Brain Tickler

[Gilenea]

Here's the ultimate philosophical question to test the limit of your brain:

What happens when an unstoppable force hits an immovable object?

Keep in mind that the force WILL NOT stop, and the object WILL NOT move. EVER.

Go!

Gil

[LV426]

Here's the ultimate philosophical question to test the limit of your brain:

What happens when an unstoppable force hits an immovable object?

Keep in mind that the force WILL NOT stop, and the object WILL NOT move. EVER.

Go!

Gil
Rebound!

[DarkWolf]

This is as much Science as it might be philosophical. LH has it right: the force rebounds.

I do not recommend this but: punch a a concrete block as hard as your can with your muscles enforcing your fist. The concrete block can withstand more force than your punch can give but you see: a solid object doesn't halt a force (in this case it is an application of kinetic energy of the action of punching and you cann't halt energy) but instead channels it through the object and rebounds it, usually back into your arm. It will hurt.

Now a martial artist will not be hurt and can break through that concrete block like a hot knife through butter. Why? They're not relying on their tense muscles and this allows them to increase the speed of the arm and drive MORE kinetic energy through the act than the concrete block is able to withstand, the block is broken and very little of the energy is rebound so it doesn't hurt the martial artist (or at least not much).

This application of kinetic energy is known as either Chi to the Chinese or as Ki ("Vital Breath", "energy") to the Japanese.

--

So if the immovable object cannot channel the energy through it's molecular structure (vibration) then all of the force of that energy will be rebound from it instantly.

[War Wolf]

I believe you are correct but if you will allow me, let me alter the parameters slightly. What happens when two COMPLETELY indestructable objects collide at light speed?

[DarknessBloodbane]

Stalemate?

[Hellcat]

A big bang?

[WareW-Believer]

"The given conditions of the problem are logically contradictory. It is logically impossible that there can exist both an irresistible cannonball (I wanted to have the force to be an object) and an immovable post. If an irresistible cannonball should exist, then by definition it would knock over any postin its way, hence there couldn't exist an immovavle post. Alternatively, if there existed an immovable postthen by definition, no cannonball could knock it over, hence there could not exist an irresistible cannonball. Thus the existence of an irresistible cannonball is in itself not logically contradictory: but to asser they both exist is to assert a contradiction.
The situation is not really very different than had you asked us "There are two people, John and Jack. John is taller than Jack and Jack is taller than John. Now, how do you explain that?" Our best answer would be "Either you are lying, or you are mistaken."

Uh yeah that's it.

[Vendetta]

Uhhh, maybe I'm missing the point, but how is this philosophy exactly?

[MorganaFang]

Maybe it is representational of people and their sentiments...

One is constantly pushing forward while other does not move.

[WareW-Believer]

Well I was thinking about this this morning and thougth of another approach.

Well lets assume that they both exist. Well then if the Unstoppable Cannonball hit the post. The post obviously wouldn't move. As for the cannonball, well since it's unstoppable then when it hit the post it would just ricoche off the post but keep going. Basically the post would not move and the cannonball would just change direction.

[Vendetta]

Maybe it is representational of people and their sentiments...

One is constantly pushing forward while other does not move.
Yet that is a patent impossibility. As most people's "sentiments" as you put it, are infinitely flexible (as are their morals, as I have pointed out on more than one occasion.)

If this is a philosophical question, then why exactly is everyone justifying it using physical explanations?

And since everyone else is engaging in it, I will also say, there is no such THING as an immovable object or an unstoppable force (entropy sees to that.)

[Redwolf_Claw]

I believe you are correct but if you will allow me, let me alter the parameters slightly. What happens when two COMPLETELY indestructable objects collide at light speed?
A black hole.

[Darth Cluich]

I believe you are correct but if you will allow me, let me alter the parameters slightly. What happens when two COMPLETELY indestructable objects collide at light speed?

That's how West was created.

[Vendetta]

A black hole.
GAH!!!

Again, this is NOT philosophy!!

Second, that is NOT what creates a black hole!

/dies

[Darth Cluich]

GAH!!!

Again, this is NOT philosophy!!

Second, that is NOT what creates a black hole!

/dies

But it is what created West. :p

[Vendetta]

But it is what created West. :p
Hmmm, I guess I was under the mistaken impression it was a-sexual reproduction. Isn't the universe grand/horrifying? :D

[MichaelCra]

But then again if you think about it when it changes direction when the ricochets happens it stops for that tiny fraction of time to change its direction so I think they would either both be destroyed or one would fail. Then again that’s of course if they both were real.

[Redwolf_Claw]

GAH!!!

Again, this is NOT philosophy!!

Second, that is NOT what creates a black hole!

/dies
Note my sarcasm... :p

[Vendetta]

Note my sarcasm... :p
Ahhh sarcastic hindsight... of course, how silly of me.