What would happen if an UNSTOPPABLE object slammed into an UN-MOVABLE object??


Discuss....

The description of one or both of those objects becomes UNreliable.

Uhhhh! I have no idea, but sounds painful no mattter what the result.

Neither type of object is possible, thus negating the conversation :)

How can you think that??

Anything is possible mayte (Even this)

The unstoppable one goes around and the unmovable one sits there, probably quite bored.

What would happen if an UNSTOPPABLE object slammed into an UN-MOVABLE object??


Discuss....


It appears that you're describing the Whump Bird.

For those of you who don't know, a Whump Bird is a rare creature. It flies in ever decreasing diameter circles at an ever increasing speed until it flies up its' own ass.

WHUMP!

What would happen if an UNSTOPPABLE object slammed into an UN-MOVABLE object??
Both objects would likely sit there since they counter one another, that's a guess.

I have heard the reaction would be a massive explosion in the universe....

I dunno......

Unstoppable and unmovable objects are not exactly going to be something fully realized in this universe of existence.

The unstoppable object would go right through the unmovable object. People forget that the ratio of matter to empty space is so small that it might as well be all empty space. It's the electromagnetic forces exerted by the atoms themselves which provides the illusion of solidity. A sufficient enough momentum would go right through any obstacles, much like how a neutrino penetrates miles of lead.

It appears that you're describing the Whump Bird.

For those of you who don't know, a Whump Bird is a rare creature. It flies in ever decreasing diameter circles at an ever increasing speed until it flies up its' own ass.

WHUMP!
HAHAHA. You made me laugh out loud, I think I woke the baby up.

The unstoppable object would go right through the unmovable object.Well thats an interesting thought!!

Hmmmm

Yeah, one could pish-posh about how "Only one could be right, wah!" Why bother, when you can power right through the challenge with a decisive pseudo-scientific counter-attack to a similarly pseudo-scientific thrust? It's not funny, like es's, but what it lacks in humor it makes up for in relevance.

Since you did not specify penetrability it surely allows the unmoveable object to allow passage without moving.

If the two objects are also impenetrable (sans alternation of its state), then I tend to think along the line of Lionel's answer here. There is no such thing as both of these objects existing at the same time. Immovability and Unstoppability are not descriptions of an object's nature. They are descriptions of observation, relative to other objects. For example, a moving ball in an empty space is unstoppable if no other object exists in this space, regardless of how fast it's moving or how much mass it has, or how hard it is (hence able to break through resistance).

So, this is a problem of semantic. Calling A unstoppable and not knowing what would happen when it hits B means that you don't actually know that A is unstoppable to begin with, and must reserve the adjective until after an impact test.

How can you think that??

Anything is possible mayte (Even this)

Any natural phenomenon is possible. But semantic impossibilities exist.

For example: is it possible to spell the word "apple" without using the letter "a"? No.

The coexistance of an unstoppable object and an immovable objects is a semantic impossibility.

Turns out there is a wikipedia article on the subject. The content is very similar to my take on this: Irresistable Force Paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresistible_force_paradox)

Chuck Norris....

There would be a transfer of energy from the unstoppable object to the Immoveable object, thus transferring the state of both objects. Mass differential would be compensated in velocity (Evak, youre on)

Nappy, the only way the unstoppable object could move through the immoveable one would be if either (but not both) contained zero mass. Your neutrino theory proves that, since it's damn close to zero mass.

Dude, an energy release of exponential proportions can happen IF one of the objects contain antimatter. Didnt you ever watch Star Trek?

What if all the attoms in the ummovable object moved a foot and created a hole just long enough for the unstoppable one to make it through?

Hmmmm

There would be a transfer of energy from the unstoppable object to the Immoveable object, thus transferring the state of both objects. Mass differential would be compensated in velocity (Evak, youre on)

Nappy, the only way the unstoppable object could move through the immoveable one would be if either (but not both) contained zero mass. Your neutrino theory proves that, since it's damn close to zero mass.

Dude, an energy release of exponential proportions can happen IF one of the objects contain antimatter. Didnt you ever watch Star Trek?
What kind of Looney Tunes science is this? Mass has nothing to do with it. What causes the neutrino to go through objects is that it's electrically neutral, and a lepton, which means it only interacts with matter through the weak force and gravity. Neutrons penetrate matter too, and they only interact with matter when they directly collide with an atomic nucleus.

So, technically, aren't neutrinos the "unstoppable object"? You can't stop what you can't hit!

So, technically, aren't neutrinos the "unstoppable object"? You can't stop what you can't hit!

Very well, then the unstoppable object wouldn't ever collide with the unmovable object, but the scenario is if an unstoppable object hit an unmovable object.


Going back to the original question - Why couldn't the unstoppable object simply reflect off of the unmovable object. It wouldn't have to stop moving, hence it could still be an unstoppable object.

Chuck Norris....
The First rule of Chuck Norris is: you do not talk about Chuck Norris.
:slap:

Neutrinos are not unstoppable. The don't "feel" electromagnetism, so they are not stopped by ordinary atoms. However, if they hit the nucleus of an atom dead-on, they may collide with a particle in it, and then they are "stopped."

It is this event that enables us to occasionally detect a neutrino in those big vats of cleaning fluid they keep in deep mines.

I recall of the top of my head that an effective shield against neutrinos would be several light-years of solid lead. In other words, they can be stopped but not easily.