@JosephWeissman Well another odd thing with infinitesimals is by their own definition, having more than one infinitesimal would still leave it as an immeasurable distance, as being able to measure the size of more than one infinitesimal (assuming you know how many of them you're measuring), you would be able to deduce the size of a single one as well, simply by division.

The rationale behind my last question was basically that the paradox relies on infinite division of distance being asymptotic. However having an "absolute" minimum for distance would make the function behave initially the same as if that minimum didn't exist, but as soon as the minimum is reached further division is impossible and the trend becomes linear, thus progress is made.

hi