Mind Bender For You High Thinkers

the unstoppable force would colide with the immovable object and the direction of the force would be altered depending on the angle of impact. the unstppable force cannot loose all of its energy, nor transfer more than a small % of energy to the immovable object therefore they cannot explode together. the unstoppable force would simply keep moving off at a different velocity (direction AND speed). that brings us to the debate of can there be an unstoppable force.....NO. every time this force colides with something it WILL transfer some energy to the object it collides with, therefore once it has collided with enough objects it will loose its force intirely, but thats not taking into acount the fact that other objects will transfer energy to it as well. Bloody Newton
As for the immovable object. i'm just going to asume that the force holding the object in place is greater than the force moving the unstoppable object.

Dreadscale said:

The proof is in front of us every day.
The unstoppable force.
Example:
Unstoppable force : Bush Regime
Unmovable object : The Constitution of the United States.
The unstoppable force blows in and contacts the unmovable object, chips away at the foundation ( Bill of Rights) until the object is destroyed
or enough to continue on an unimpeded path.
Case Closed
Feel free to list anything that can stop this force.

Click to expand...

Three words: Bullet In Brain

natmoon said:

Actually the only correct answer is that neither can ever exist in the first place.
Ive only said it about 10 times though so i guess i must be an invisible force talking to another invisible force lol

Click to expand...

dude man, you love being a fuckin smart ass don't ya? I know there is no such thing, but dude, its good to stretch your brain with questions like this, trying to think of a plausable answer to an imposible question.

lil' miss left hand side said:

dude man, you love being a fuckin smart ass don't ya? I know there is no such thing, but dude, its good to stretch your brain with questions like this, trying to think of a plausable answer to an imposible question.

Click to expand...

Its nothing to do with being a smart ass,just an obvious fact.
Theres no brain stretching here,just a play on words,a comic book scenario,and 1 or 2 disgruntled youngsters

If you want to stretch your mind answer me this.
What is it?

what would happen?..nothing.....both objects would cease to exist in present time...as if they were never there.

natmoon said:

Its nothing to do with being a smart ass,just an obvious fact.
Theres no brain stretching here,just a play on words,a comic book scenario,and 1 or 2 disgruntled youngsters

If you want to stretch your mind answer me this.
What is it?

Click to expand...

peace and smoking joints?

if not, what is?

BongReaper said:

What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?

Click to expand...

Assuming the Unstoppable force is Light (light does have force) and the Immovable object is Glass, it would go right through and keep travelling. Did I just answer the impossible question??

This is an impossible hypothetical, no force is unstoppable no object unmovable so you cant answer it

"if there is such a thing as an unstoppable force, then the phrase immovable object is meaningless in that context, and vice versa, and the issue amounts to the same thing as, for example, asking for a triangle that has four sides." - Wiki

i think one of them will get proved wrong

The question is indeed a paradox - much like the question - can an all powerful God make a stone so heavy it can not be lifted by even God himself?

BUT - we can play around with the answer using theoretical logic AKA mental masturbation.

While scientific understanding makes the question an impossibility - if you are curious an immoveable object would have to have infinite inertia (and therefore mass) which would collapse (because of gravity) and create a black hole or singularity. The irresistible force would mean the same fate because irresistible force implies infinite energy which would convert to infinite mass and we're right back to the singularity.

So the hypothetical answer may be you would have two black holes before they ever have a chance to meet.

Never a horse that couldn't be rode, never a cowboy that couldn't be throwed.

jimmyspaz said:

Never a horse that couldn't be rode, never a cowboy that couldn't be throwed.

Click to expand...

that sums it up nicely. key word: never.

What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?

If that is the question alone, with no other specifications, my previous post would hold valid. Let me explain.

SINCE, there was no given environment, one assumes there is NO environment, Just empty space. This being said, an Unstoppable Force COULD meet an Immovable Object.

Like my previous post stated, Light being your Force, Glass being the Immovable object- the Light (Force) will not move the Glass (Immovable Object), yet continue to travel right through, never being stopped (Unstoppable Force).

Someone please prove that wrong, based off the information given from the question...

I didnt think light was a force.

oscarmiya said:

What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?

If that is the question alone, with no other specifications, my previous post would hold valid. Let me explain.

SINCE, there was no given environment, one assumes there is NO environment, Just empty space. This being said, an Unstoppable Force COULD meet an Immovable Object.

Like my previous post stated, Light being your Force, Glass being the Immovable object- the Light (Force) will not move the Glass (Immovable Object), yet continue to travel right through, never being stopped (Unstoppable Force).

Someone please prove that wrong, based off the information given from the question...

Click to expand...

you must have missed my post along with quite a few others. your post is as invalid as everyone else's. There is no "right" answer. For the hypothetical science answer - see my post.

tckfui said:

I didnt think light was a force.

Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. Read up on Solar Sails... or just read below...

What is a Solar Sail?

A solar sail is a spacecraft with a large, lightweight mirror attached to it that moves by being pushed by light reflecting off of the mirror instead of rockets. The light to push a sail can come from the sun or large lasers we could build. Satellites in orbit around the Earth can survive for many years without any maintenance while using only a little bit of rocket propellant to hold their positions. Solar sails can be made to survive in space for many years as well. But, because solar sails use sunlight that never runs out like rocket propellant, during those years the sail can move around as much as you want it to, such as from Earth to Mars and back, possibly several times if the sail remains in good condition. A similarly equipped rocket would either be ridiculously huge because it has to carry the fuel for each trip, or would need to be refueled regularly.

email468 said:

you must have missed my post along with quite a few others. your post is as invalid as everyone else's. There is no "right" answer. For the hypothetical science answer - see my post.

Click to expand...

There is no right answer, agree'd. What I am dis-agreeing with is all the people who said this wasn't possible... I think including you.

email468 said:

The question is indeed a paradox - much like the question - can an all powerful God make a stone so heavy it can not be lifted by even God himself?

====================
First off, you would have to beleive in God. If you do, who are you to say he couldn't? Bad example. Give a realistic, scientifically explained example, or better yet... prove my "answer" wrong.
===================

BUT - we can play around with the answer using theoretical logic AKA mental masturbation.

While scientific understanding makes the question an impossibility - if you are curious an immoveable object would have to have infinite inertia (and therefore mass) which would collapse (because of gravity) and create a black hole or singularity. The irresistible force would mean the same fate because irresistible force implies infinite energy which would convert to infinite mass and we're right back to the singularity.

===================
The entire above paragraph is made by a hypothetical guess on the environment, which you do not know because it is not stated in the question. Also, its not IRRESISTIBLE Force, its UNSTOPPABLE Force, which only implies a Force that keeps moving, NOT something that CAN'T be stopped. That also means that it does not need to carry infinite energy.
==================

So the hypothetical answer may be you would have two black holes before they ever have a chance to meet.

Click to expand...

------------------
That was your "scientific" explanation of this, correct? Incase you didn't see, I commented between the ========== signs.

Neither can or will ever existlmfao

oscarmiya said:

------------------
That was your "scientific" explanation of this, correct? Incase you didn't see, I commented between the ========== signs.

Click to expand...

Sorry I wasn't clear. No, the scientific explanation is it is a paradox and can not occur. That is the end of the scientific explanation. I would point to the phrases "we can play around with the answer using theoretical logic AKA mental masturbation" and "while scientific understanding makes the question an impossibility" as fairly clear statements of how science views this and all paradoxes.

My use of "god" was as an example of another paradox. And yes my use of "irresistible" rather than "unstoppable" force was a slip on my part and I apologize. But in my defense, it is the "Irresistible force paradox" not the "Unstoppable force paradox" that is one of the more famous of the physical-type paradoxes.

I would also point out that we are not the first ones to discuss this paradox or come to conclusions. To be honest, I'm surprised no one offered the explanation I did since it is not my own and a fairly "pat" answer to this paradox.

But that doesn't make it right since the question is scientifically unanswerable. So how about we call both answers right and yours can be more right than mine. Sound fair enough to you?