Zenon thinks like this: If we put a bean on the floor, it does not make any noise. And all the grains of a millet cake, released separately, do not make any noise, and at the same time all released, they give a pretty loud sound. It is clear, however, that this sound is a deception of our senses, for it is impossible to obtain some magnitude from gathering anything with nothing; anything can not come out of anything. Also, losing one hair from the head does not make baldness. Loss of all hair separately does not give baldness. And their simultaneous absence gives baldness, but this is only visible, because in this case something has come from nothing. A number of similar examples are also possible, where a real, real magnitude is obtained from apparent null values.
Some historians do not grasp the subtlety of Zenon's argument, and point out that the single begging grain already gives some kind of, albeit imperceptible, sound to our ordinary ear. They even talk about the upper threshold of perception of its compliance with irritation, and so on. But Zenon does not actually stop at any particular noise or sound, but takes into account the complexity, the state of each noise, and leads his division mentally until there is something contradictory inside, which can no longer be said to be a sound, so with the spatiality and divisibility of matter. Below are Zenon's famous arguments against the real existence of the movement. There is no movement when there is a fixed aim in front of us, "because what should be moving should be at the middle of its path before it reaches the ultimate goal." And to get to the middle, must first reach its environment and so on. And since the distance between the body and its purpose is infinitely divisible, it appears that the body would need an infinite amount of time to reach its goal-something that is unthinkable. It is also inconceivable to have the opposite assumption that infinite space travels in limited time.
Therefore, movement does not exist. The movement could not begin because between the state of rest and the state of motion lies an insurmountable, infinitely divisible gap, as it lies a gap, an infinitely divisible distance between the point where the body would be in its movement and the point we take for the beginning of movement. Because this argument is based on the division, the two-dimensional division of space, it is known as dichotomia. The best-known argument against the admission of movement is the so-called example of Achilles and the turtle. With it, Zenon points out that it can not be understood with reason and movement to a moving target, and therefore it is only apparently illusory. The fast-paced Achilles can not catch a tortoise that would move in front of him, because each time it's been a long distance, it will travel some distance. It would endlessly decrease but never reach zero, so Achilles will never reach the turtle. It is also known too much the argument with the flying arrow. The flying arrow is at all times at a resting place: the next moment is still at rest in another place, the third moment is at rest in the third place, and so on. At which point to take her, she is somewhere at rest. And it is inconceivable that movement from the summation of moments of rest.
So the movement of the arrow is just a trick, an illusion. The fourth argument against the movement, Zenon has drawn from his belief that time is measured according to the length of the bodies along which a moving body passes. He thinks like this: if there are bodies A and B and move one against the other, being the same in length and at the moment of divergence, they pass along a third similar to them lengthwise, but stationary body C, they will travel their own length for half of the time they need to pass the length of the fixed body, even though it is as long as their own length. It turns out that half the time is equal to the whole time. So there is only one illusion here; movement does not really exist.