What is the smallest positive integer that cannot be defined in less than twenty-five syllables?

(In reply to re(5): Tentative solution REVISED (reply to Sam) by Ady TZIDON)

>> So pay attention: "smallest positive integer that cannot be defined in less than twenty-five syllables" defines the said number in less than twenty-five syllables.
Capisce??

 

I'm not exactly sure exactly what it is that I'm supposed to "capisce". Is there an answer hidden somewhere there? That's less that a quarter of the paradox you've just posted above.

I am distressed to see a reemergence of the huge egos and agression that seemed to have died down a while ago. A puzzle is a puzzle. A paradox is a paradox. Something posted on perplexus is designed to get people thinking, not designed to have the people posting answers attempt to prove their superiority over the person posting the puzzle.

Comments like "So pay attention: ... capisce??" merely show a rather pointless agressive attitude. Comments like "The great Godel has fallen into a well-known trap: trying to be original in thought without first humbling himself before the superior wisdom of the Ancient Greeks" merely show an ego vastly superior that anyone who has not yet written a book pointing out Godel's flaws.

 

I guess I've fallen into SK's trap when he first started to encounter this, and my own after "Proof of Anything." I should have learnt by now not to respond to sillyness, but am a little drunk after Senior Cocktails and wanted simply to correct the above comment that appears to think it somehow "solves" something. Silly me.

Posted by Sam on 2004-04-16 02:35:57