The Ol' fly on a windshield conumdrum

[FireFly]

In logic, the incorrect assumption is that if the fly stopped, the car had to also stop. You skipped a step. Why does the car have to stop, just because the fly does? The answer: it doesn't. The flaw in logic is easy to point out, as such, you should never owe anyone a beer over this question.

I'm drunk and apparently missed a spot. But yeah, it was all explained anyways so you should still not owe a beer.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Circa89

pt.2 Do you agree that if something is travelling in a straight line and then reverses it had to stop at somepoint? Yes, I agree

This is the incorrect assumption. For the fly to actually reverse direction, it would then be flying ass-first backwards. It isn't. It hasn't reversed direction, it has changed direction.

[Sparks]

I would guess that the impulse that the train would exert on the fly would be so massive that the fly would accellerate to the speed of the train virtually instantaneously. I'm not sure that the fly's velocity would ever truly be zero.

Don't quote me on it, though.

[gottabekd]

OR, instead of this fly on the windshield stuff...just there's always the old:

Put a coaster on top of your buddy's glass. Bet him $2 that you can drink the whole pint without touching the glass or removing the coaster.

Then enjoy your $2 pint.

Lame indeed.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by gottabekd

OR, instead of this fly on the windshield stuff...just there's always the old:

Put a coaster on top of your buddy's glass. Bet him $2 that you can drink the whole pint without touching the glass or removing the coaster.

Then enjoy your $2 pint.

Lame indeed.

BEST IDEA EVER