Spyderco Forums

And I just found this video of Mike Read's prototype which looks very similar:

The original PITS is one of my favorite Spyderco knives. The new one doesn't do much for me aesthetically, but it's still interesting.

What you are missing is the act of dividing '1' into infinite parts can continue forever. It can, but it doesn't have to. And dividing up a minute cannot continue "forever" by definition. You mean you can divide up the minute infinitely, which doesn't somehow magically make the parts sum ...

But no matter the constant nature of the sum of the total parts, you can stay in the process of incremental division FOREVER. Welcome to the paradox. Forever is a statement of time. The infinite division will be done after 100s, not forever. You're again confusing amount of actions with time, and c...

Here's a more interesting problem: You have a closed PM2 in your hand. After 1/2 a minute you flick it open. 1/4 a minute later you close it. 1/8 a minute after that you flick it open. You repeat this process until 1 minute total has passed. At that time will the knife be open or closed?

I don't think you've shown finite time. I gave you a mathematical proof. Can you explain what part of it is wrong? You're taking the thousand foot view of it and seeing the whole as finite. No, I calculated it from the bottom up. As I keep saying the paradox lies in the process of dividing. Which c...

Where does this end ? '...' What do you mean by "end?" It doesn't have a final term, if that's what you mean. It's an infinite sum. And if you reduce the time to complete the next step by a fraction (or another way to say it would be to increase the speed to complete the next step), don't...

Let me try again. We agree that you can divide a unit into infinite steps, yes? I think we agree. If we don't agree on this, we don't agree on the premise of the pardox. Of course. Imagine you are trying to write out every one of those steps, or take every one of those infinite steps. Can you expla...

You don't see the contradiction? It doesn't matter if the time it takes to cross the next half distance gets faster with each step, there's always another distance to cross. You can't reach the end of an infinite set of steps no matter how fast you go through them. There are endless 'infinite' step...

And here is where the pardox lies. Every number represents or describes a point in space. Like notches on a ruler. There are infinite numbers between two points. Do you see the pardox? It is both correct that a mile is a mile, and that you can divide it infinitely. I don't see the paradox. How does...

Well in this case we were talking about the "process" of halving space, so that process has no limit? Or in other words you could half space infinitely without end? That's the same as asking if there's a final number of the form 1/2^n. There isn't. There are infinite integers n and infini...

But math it seems to me takes some liberties that step over philosophy. The idea that an infinite sequence adds up to a finite number is incorrect to me. Try adding up a bunch of terms of the sequence 1/2+1/4+1/8+... and you'll quickly see they approach 1. They are never going above 1, let alone gr...

@Synov Thanks for typing all that out. Big thumbs up from a fellow mathematician, everything is spot on, a joy to read. Thanks benja-man, I've tried to hone this particular spiel over many years of internet discussions. When it comes to infinity and the physical world I'd like to add that our world...

Half the time it takes you say? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but as you 'approach' zero, can't you half the time infinitely if you keep making the fraction of time smaller? Yes, that's exactly why I said the number of fractional distances would be infinite. Sure, as you say you can add them all togethe...

Since this thread has been resurrected from its ghostly form, I thought I would take the opportunity for a math lesson. The way I've interpreted it is similarly to the Zeno's Paradox where if you travel half the distance between two points, and then half that distance, and half that distance and so ...

Well we know the Sage 5 in Rex 121 is coming at some point.

Lets say the chart shows 500 Total Cards Cut for some particular steel. That is only 1.64042 feet. It looks like the stack of cards to be cut is being moved over a 1 inch area of the blade. Are they saying that that one inch of blade can only cut 1.64042 feet of card material? The area of the blade...

When the graph says Total Cards Cut in mm, I am not sure how to visualize that. The stack of cards cut has a height in mm? I'm making an assumption here that is what the chart is showing. But the stack of cards to be cut has a width too...is it 2cm to 4cm? So the stack cut is for example, "500...

No problem Sal, I enjoy reading about your process for choosing steels.

The data makes me wonder if we are missing out on high edge retention steels that get better toughness from not being as extremely hard as Maxamet and Rex 121. It seems like that space is somewhat unexplored.

This may be controversial, but I think the Military 2 is currently the quintessential Spyderco, representing its current design language. Sorry Boomers