It is quite paradoxical which can only be solved with complete annihilation of both values.

the unstoppable force colliding with an immovable force will create an equal amount of impact and effect on both forces ..

So if you say both have an infinite mass/energy and still can't shatter due to closely packed molecules.

the equal amount of effect created from the impact with also equal to infinity and so is enough to cancel their infinite values and enough to shatter them.

-It is either the immovable force move in order to withstand the infinite shock of the impact and the unstoppable force gets bounced towards a different direction (though if i understand correctly you imply cannot happen but it has a fixed unstoppable direction)

If the immovable force cannot move and the unstoppable cannot stop or change course then the equal infinite amount of resulting force from the impact is enough to cancel both values and Boom both are annihilated ..

hey geniuses. . . . I am.not dead yet


Anyway. . . . It means both would stop to exist. This would happen as a BIG EXPLOSION or they simply disappear/cease to exist.


If matter and anti-matter meet, they would both disappear or cause a massive explanation. The reason I am compensating both scenarios is that they both involve contrasting xters (immovable is directly opposite unstoppable, because you need UNSTOPPABLE FORCE TO MOVE IMMOVABLE OBJECT. Lol. Okay, you dig me? ). They both have infinite vector magnitude (direction and lemme just say velocity- derivative of our equation - say we were given in quadratic form. . . and immovable has a position in space with infinite mass) . so na why I compared with matter and anti-matter.





SO I BELIEVE THEY BOTH DISAPPEARED or EXPLODE!! no crucify me abeg. My physics get K-LEG!!


Teempakguy, I never see you o . . johnydon22,oya crucify my comment and others too should.

Dekatron:
hey geniuses. . . . I am.not dead yet


Anyway. . . . It means both would stop to exist. This would happen as a BIG EXPLOSION or they simply disappear/cease to exist.


If matter and anti-matter meet, they would both disappear or cause a massive explanation. The reason I am compensating both scenarios is that they both involve contrasting xters (immovable is directly opposite unstoppable, because you need UNSTOPPABLE FORCE TO MOVE IMMOVABLE OBJECT. Lol. Okay, you dig me? ). They both have infinite vector magnitude (direction and lemme just say velocity- derivative of our equation - say we were given in quadratic form. . . and immovable has a position in space with infinite mass) . so na why I compared with matter and anti-matter.





SO I BELIEVE THEY BOTH DISAPPEARED or EXPLODE!! no crucify me abeg. My physics get K-LEG!!


Teempakguy, I never see you o . . johnydon22,oya crucify my comment and others too should.

unstoppable moving an immovable is still improbable since it is also like saying the immovable is needed to stop the unstoppable.

If an unstoppable can move an immovable then it was not really immovable in the first place.

same holds true if immovable stops the unstoppable

it is paradoxical ..

Annihilation of both solves the paradox

An immovable object is one whose motion cannot be changed. Change of motion directly related to force with F = ma hence, an object that cannot move is an object whose constituents cannot interact with a force. Because if change of motion, acceleration, is 0, then irregardless of mass, Force is equally 0.

An unstoppable force is a force which is not even moving in the first place. As the only way that you can never stop anything is if it's not moving in the first place.


Hence, the immovable object is the same as the unstoppable force. Because the object cannot be moved. And because it cannot be moved, it cannot be stopped.

So since the immovable object is also the unstoppable force, the question becomes, what happens when something collides with itself?

Well, nothing.


Teem signing out. Peace.

In my own opinion, both would remain still with the force...

Like pushing hard against a wall and remain pushing.

HALT!!!

johnydon22:


unstoppable moving an immovable is still improbable since it is also like saying the immovable is needed to stop the unstoppable.

If an unstoppable can move an immovable then it was not really immovable in the first place.

same holds true if immovable stops the unstoppable

it is paradoxical ..

Annihilation of both solves the paradox

I agree

op this question was asked at the superman series*all star superman*comic cartoon series and the answer which superman gave which is correct is------
#they surrender#meaning everything goes kabisg boom gbosa shakwagbagagbisha big bang which ever one u want to use.see y i watch cartoon animated series.

For an object to be immovable, it needs to have an infinite density, and infinite density is only possible for an object with infinite mass, and if the object has infinite mass it will occupy infinite space, and if it occupies infinite space, there will be no space for the unstoppable object to exist and if u argue that the unstoppable object has space to move, then the immovable object has finite mass, and if it has finite mass, then it can be moved by the unstoppable object.
You might want to argue that it has a finite mass but it is very massive and rooted to the ground in such a way that it cannot be moved.
The answer to this is that if it is rooted to the ground that it cannot be moved, then the unstoppable object will penetrate the immovable object without moving it. From this, you can see that an unstoppable object cannot exist simultaneously with an immovable object.

Both bodies will continue in an infinite uniform state characterized by an equal number of elements from both immovable and unstoppable. Thus, the unstoppable force will keep acting on the immovable body while the immovable body in turn will keep resisting motion.

RobinHez:


Going by newton's 3rd law of motion: I think the 'so called' unstoppable force would be brought to a halt.
Because 1. It is the one in motion (more like na him go fine trouble)
2. The magnitude of the force at which it hits the immovable object is the same it would require for the object to 'push back at it' in order to maintain its status as immovable. The total force at that point becomes 0 as they both cancel each other.


That's my own way of looking at it.

Would have agreed with you because you put up a good point. But I don't agree the energy exerted by the two parties will diminishes to zero.

What I think is that when a force is enclosed in a space hitting immovable object. What physics explain in such situations is that the movement of such energy at rapid speed within a limited space will start to generate heat because of the fast movement of such particles hitting each other. And have heat energy increases. By nature we all know when heat energy increases to infinity in a fixed space there will be an explosion because no objects or solid materials or anything can withstand the force of heat tending to infinity.

ghostofsparta:
Wow! you are really solving this. I concur. I think that's likely what's bound to happen within such a system, pure energy in the form of light. But let's still think of factors unaccounted for, btw do you believe in African science and technologies erroneously known as jaz/juju (you know na), by believe I am both referring to their existence and efficacy ?

Would have agreed with you because you put up a good point. But I don't agree the energy exerted by the two parties will diminishes to zero.

What I think is that when a force is enclosed in a space hitting immovable object. What physics explain in such situations is that the movement of such energy at rapid speed within a limited space will start to generate heat because of the fast movement of such particles hitting each other. And have heat energy increases. By nature we all know when heat energy increases to infinity in a fixed space there will be an explosion because no objects or solid materials or anything can withstand the force of heat tending to infinity.

There is no unstoppable force or immovable object in reallife.........I stand to be corrected.

IT WILL BOUNCE BACK AND CONTINUE MOVING SHIKENA

The question is like the question of existence, it can not really be answered. it is one of the evidences of creation. It mocks our intelligence.

When an unstoppable force hit an unlovable object, the force will pierce through the unmovable object thereby passing through it

When an unstoppable force hit an unlovable object, the force will pierce through the unmovable object thereby parsing through it without the object moving