Q&A: A Logical Impossibility or a Physical One?
A Logical Impossibility or a Physical One?
Question
Hello,
Is the writing on the Tablets, according to the interpretation of the Sages—that it was engraved all the way through, so that the samekh and final mem stood miraculously in place, while at the same time being "written on both sides"—a logical impossibility or only a physical one?
Likewise, "the place of the Ark did not take up any space" and "they stood crowded together but bowed with ample room," and the like.
If possible, please explain how to distinguish between these kinds of impossibility.
Answer
Excellent question. As a rule, any claim about the world is a physical impossibility, not a logical one. I discussed this in several columns, for example no. 50.
Discussion on Answer
You added two words. That doesn’t change the content. Read there.
I also read it, and it seems to me that I understood it (I hope).
Still, just for clarification, I’ll ask: according to the Rabbi’s view, what does count as a logical impossibility, if anything? The famous examples of a square whose diagonal equals its side, and the like—is that impossible even for the Holy One, blessed be He, or not?
If you keep Euclidean space.
Do you mean this?
It looks like the article gets cut off before the end.
In any case, before I read that column carefully, I didn’t quite understand what you wrote: is a triangle with four sides a "claim about the world" or not?