Hi this thread is actually devoted to Prince James and how we may be able to paradox the paradox so to speak.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It is best described by asking two comparative questions: 1] How many infintesimally thin planes can be fitted into the volume of a 12 inch brick? 2] How many zero thick planes can be fitted into the volume of a 12 inch brick? Now by using the words infinitely thin we are granting according to Prince James an ultimately smallest thickness in that infinitely can not reduce to zero. So there fore at it's smallest point it must have thickness. So therfore more zero thick planes by an infinite amount will fit into the volume of the 12 inch brick than planes that have thickness even if infinitely thin. So therefore zero is the only value that can be legitimately used infinitely with in a given volume where as infinitely small can not be granted the same priviledge as the use becomes irrational or illogical. The point being that the use of infinitey in these ways ends up always paradoxical. My main arguement to Prince james is that infinitey is an absolute notion and cannot be in any way limited to a given stop point or finish point as in his time segmented arguement using zenos paradox as it's founding. So if used commonly and in my opinoin incorrectly an infinite number of infinitely thin planes should fit into our 12 inch bricks volume. And the same would apply to zero think planes but I would bet that zero thick planes would be a better use of infinity than infinitely thin. [ because no matter how thin you go an infinitely thin plane will always have thickness where as a zero thick plane does not. Thus infinity poses a paradox when qualified using words like "thin" or "small" or "slow"] And thus it is worth debating I think to clarify this issue. Care to discuss? Could be fun!