cheem paradox

• unclebutcher

  29 Jul 07, 01:48

  Double Liar Paradox (Jourdain's paradox)
  
  This version of the famous paradox was presented by an English mathematician P. E. B. Jourdain in 1913.
  
  The following inscriptions are on a paper:
  Back side
  Inscription on the other side is true
  
  Face side
  Inscription on the other side is not true
  
  think carefully it will give u a headache
  
• tut4nkh4m3n

  29 Jul 07, 01:54

  there is no ans to it right? at least to me it seems that way.
• seotiblizzard

  29 Jul 07, 01:57

  HUH???
  Eh dun post all the cheem stuff.
• tut4nkh4m3n

  29 Jul 07, 01:58

  Originally posted by seotiblizzard:

  HUH???
  Eh dun post all the cheem stuff.

  lol he got headache alr..
• ChoCoChips

  29 Jul 07, 01:59

  eh dun keep posting new threads leh.
  later fifi ban u for flooding ah!
  
• unclebutcher

  29 Jul 07, 01:59

  Originally posted by ChoCoChips:

  eh dun keep posting new threads leh.
  later fifi ban u for flooding ah!
  

  i going to shui jiao liao
• Xtrider

  29 Jul 07, 02:05

  so wat is this suppose to show? do we know which is the face and which is the back?
• seotiblizzard

  29 Jul 07, 02:10

  Means black inside got white, white inside got black Or there are truth in untruths and untruths in truths or there is no truth in truths and untruths in untruths or that that its the truth that black got untruth and white untruth got black truths. Or isit that the white truths got black untruths or white truth in black truths and black untruths in white untruths.??
• ChoCoChips

  29 Jul 07, 02:11

  Originally posted by seotiblizzard:

  Means black inside got white, white inside got black Or there are truth in untruths and untruths in truths or there is no truth in truths and untruths in untruths or that that its the truth that black got untruth and white untruth got black truths. Or isit that the white truths got black untruths or white truth in black truths and black untruths in white untruths.??

  tongue twister?
• motoway

  29 Jul 07, 02:16

  Originally posted by seotiblizzard:

  Means black inside got white, white inside got black Or there are truth in untruths and untruths in truths or there is no truth in truths and untruths in untruths or that that its the truth that black got untruth and white untruth got black truths. Or isit that the white truths got black untruths or white truth in black truths and black untruths in white untruths.??

  
  wtf lol.
• seotiblizzard

  29 Jul 07, 02:20

  Originally posted by ChoCoChips:

  tongue twister?

  
  I duno.
• menokki

  29 Jul 07, 02:49

  It means a stalemate. Its called Paralysis by Analysis
• tut4nkh4m3n

  29 Jul 07, 02:56

  Originally posted by seotiblizzard:

  Means black inside got white, white inside got black Or there are truth in untruths and untruths in truths or there is no truth in truths and untruths in untruths or that that its the truth that black got untruth and white untruth got black truths. Or isit that the white truths got black untruths or white truth in black truths and black untruths in white untruths.??

  you must be retarded to be able to come up with somothing like that, dude!
  
  
• seotiblizzard

  29 Jul 07, 02:57

  Originally posted by tut4nkh4m3n:

  you must be retarded to be able to come up with somothing like that, dude!
  
  

  Y????
• yiha093

  29 Jul 07, 04:02

  wads a paradox
• tut4nkh4m3n

  29 Jul 07, 04:13

  Originally posted by seotiblizzard:

  Y????

  cos only you can understand it. haha, it's like your own lil language.
• tut4nkh4m3n

  29 Jul 07, 04:14

  Originally posted by yiha093:

  wads a paradox

  it's a statement or proposition which might reveal a truth. something like a theory, but sounding a lil more profound. lol.
• seotiblizzard

  29 Jul 07, 05:11

  Originally posted by tut4nkh4m3n:

  cos only you can understand it. haha, it's like your own lil language.

  Actually i dun understand it.
  i just anyhow type.
• AndrewPKYap

  29 Jul 07, 06:19

  What the 1st post tries to show is this...
  
  The first statement (A) says: "The statement on the other side is true" and the second statement (B) says about the statement (A) "The statement on the other side is untrue"
  
  If you believe the 1st statement (A) that (B) is true, then you cannot believe statement (A)
  
  (B) ask you not to believe (A)!
  
  and (A) asks you to believe (B)!
  
  So how?
  
  You believe (A), then you cannot believe (A) because (A) asks you to believe (B) but according to (B), you cannot believe (A).
  
  If you do not believe (A), that what (B) says is true, it, means you do not believe (B) is true since you do not believe what (A) says. [(A) says what (B) says is true but you do not believe (A) meaning that you believe what (B) says is untrue]
  
  If you do not believe (B) [since you do not believe (A) which says that (B) is true], then you must believe (A) because B) says (A) is untrue...
  
  So how? You believe (A) you are wrong and if you do not believe (A) you are wrong!
  
  This is what you call a logical conundrum.. hahahaha there is an answer but...
• MyPillowTalks

  29 Jul 07, 07:54

  side one: instruction on side 2 is true
  side two: instruction on side 1 is fake
  
  hmm........
  
  i can say that the paradox presented here is ambigious
  thus, i go surf other topic
• eagle

  29 Jul 07, 07:57

  U all actually go and bother about analysing the paradox... yawns...
• AndrewPKYap

  29 Jul 07, 08:39

  hello, thinking is what sets man apart from animals...
• AndrewPKYap

  29 Jul 07, 09:22

  but of course, thinking is also the reason why some people are worse than animals...
  
  but but but, that does not mean don't think... but think correctly...
• ouchtthurt

  29 Jul 07, 10:23

  Aiyo. Its just like the chicken and the egg.
• Gedanken

  29 Jul 07, 10:35

  Nothing that the good old Alexandrian solution can't handle.
  
  Vis-a-vis chicken-and-egg, why, it's the egg, of course.