age ~63
from Phoenix, AZ
… Hence it does not follow that a thing is not in motion in a given time, just because it is not in motion in any instant of that time."[22]Bertrand Russell offered what is known as the "at-at theory of motion". It agrees that there can be no motion "during" a durationless instant, and conten...
…A similar position was also discussed by Bertrand Russell in chapter VI of Russell (1903), but later dropped in favour of a "no-classes" theory. See also Gottlob Frege 1895 for a critique of an earlier view defended by Ernst Schroeder.…