83,205
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:(ii) As the number of scheduled participants increases, that probability tends to zero. | :(ii) As the number of scheduled participants increases, that probability tends to zero. | ||
:(iii) The more participants there are the more retarded the starting time (and content) of the meeting will be. <br> | :(iii) The more participants there are the more retarded the starting time (and content) of the meeting will be. <br> | ||
This is true of any meeting containing more than one person. (A single-person meeting, of course, ought not, in a sensible mind, count, at least since {{otto}} asserted through his maxim “[[convenimus ergo es]]”) | This is true of any meeting containing more than one person. (A single-person meeting, of course, ought not, in a sensible mind, count, at least since {{otto}} asserted its incoherence through his maxim “[[convenimus ergo es]]”). | ||
As a consequence of these axioms there is thus a lower ''and'' an upper bound on the number of people possible in a viable meeting of a given duration. <br> | As a consequence of these axioms there is thus a lower ''and'' an upper bound on the number of people possible in a viable meeting of a given duration. They, when allied to {{buchstein}}’s maxim lead one to the paradox that, to be meaningful, a meeting must have more than one, but fewer than two, people. There is a school of [[catholic]] thought that this is absolutely ''not'' a paradox, but is rather a profound truth about the universe.<br> |