no it doesn’t... anyways the situation can’t occur either way... the notion of having an immovable object implies that there is no force in existence that can move it and vice versa... those two forces cannot exist at the same time... it is a logical impossibility meant only to confuse and create a paradox that can’t happen...
and you made me go look at a bunch of websites about it and my brain hurts... DAMN YOU ATRESAC...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
DestinyGuy678 wrote:
the immovable object would crumble, allowing the unstoppable object to go through and the imovablr object would not have moved, just changed size
It couldn’t crumble because then fragments would move and seperate.
hmmmm...thats a good question, it all depends whether the unmovable object was strong enough to with take the unstoppable forces power......I’d have to say that the unstoppable force would go right through the object...
--- "I doubt these guys even know that were not exactly well…serious about eating their children…”-Areian my Luv
I have noticed several contradictions in other answers and I believe this is the only answer that settles both parts of the 'unstoppable force colliding with an immovable object?' scenario.
When an object is annihilated, it ceases to exist and is converted into energy, like when anti matter particles meet matter particles.
So the unstoppable force is not stopped and the immovable object is not moved, both are converted into energy.
Apologies for any miz spelt words, I dont have a spell chekker!
woot for google
First Last ]
»
Off-Topic
» What would happen
