Poll: unstoppable object meets unmovable object
- Thread starter Joe Matsuda
- Start date
have there really been that many paradoxical questions lately?VGStrife said:
i just want confirmation on my theory
....people at my school never listen to me and say the unmovable would just stop (the morons)
An object is unstoppable only if its velocity cannot be acted upon to any effect by an outside force. With inertia, starting and stopping are essentially the same thing. For an object to be moving, something has to have acted upon it to start its motion, which is assumed impossible. Thus, the only unstoppable object is one that cannot be acted upon to move.Joe Matsuda said:
reminds me of the answer to the goose in the bottle paradox...
which was featured in the comic 52
...during a scene with batman!!!! holy crap it all makes sense now!
which was featured in the comic 52
...during a scene with batman!!!! holy crap it all makes sense now!
[quote="NeutralDrow"
An object is unstoppable only if its velocity cannot be acted upon to any effect by an outside force. With inertia, starting and stopping are essentially the same thing. For an object to be moving, something has to have acted upon it to start its motion, which is assumed impossible. Thus, the only unstoppable object is one that cannot be acted upon to move.[/quote]
hmmm..
when you put it that way....
guess that does makes sense...
An object is unstoppable only if its velocity cannot be acted upon to any effect by an outside force. With inertia, starting and stopping are essentially the same thing. For an object to be moving, something has to have acted upon it to start its motion, which is assumed impossible. Thus, the only unstoppable object is one that cannot be acted upon to move.[/quote]
hmmm..
when you put it that way....
guess that does makes sense...
This subject was actually made into a physics debate which, summed up, is this. Both objects have a mass of infinity, which would make them universes, and the collision of the two would result in the destruction of both, and there was debate if it would destroy all reality, but we all know that in the event such a thing would happen, Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee would form a fusion form and redirect the unstoppable object, and move the space around the immovable object so it is in the corner of the dimension.
None of the answers above.
The answer is...the unstoppable object hits the unmovable object and then the entire universe starts moving. Basically, the unmovable one is anchored to the universe, and the unstoppable one literally CAN'T stop. So, to satisfy all field, the universe has to give and thus the unstoppable object pushes the universe around while the unmovable one still sits stationary.
The answer is...the unstoppable object hits the unmovable object and then the entire universe starts moving. Basically, the unmovable one is anchored to the universe, and the unstoppable one literally CAN'T stop. So, to satisfy all field, the universe has to give and thus the unstoppable object pushes the universe around while the unmovable one still sits stationary.
i didnt know that!Demented Teddy said:
im sorry teddy =*(
*gives slightly burnt cookies to teddy*
Soulution 1: The immovable object is a hallow cylinder with a hole in each end, and the unstoppable object passes right through it.
Soulution 2: If the immovable object was, as stated, truly immovable, it would have defences against unstoppable objects. An example would be a anti-gravity field. When the unstoppable object passes through this, it does not decelerate, but still changes direction.
Soulution 2: If the immovable object was, as stated, truly immovable, it would have defences against unstoppable objects. An example would be a anti-gravity field. When the unstoppable object passes through this, it does not decelerate, but still changes direction.
The unstoppable object would bounce off the immovable one, with infinite/incalculable deceleration/acceleration, and instantly, over the course of 0 time, move in a completely different direction. Unstoppable object never stops, just changes vectors, and the immovable object does not move.
Yes, I realize the above explanation is impossible. But there's something else which is impossible too...
Yes, I realize the above explanation is impossible. But there's something else which is impossible too...
Yeah, this has kinda already been dismissed at various universities, and the solution is thus:
If an unstoppable force exists, and it meets an immovable object, then the force either ISN'T unstoppable or the object isn't immovable. You can't have both.
If an unstoppable force exists, and it meets an immovable object, then the force either ISN'T unstoppable or the object isn't immovable. You can't have both.