Immovable Object vs Unstoppable Force (8 opinions so far)

[Scatty]

What would happen if an unstoppable force would hit an immovable object? It is suggested that the unstoppable force is narrower than the immovable object, so they won't miss each other.

 

So, people, brainstorm and respond!

 

[spoiler=My personal opinion]I think the immovable object is immovable because he has infinite inertia. If it has infinite inertia, then it has infinite mass. If it has infinite mass, it collapses and becomes a black hole.

 

So the black hole would simply suck the unstoppable force. This way, the unstoppable force wouldn't be stopped, but would simply cease to exist.

 

[spoiler=shatterredfox's opinion]The immovable object would become the unstoppable force

and the unstoppable force would become the immovable object.

 

[spoiler=Crab Helmet's opinion]An unstoppable force and an immovable object cannot exist in the same universe at the same time, and even if they would, they wouldn't interact with each other.

 

[spoiler=Cyber Altair's Opinion]Babies are born.

 

[spoiler=Blaze's opinion]The unstoppable force simply goes around the immovable object.

 

[spoiler=Rinne's opinion]I'm assuming that "unstoppable" includes "unredirectable." In that case, one of them is transported into a different plane of reality where it can continue unimpeded.

 

[spoiler=Many People's opinion]Crab Helmet is right.

 

[spoiler=Mcjimbob's opinion]My opinion is that the object would wear away but not move. The unstoppable force would slowly wear away too (its still moving but just very slowly wearing away the object) because neither are indestructable. Friction would destroy the one that is smaller.

 

[spoiler=Fewer People's opinion]The unstoppable force will redirect (bounce off).

 

[shatteredfox]

the unstoppable force would hit the immovable object.

 

the immovable object would become the unstoppable force

and the unstoppable force would become the immovable object.

 

X - Immovable Object

O - Unstoppable force

 

X -> -> O

-> X -> O

-> -> O X ->

-> -> O -> X - etc..>

[Scatty]

But that would mean that the immovable object would move...meh...recorded anyway.

[shatteredfox]

But that would mean that the immovable object would move...meh...recorded anyway.

 

that's just my theory and that's what I stick by :P

 

basically I simpy believe the energy between the two object exchange with eachother, so the immovable object property never moved, just in which object the property is used on/for.

 

((also if this makes no sense, blame my mind for being encrypted that everything makes to me...and only me))

[CrabHelmet]

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or, if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[Enrise]

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or' date=' if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[/quote']

 

Intelligence at it's best on YCM.

[Scatty]

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or' date=' if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[/quote']

 

Added.

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or' date=' if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[/quote']

 

Intelligence at it's best on YCM.

 

Orly?

[Enrise]

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or' date=' if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[/quote']

 

Added.

It's a contradiction in terms. You cannot have both an unstoppable force and an immovable object simultaneously exist - or' date=' if they can exist simultaneously, then by their definitions they cannot possibly directly interact.

[/quote']

 

Intelligence at it's best on YCM.

 

Orly?

 

[Scatty]

Stop spamming [/sarcasm, you can spam as much as you want].

[JG.]

Because you hate paradoxes... When they hit eachother, it would create a space paradox. Oh, and don't record that, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

[Cyber Altair]

When the collision happens babies are born, right?

[Enrise]

When the collision happens babies are born' date=' right?

[/quote']

 

Does this make the Daddy the Unstoppable Force, and the Mommy the Immovable Object?

 

Wait, why is she an object again?

[Yasu]

Can God create a stone so heavy it cannot be lifted, not even by God Himself?

But eh, I don't know :/

But there's no such thing as Immovable object in this universe.

[Aesirson]

When the collision happens babies are born' date=' right?

[/quote']

 

Does this make the Daddy the Unstoppable Force, and the Mommy the Immovable Object?

 

Wait, why is she an object again?

Better question: What is she doing outside the kitchen?

[blaze.]

If the immovable object is what it says: immovable, then not even an unstoppable force could move it. The force would just go around it and not be stopped, like smoke in a wind tunnel.

[bury the year]

I'm assuming that "unstoppable" includes "unredirectable." In that case, one of them is transported into a different plane of reality where it can continue unimpeded.

[Yasu]

Oh... this is a logical problem D:

Sorreh I'm slow (aka special)...

Well... the one will pass through the other. I think D:

[Blue Lightning]

I think that contradicts itself. If you have an unmovable object there cant be a force that wont be stopped. If theres an unstoppable force, there wont be any object that it cant go through/move.

[Aesirson]

Like Blue Lightning and Crab said, both cannot exist in the same reality, because if there is an unstoppable force, there cannot be an immovable object and vice versa.

[blaze.]

Thats true... however, if there were (if though there couldnt be) I'd stick with my theory, as in mine, the object doesnt move and the force isnt stopped.

[Mcjimbob]

What would happen if an unstoppable force would hit an immovable object? It is suggested that the unstoppable force is narrower than the immovable object' date=' so they won't miss each other.

 

So, people, brainstorm and respond!

 

[spoiler=My personal opinion']I think the immovable object is immovable because he has infinite inertia. If it has infinite inertia, then it has infinite mass. If it has infinite mass, it collapses and becomes a black hole.

 

So the black hole would simply suck the unstoppable force. This way, the unstoppable force wouldn't be stopped, but would simply cease to exist.

 

[spoiler=shatterredfox's opinion]The immovable object would become the unstoppable force

and the unstoppable force would become the immovable object.

 

[spoiler=Crab Helmet's opinion]An unstoppable force and an immovable object cannot exist in the same universe at the same time, and even if they would, they wouldn't interact with each other.

 

 

If the imoveable object was a black hole it wouldn't be a object, but a hole in time and space leading to the unknown. My opinion is that the object would wear away but not move. The unstoppable force would slowly wear away too (its still moving but just very slowly wearing away the object) because neither are indestructable. Friction would destroy the one that is smaller

[Dark]

Can God create a stone so heavy it cannot be lifted, not even by God Himself?

 

EXCUSE ME, BUT WHO SAID THAT GOD COULD DO EVERYTHING?! D:<

 

OT: They cannot coexist, so the question is null.

 

Because if they did, the force would become stoppable and the object would become moveable.

[έκλειψη]

... Impossible.

 

Neither thing can exist together, because that would make one of them contradict their existence. If there is an unstoppable force, there is no possible way for an immovable object to exist. Same for the object's existence meaning the force cannot. If something cannot be changed, there is nothing in the universe that always changes something.

[Yasu]

Can God create a stone so heavy it cannot be lifted' date=' not even by God Himself?[/i']

 

EXCUSE ME, BUT WHO SAID THAT GOD COULD DO EVERYTHING?! D:<

 

its in the bible and god wrote the bible it shld be true.

[Yankee]

Uh..

Personal opinion..

The unstopable force would simply be bounced or repelled by the immovable object. The force is not stopped, but simply re-directed.