Of course, it would be wise to heed Benacerraf’s words that the states of the jars before "t" = 1 do not logically determine the state at "t" = 1. Thus, neither Ross’s or Allis’s and Koetsier’s argument for the state of the jar at "t" = 1 proceeds by logical means only. Therefore, some extra premise must be introduced in order to say anything about the state of the jar at "t" = 1. Allis and Koetsier believe such an extra premise can be provided by the physical law that the marbles have continuous space-time paths, and therefore from the fact that for each "n", marble "n" is out of the jar for "t" < 1, it must follow that it must still be outside the jar at "t" = 1 by continuity. Thus, the contradiction, and the paradox, remains.