One argument states that there should be infinitely many marbles in the jar, because at each step before "t" = 1 the number of marbles increases from the previous step and does so unboundedly. A second argument, however, shows that the jar is empty. Consider the following argument: if the jar is non-empty, then there must be a marble in the jar. Let us say that that marble is labeled with the number "n". But at time "t" = 1 − 0.5"n" - 1, the "n"th marble has been taken out, so marble "n" cannot be in the jar. This is a contradiction, so the jar must be empty. The Ross–Littlewood paradox is that here we have two seemingly perfectly good arguments with completely opposite conclusions.