Re: [s-d] [s-b] Logical Hand Grenade: 5 Seconds Later

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Jamie Dallaire
> <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  "3 minutes before the end of nday 8", I pay for retainer usurp the MoM.
> >  Right after that, I stop the clock.
> >  Therefore, nday 8 ends up not really ending, but rather the nday stays
> >  8 and the ndelay increases.
>
> Let's say I have a meeting at 13:00. I go to lunch an hour before the
> meeting and make this statement in an email. When I get back from
> lunch, I find out that the meeting has been rescheduled to 16:00. Does
> that mean I went out to lunch at 15:00? No.
>
> The action that was scheduled for 3 minutes before the end of nday 8
> occurred at the time that condition was true. Changing the end of the
> nday after the action has happened doesn't all of a sudden undo that
> action.

Indeed it doesn't. But in that case, you went to lunch one hour before
you THOUGHT the meeting would be held, not one hour before it WAS
held. There is a difference with the case we have here.

That said, I think it is correct to think that the temporal prime
directive does prevent my attempt at paradox from succeeding. Drats!

BP
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss