From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mathematics desk
< November 10	<< Oct | November | Dec >>	November 12 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

Contents 1 November 11 1.1 Is it a paradox?

[edit] November 11

[edit] Is it a paradox?

I made a to-do list which consists of

• Make a to-do list

Does this require any more work, or I am done? (Igny 00:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

I'd say you are done. You want a to-do list, and you have one. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 00:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No paradox here. Just a self-reference. — Kieff | Talk 02:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

But a self-rerefence can create a paradox.(Igny 04:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

Suppose you go to the store and buy groceries. A week later, you run out. You write a to-do list that includes buy groceries. Are you done with that part?

Generally, a to-do list is telling you what to do after you make the list, so you'd need to make another to-do list. — Daniel 03:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Items placed on a to-do list are, by nature, a description of tasks to be done in the future. If there is nothing else "to-do," yet making a to-do list remains of paramount importance, then you will be writing that short one-item list for a very long time indeed. Sappysap 04:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh - no - you're not done. Look at your to-do list...it says you've got to make another to-do list. So make another to-do list, then cross the single entry off of the first list. Now you have two to-do lists and they are BOTH empty - so NOW you're done. SteveBaker 05:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

It says only to "make a to-do list." It doesn't say what is to be on that list. It doesn't necessarily have to say "make a to-do list." It could say "stop making to-do lists." ... But what if the second list says "ignore first to-do list"? — Michael J 07:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Your thinking however is close related to a paradox in naive set theory which lead to the now common ZFC axiomization of set theory. (I think it was called Russell's paradox but I'm not sure.) A math-wiki 10:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I started out in the direction of "Does the to-do list that lists all todo-lists that list a to-do list, contain itself?", but it's not a paradox, since it's not self-reference. Just recursion. Of course, when you're making a to-do list, you can start with "Make this to do list" (to be crossed off when you've finished writing the list). Then you can imagine the to-do list that tells you to make all such to do lists (ie., the set of all sets that contain themselves). Then there's also the to-do list that tells you to make all to-do lists that that do not contain "make this to-do list". Does that list tell you to make itself? That is, I think, roughly equivalent to Russel's paradox. risk 19:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure where, but I heard of a guy who had his book translated into French by a friend, and added at the end (in French), "I would like to thank my friend for helping me translate the preceding book. I would like to thank my friend for helping me translate the preceding sentence. I would like to thank my friend for helping me translate the preceding sentence." Why did he stop after two? Black Carrot 21:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Humorous effect I believe :) A math-wiki (talk) 10:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)