Was Zeno wrong about the necessary implications of the divisibility of continua, or was he merely inconvenient?
1) “Mathematicians claim to have done away with Zeno’s paradoxes with rigorous analysis of the units of distance and time involved in the problem, and the invention of the calculus and methods of handling infinite sequences by Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in the 17th century, and then again when certain problems with their methods were resolved by the reformulation of the calculus and infinite series methods in the 19th century. The paradoxes certainly pose no problems in engineering either, as the practical questions as to where and when events such as Achilles passing the Tortoise are satisfactorily handled by unit analysis and calculus. However, some philosophers insist that the deeper metaphysical questions, as raised by Zeno’s paradoxes, are not addressed by the calculus. That is, while calculus tells us where and when Achilles will overtake the Tortoise, philosophers do not see how calculus takes anything away from Zeno’s reasoning that concludes that this event can
