusion.png
The vertical–horizontal illusion

Politics

Psychology and sociology

Miscellaneous

See also

Related Research Articles

In philosophy and logic, the classical liar paradox or liar's paradox or antinomy of the liar is the statement of a liar that they are lying: for instance, declaring that "I am lying". If the liar is indeed lying, then the liar is telling the truth, which means the liar just lied. In "this sentence is a lie" the paradox is strengthened in order to make it amenable to more rigorous logical analysis. It is still generally called the "liar paradox" although abstraction is made precisely from the liar making the statement. Trying to assign to this statement, the strengthened liar, a classical binary truth value leads to a contradiction.

A paradox is a logically self-contradictory statement or a statement that runs contrary to one's expectation. It is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true or apparently true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion. A paradox usually involves contradictory-yet-interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time. They result in "persistent contradiction between interdependent elements" leading to a lasting "unity of opposites".

A tachyon or tachyonic particle is a hypothetical particle that always travels faster than light. Physicists believe that faster-than-light particles cannot exist because they are inconsistent with the known laws of physics. If such particles did exist they could be used to send signals faster than light. According to the theory of relativity this would violate causality, leading to logical paradoxes such as the grandfather paradox. Tachyons would exhibit the unusual property of increasing in speed as their energy decreases, and would require infinite energy to slow to the speed of light. No verifiable experimental evidence for the existence of such particles has been found.

In mathematical logic, Russell's paradox is a set-theoretic paradox published by the British philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell in 1901. Russell's paradox shows that every set theory that contains an unrestricted comprehension principle leads to contradictions. The paradox had already been discovered independently in 1899 by the German mathematician Ernst Zermelo. However, Zermelo did not publish the idea, which remained known only to David Hilbert, Edmund Husserl, and other academics at the University of Göttingen. At the end of the 1890s, Georg Cantor – considered the founder of modern set theory – had already realized that his theory would lead to a contradiction, as he told Hilbert and Richard Dedekind by letter.

Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical logic that are concerned with the limits of provability in formal axiomatic theories. These results, published by Kurt Gödel in 1931, are important both in mathematical logic and in the philosophy of mathematics. The theorems are widely, but not universally, interpreted as showing that Hilbert's program to find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all mathematics is impossible.

In logic, Richard's paradox is a semantical antinomy of set theory and natural language first described by the French mathematician Jules Richard in 1905. The paradox is ordinarily used to motivate the importance of distinguishing carefully between mathematics and metamathematics.

Moore's paradox concerns the apparent absurdity involved in asserting a first-person present-tense sentence such as "It is raining, but I do not believe that it is raining" or "It is raining, but I believe that it is not raining." The first author to note this apparent absurdity was George E. Moore. These 'Moorean' sentences, as they have become known, are paradoxical in that while they appear absurd, they nevertheless

  1. Can be true;
  2. Are (logically) consistent; and
  3. Are not (obviously) contradictions.

In philosophical epistemology, there are two types of coherentism: the coherence theory of truth, and the coherence theory of justification.

In philosophy, a supertask is a countably infinite sequence of operations that occur sequentially within a finite interval of time. Supertasks are called hypertasks when the number of operations becomes uncountably infinite. A hypertask that includes one task for each ordinal number is called an ultratask. The term "supertask" was coined by the philosopher James F. Thomson, who devised Thomson's lamp. The term "hypertask" derives from Clark and Read in their paper of that name.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">St. Petersburg paradox</span> Paradox involving a game with repeated coin flipping

The St. Petersburg paradox or St. Petersburg lottery is a paradox involving the game of flipping a coin where the expected payoff of the theoretical lottery game approaches infinity but nevertheless seems to be worth only a very small amount to the participants. The St. Petersburg paradox is a situation where a naïve decision criterion that takes only the expected value into account predicts a course of action that presumably no actual person would be willing to take. Several resolutions to the paradox have been proposed, including the impossible amount of money a casino would need to continue the game indefinitely.

Dialetheism is the view that there are statements that are both true and false. More precisely, it is the belief that there can be a true statement whose negation is also true. Such statements are called "true contradictions", dialetheia, or nondualisms.

In physics, Loschmidt's paradox, also known as the reversibility paradox, irreversibility paradox, or Umkehreinwand, is the objection that it should not be possible to deduce an irreversible process from time-symmetric dynamics. This puts the time reversal symmetry of (almost) all known low-level fundamental physical processes at odds with any attempt to infer from them the second law of thermodynamics which describes the behaviour of macroscopic systems. Both of these are well-accepted principles in physics, with sound observational and theoretical support, yet they seem to be in conflict, hence the paradox.

Infinite divisibility arises in different ways in philosophy, physics, economics, order theory, and probability theory. One may speak of infinite divisibility, or the lack thereof, of matter, space, time, money, or abstract mathematical objects such as the continuum.

A temporal paradox, time paradox, or time travel paradox, is a paradox, an apparent contradiction, or logical contradiction associated with the idea of time travel or other foreknowledge of the future. While the notion of time travel to the future complies with the current understanding of physics via relativistic time dilation, temporal paradoxes arise from circumstances involving hypothetical time travel to the past – and are often used to demonstrate its impossibility.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Physical paradox</span> Apparent contradiction in physical descriptions of the universe

A physical paradox is an apparent contradiction in physical descriptions of the universe. While many physical paradoxes have accepted resolutions, others defy resolution and may indicate flaws in theory. In physics as in all of science, contradictions and paradoxes are generally assumed to be artifacts of error and incompleteness because reality is assumed to be completely consistent, although this is itself a philosophical assumption. When, as in fields such as quantum physics and relativity theory, existing assumptions about reality have been shown to break down, this has usually been dealt with by changing our understanding of reality to a new one which remains self-consistent in the presence of the new evidence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Two envelopes problem</span> Puzzle in logic and mathematics

The two envelopes problem, also known as the exchange paradox, is a paradox in probability theory. It is of special interest in decision theory and for the Bayesian interpretation of probability theory. It is a variant of an older problem known as the necktie paradox. The problem is typically introduced by formulating a hypothetical challenge like the following example:

Imagine you are given two identical envelopes, each containing money. One contains twice as much as the other. You may pick one envelope and keep the money it contains. Having chosen an envelope at will, but before inspecting it, you are given the chance to switch envelopes. Should you switch?

In mathematics, an impossibility theorem is a theorem that demonstrates a problem or general set of problems cannot be solved. These are also known as proofs of impossibility, negative proofs, or negative results. Impossibility theorems often resolve decades or centuries of work spent looking for a solution by proving there is no solution. Proving that something is impossible is usually much harder than the opposite task, as it is often necessary to develop a proof that works in general, rather than to just show a particular example. Impossibility theorems are usually expressible as negative existential propositions or universal propositions in logic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boltzmann brain</span> Philosophical thought experiment

The Boltzmann brain thought experiment suggests that it might be more likely for a single brain to spontaneously form in a void, complete with a memory of having existed in our universe, rather than for the entire universe to come about in the manner cosmologists think it actually did. Physicists use the Boltzmann brain thought experiment as a reductio ad absurdum argument for evaluating competing scientific theories.

This article contains a discussion of paradoxes of set theory. As with most mathematical paradoxes, they generally reveal surprising and counter-intuitive mathematical results, rather than actual logical contradictions within modern axiomatic set theory.

The measure problem in cosmology concerns how to compute the ratios of universes of different types within a multiverse. It typically arises in the context of eternal inflation. The problem arises because different approaches to calculating these ratios yield different results, and it is not clear which approach is correct.

References

  1. Eldridge-Smith, Peter; Eldridge-Smith, Veronique (13 January 2010). "The Pinocchio paradox". Analysis. 70 (2): 212–215. doi:10.1093/analys/anp173. ISSN   1467-8284.
    As of 2010, an image of Pinocchio with a speech bubble "My nose will grow now!" has become a minor Internet phenomenon (Google search, Google image search). It seems likely that this paradox has been independently conceived multiple times.
  2. "Monty hall problem - Encyclopedia of Mathematics". encyclopediaofmath.org. Retrieved 8 December 2023.
  3. Wechsler, Sergio; Esteves, L. G.; Simonis, A.; Peixoto, C. (2005). "Indifference, Neutrality and Informativeness: Generalizing the Three Prisoners Paradox". Synthese. 143 (3): 255–272. ISSN   0039-7857.
  4. Newton, Roger G. (2002). Scattering Theory of Waves and Particles, second edition. Dover Publications. p. 68. ISBN   978-0-486-42535-1.
  5. Goddard, William A.; O’Keefe, Patricia M. (1971), Marcus, P. M.; Janak, J. F.; Williams, A. R. (eds.), "The Use of the GI Method in Band Calculations on Solids", Computational Methods in Band Theory: Proceedings of a Conference held at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York, May 14–15, 1970, under the joint sponsorship of IBM and the American Physical Society, The IBM Research Symposia Series, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 542–569, doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-1890-3_45, ISBN   978-1-4684-1890-3 , retrieved 8 December 2023
  6. Carnap is quoted as saying in 1977 "... the situation with respect to Maxwell's paradox", in Leff, Harvey S.; Rex, A. F., eds. (2003). Maxwell's Demon 2: Entropy, Classical and Quantum Information, Computing (PDF). Institute of Physics. p. 19. ISBN   978-0-7503-0759-8. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 November 2005. Retrieved 15 March 2010.
    On page 36, Leff and Rex also quote Goldstein and Goldstein as saying "Smoluchowski fully resolved the paradox of the demon in 1912" in Goldstein, Martin; Goldstein, Inge F. (1993). The Refrigerator and The Universe. Universities Press (India) Pvt. Ltd. p. 228. ISBN   978-81-7371-085-8. OCLC   477206415 . Retrieved 15 March 2010.
  7. Khasnis, A.; Lokhandwala, Y. (January–March 2002). "Clinical signs in medicine: pulsus paradoxus". Journal of Postgraduate Medicine. 48 (1): 46–9. ISSN   0022-3859. PMID   12082330 . Retrieved 21 March 2010. The "paradox" refers to the fact that heart sounds may be heard over the precordium when the radial pulse is not felt.
  8. Hidders, J. "Expressive Power of Recursion and Aggregates in XQuery" (PDF). Retrieved 23 May 2012.: Chapter 1, Introduction.
  9. Padma, T. V. (2014). "Developing countries: The outcomes paradox". Nature. 508 (7494): S14–S15. Bibcode:2014Natur.508S..14P. doi: 10.1038/508S14a . PMID   24695329. S2CID   4463164.
  10. Trapnell, P. D., & Campbell, J. D. (1999). "Private self-consciousness and the Five-Factor Model of Personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 284–304.