Zeno's Paradox of Motion: The Arrow -- Part III

Motion Through Time and Consciousness
I would like to make yet another argument for motion, in a sense, relating it to spacetime. Aristotle said that time is the measure of motion. What he meant was that any change was motion. Movement can be defined as an objects motion through time. Time passes; therefore, any change can be categorized as movement. We experience time or we are conscious of time therefore we must assume that it exists. In this we can assume the premise that movement can be categorized as an objects experience through time.

Furthermore, in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, the rate of a clock as well as material change is lowered within a fast moving system. The closer the object moves to the speed of light the slower time moves. Motion effects time. Time is merely a by-product of motion. Essentially clocks "clock up" motion, not time.

Again, motion can be described as an objects, (the arrow) physical change from one state to another. Because of our own human consciousness we are able to observe the changes in time brought about by motion of that object. I believe that because of our notion of time and as we continually experience progressing time we can postulate that there is motion.

And so, if we incorporate what we know about motion, (or even the belief that there is not motion): that motion brings about change in time, that results from velocity of an object include potential energy as well as a resulting kinetic energy, and we also include what we observe through quantum mechanics: that objects move like we see movement on a movie reel, (single frames seen in quick succession) we must then reevaluate what we perceive as motion. I say this because of mainly the results we see from motion. Objects in motion effect too much to say that there is no motion. In fact there are results that you can only observer because of motion. If there was no motion and all was essentially an object “strobing” through space, than the simplest results we see from motion, (every action will cause an equal and opposite reaction) could not come about from motion.

I argue that motion cannot be defined as an object physically moving through space consecutively – even at a quantum level – but we can define motion by the results that we see come from an object moving through space or spacetime.

Conclusion
Over two thousand years after Zeno first introduced the world to his ideas of motion we still cannot determine a definitive conclusion to the paradox. Still philosophers, mathematicians and scientists cannot find an all inclusive answer to the question, “is there motion?” Though, it is hard to say for sure the results of this paper, I feel that redefining our view of motion, I feel, is the most conclusive resolution. When science can no longer, (or so far) give an answer to a question seemingly so simple, maybe it is time to redefine the original problem – motion.

Regardless, it is important to understand what these things imply. Our knowledge of the “now” is dependent on our experience through time. However, are definition differs when we understand more about motion. If Zeno was right, then the “now” can be understood differently. We can see a universe divided into moments – essentially frozen – and understand that we never really move. Our understanding of being changes. We are no longer objects in motion, or objects that experience through time. I feel this paradox is important to understand and to seek a further understanding of motion.