Poll: unstoppable object meets unmovable object

[Joe Matsuda]

its suppost to be what happens when an unstoppable FORCE meets an unmovable object.

im just telling it like i heard it

and who says the force cant be an object?

it is hypothetical after all....

 

[bew11]

its suppost to be what happens when an unstoppable FORCE meets an unmovable object.

im just telling it like i heard it

and who says the force cant be an object?

it is hypothetical after all....

im just telling it like i heard it to

 

[Deleted]

An unmovable object would need all the mass in the world, so nothing will be there to move it.
An unstoppable force would need all the energy in the world, but it can't have kinetic energy because all the mass is being used up by the unmovable object.

Now excuse me I'll be having sex.

All the mass in the world? you set your sights a little low there buddy if you were thinking more mass means less movable. all the mass in are world goes all the way around the sun once a year. nice try though. not even all the mass in the universe would do it. if you brought all the mass in the universe together it would all collapse under its own gravity and make a super massive black hole. your probably just tired from all that "sex" your having

If something has all the mass in the universe (sorry that was a typo with 'world') it should implode but then that would defeat the point of the questoin.

 

[El Poncho]

The unstoppable object would stop and the unmovable object would move.

 

[Eliam_Dar]

neither really exist. the quistion exist to make you think.

now most things can be "unstoppable" in a zero gravity situation.

of coarse immovable dosnt mean unbreakable or dose it?

*on notebook waiting to enter to give the exam*

actually the can be stoppable in zero gravity in vacuum, any friction and it would be eventually stopped.

to break something you have to move it.

 

[Eliam_Dar]

An unmovable object would need all the mass in the world, so nothing will be there to move it.
An unstoppable force would need all the energy in the world, but it can't have kinetic energy because all the mass is being used up by the unmovable object.

Now excuse me I'll be having sex.

All the mass in the world? you set your sights a little low there buddy if you were thinking more mass means less movable. all the mass in are world goes all the way around the sun once a year. nice try though. not even all the mass in the universe would do it. if you brought all the mass in the universe together it would all collapse under its own gravity and make a super massive black hole. your probably just tired from all that "sex" your having

If something has all the mass in the universe (sorry that was a typo with 'world') it should implode but then that would defeat the point of the questoin.

just two words. Big Bang

 

[Archemetis]

There's no rule that dictates the unstoppable object can't change direction.

 

[tdp316]

Wasn't this Wrestlemania III? In which case I conclude that the answer must be Hulk Hogan.

 

[Eliam_Dar]

There's no rule that dictates the unstoppable object can't change direction.

actually yes there is, to change direction another force must enter into play, the accelleration has to be redirected somehow, and in a extreme case if the angle is 180 degrees, the object will be stopped for a momment.

EDIT: "Im beeing called for exam...wish me luck, is Social Sciences....=/"

 

[oppp7]

The question is impossible as there is no unstoppable force or immovable object. The entire question is disregarded by the universe.

 

[Et3rnalLegend64]

The immovable object gets budged, then they both stop. That way, they both failed at their jobs, making them equal. Either that, or you divide by zero.

 

[joschen]

Don't X-X=0?

Id say they take out each other, since they both appear infinite in spoken language.

 

[Versabane]

delete

 

[Versabane]

delete

 

[omega 616]

The universe explodes ... or the unstoppable object changes direction, which ever you prefer.

 

[Archemetis]

There's no rule that dictates the unstoppable object can't change direction.

actually yes there is, to change direction another force must enter into play, the accelleration has to be redirected somehow, and in a extreme case if the angle is 180 degrees, the object will be stopped for a momment.

EDIT: "Im beeing called for exam...wish me luck, is Social Sciences....=/"

That's implying that the object is just that.
An object which without outside assistance is incapable of movement or at least starting to move.

Which effectively, means that any object under certain circumstances has the potential to be an unstoppable object.

I'm talking about the object as if it is capable of starting and maintaining it's own unassisted, arbitrary movement and of course altering it's course, I'm not talking about it stopping and suddenly going sideways, I'm thinking more of a curved method of course correction, which wouldn't impede it in anyway other than the direction it's originally going.

And when I think of "unstoppable object" I think of something that is constantly moving unimpeded regardless of direction.
As opposed to the "unmovable object" which I consider to be more of a monolithic structure stuck in a constant state of it's own suspension.

in fact I'd go as far to say that the unstoppable object would more likely orbit the unmovable object.

But as it stands, both objects don't exist, so we can apply whatever laws we want to them, so no answer or theory is right or wrong.

 

[WestMountain]

There are no such thing as unmoveable objects or unstoppable objects, there never will be

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.

That wouldnt count because the unstoppable would still be in the same spot of the universe because the universe is everything, you get it?

 

[Axeli]

The unstoppable object obviously bounces off and continues to its unstoppable movement in other direction.

Or assuming they can't bounce, we have a situation where two infinite energies try to negate each other - a calculation which is undefined. Anything could happen. I guess they'd freeze in time!

But really isn't the notion that the other object is "immovable" pretty silly anyway? Movement is relative, though someone with better knowledge or physics could explain more...

 

[TZer0]

First of all: neither exist.

The unmovable object would have unlimited mass, the unstoppable object would be an item with mass traveling at the speed of light. If we were going to simulate a situation where an unstoppable hits a unmovable object.. the unstoppable object would probably just go through (unmovable doesn't mean not pass-through-able - two different things).

Another problem is the fact that everything in the same universe would fly towards this unmovable object.. probably at the speed of light.

 

[franklinbadge]

batman

well thats possibly the best answer ever so yeah.