The question is a contradiction. Both cannot exist in the same universe because the existence of one precludes the existence of the other. And that is before taking into account that there are no preferred frames of reference and thus it is impossible to tell a moving object from an unmoving one. Sheesh, what do they teach in schools these days.
Poll: unstoppable object meets unmovable object
- Thread starter Joe Matsuda
- Start date
Recommended Videos
didn't Isaac Asimov answered this? according to him (and if I remember correctly) both objects cannot exist on the same universe, since too be unstoppable, nothing should be able to stand on his way, and to be unmovable, no force should be able to move it.
No, because if it changed direction then it would have had to stop since velocity is a vector one component has to go to zero (thus stopping). My answer is they would go through another since intangibility is the only way I can think of something being unmovable/unstoppable.Joe Matsuda said:
First off, its unstoppable force and immovable object, not unstoppable object and unmovable object. Second, no it is not different. The cube in that thread is an immovable object, and the knife is an unstoppable force. Third, please put a little more effort into the way you introduce your threads. In this one you sort of expect us to know what you are talking about without explaining it. That is a no-no.Joe Matsuda said:
Finally, I guess I can't really give an answer to the paradox. I think that's why it is called a PARADOX.
We already had 2 threads today on the subject of weather or not a knife that can cut through anything can break an indestructable object. While this isn't the exact same it is incredibly similar. The unstopable object would just go through the unmoveable object.Joe Matsuda said:
Move in a new direction or through, whatever pelases you.
Also, i'm soo tempted to make a thread about how to survive the infected apocalypse, they're not zombies, they're infected so it's a totally different thread, and not just me beeing extremely unoriginal but still feelign a stupid urge to make stupid repeat threads.
(and after that an undead apoc thread)
Also, i'm soo tempted to make a thread about how to survive the infected apocalypse, they're not zombies, they're infected so it's a totally different thread, and not just me beeing extremely unoriginal but still feelign a stupid urge to make stupid repeat threads.
(and after that an undead apoc thread)
"Unmovable" does not mean "indestructible". So assuming they are the same shape, size and density, mutual destruction. If they are both indestructible, the unstoppable object will bounce off the unmovable object and keep going. Otherwise, Batman hangs The Joker upside-down and Two Face shoots some corrupt cops and mobsters.
no, of the options provided by the OP, the only one that has cartain logic is to move the universe. basically, both situations cannot happen in the same universe at the same time, but if they could, by moving the universe the unstoppable object (should have been force, but oh well) will keep moving, and the unmovable object will remain at the same point in relation to that universe... the problem is, moving the universe in relation to what?Dys said:
all solutions based on changing the direction are, as I see it invalid, if you accept that this "object" represents a force then f=m.a, so either the mass or the acceleration are infitite, since to be unstoppable force must be infinite, to change the direction of that "object" you are asumming that there is another force that can affect the force already in motion... which is an infinite force...so, not possible