fastest 100 metres

Time aspect
I think you have to take time into account. It may take a year to shave off the next .01 sec, but the 0.01 sec after that may take three years and the 0.01 sec after that may take 10 years. There would always be the possibility of breaking the record, but it gets progressively smaller.

Then they really ban steriods and it becomes impossible.

What if we have eternity to shave time off the record?

Interesting to contemplate
That is like the "million monkeys at typewriters" supposition. They're never going to write "War and Peace", but there is always a small probability of it. Same with your question. There is always a small probability that the record will be broken no matter how good it is, but will it actually be broken, then broken again? Not likely.

Re: fastest 100 metres


In that you failed to take into account (in your post at least) that it can be broken a number of times without approaching "no time", thereby debunking the notion of mutual exclusivity between breaking of the record and failing to approach "no time".

Welcome back to Science, Craven. Where you been keeping yourself?

Been pretty busy, and my a2k time is generally dedicated to maintenance and code these days.

Too bad. Well, nice to see you.

Re: fastest 100 metres
Craven. Would you mind explaining that a little more? I still don't see how you could break the record (shorten the time taken to run the race) without approaching (even if by a tiny increment) 'no time'.

I don't agree that it is similar to the monkey typing scenario as attempting the record is not a chance happening, rather something that people strive for. No matter what the record is there will still be someone working to break it. Do you suppose that one day it will be run in a time that no-one will beat EVER. How long will people try before giving up and trying another sport? Coming to think of it the same can be applied to to many sports.

There is an error in your under understanding of infinity. Craven said it correctly, but let me offer an example.

Imagine this scenario.

We start with 100 meters being run in 10 seconds.
The next year the time is 9 seconds
the next year the time is 8.5 seconds
the next year the time is 8.25 seconds
the next year the time is 8.125 second

If you haven't gotten it, each year the time between the current best time and 8 seconds is cut in half.

Using a pattern like this, every year for infinity, the record can be beaten, but the time will never be lower than 8 seconds.

So, mathematically it is possible to keep getting better forever without reaching 8 seconds (or reaching no time).

Gotcha. Cheers. Like the 'how long will a piece of chocolate last if you eat half every day' gag.

The only problem will be in the measurement of the time.