An irresistable force meets an immovable object.

Now I under stand by definition, neither of these things could exist in the universe. But hypothetically. Dig deep people. :bugeye:

Originally posted by Baphomet
An irresistable force meets an immovable object.

Now I under stand by definition, neither of these things could exist in the universe. But hypothetically. Dig deep people. :bugeye:

this belongs in the philosophy subforum.

Originally posted by Baphomet
An irresistable force meets an immovable object. This is self-contradictory. If there is an irresistible force then there are by definition no immovable objects, and vice versa.

deflection.

ZENO paradox will happen. The force will move endlessly repeating moving half of the remaning distace towards the object.

The irresistable force will simply pass through the immovable object.

The irresistable force and immovable object will take one look at each other, then turn around and beat the hell out of you!

Originally posted by Nasor
This is self-contradictory. If there is an irresistible force then there are by definition no immovable objects, and vice versa.

I second that. This is obviously the correct answer.

It's like asking "What happens when there's a square inside a universe with no squares?"

Eric

There are no irresistable forces, there are no immovable objects, and what does zen have to do with it? There is nothing that is infinite, it's a theoretical construct.

The two would never meet since if the force is irresistable then if it meets the immovable object then it would not be irresistable anymore. But also if the immovable object meets the irresistable force then it wouldn't be immovable anymore. Thus these two forces would not meet at all

Language games. Our language is powerful enough to create anything (hell, look at theology).

Some of it is worth talking about - some of it is not.

As i said earlier I think the irresistable force would perforate the immovable object and simply pass though it.

Keeping in mind the idea that the object holds more empty space that non empty space.

Otherwise the question is a conundrum and has no answer.

Assuming it is just a thought experiment...

The energy would have to be released somewhere, probably as an electromagnetic pulse, a huge burst of radiation.

assuming that we are talking about a force that is both force and energy or either.
The force of energy or the energy of the force...hmmmmmm.....time to go to bed me thinks:D

They will both decompose into jelly beans.

Originally posted by ProCop
ZENO paradox will happen. The force will move endlessly repeating moving half of the remaning distace towards the object.

Having just engaged in a debate on this topic, I feel somewhat comfortable on commenting on this. The Zeno 'Achillies' pardox wouldn't occur, and it only applies in zero-space point theory. Once you remove the division between space and time from the "paradox", then the object can reach it target, and will.
A physical object doesn't travel in infinate half-distances, it travels in distance/time. Even though the distance can still be measured by half-distances, the objects motion is not restricted to them, and so is not limited by the so-called "paradox."

now, if we were atlking about zero-space points on a number line, you'll have two thing in combination. The distance between 0 and 1 can be divided up into an infinate number of half distances (.5, .25., etc). all of these hlaf distances actually *do* equal a total of 1. There is no paradow there.
However, travelling the distance via those half-distances would be impossible, because it would take an infinate amount of time to travel from zero to one - there is an infinate number of point you have to first be at. Even if you only take 1 nanosecond to get to each one, you still will require an infinate amount of time to complete the process.

http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s3-07/3-07.htm

Originally posted by river-wind
[B]However, travelling the distance via those half-distances would be impossible, because it would take an infinate amount of time to travel from zero to one - there is an infinate number of point you have to first be at. Even if you only take 1 nanosecond to get to each one, you still will require an infinate amount of time to complete the process.



What if the time would simultaneously slow down (to the half speed (of the previous speed of time) with every half move)? Then we would have a constant distance between the two.

Another sollution would be to stop the time altogether - that would "unforce" the force.

The point is they must co-exist (otherwise one of them is false).

You have skipped providing your sollution...;)

to borrow from an Iain Banks novel, the immovable object moves, and the irresistible force stops.

maybe another answer is in the achievement of humility when both the "Irresistable force" and the "unmoveable object" learn that they live a delusion of superiority.

Being Zenian in nature ( the question) this sounds more like the answer.
A lesson in humility.

Originally posted by ProCop
What if the time would simultaneously slow down (to the half speed (of the previous speed of time) with every half move)? Then we would have a constant distance between the two.

Another sollution would be to stop the time altogether - that would "unforce" the force.

The point is they must co-exist (otherwise one of them is false).

You have skipped providing your sollution...;)

ok, assuming that both *do* exsist, then yea, one of your methods must occur so that neither of the objects nullisfies the other. you are correct :)


my solution? I'd take this the same way as I would take the "Can God make a mountain that he himself cannot move". If we assume that God exsists, and that he is omnipotent, then, IMO, yes he could. Given his omnipotence, he could create a mountain, and then decide that he would not be able to move it. He could then, at a later time, change the rules of the universe, and move the mountain.
So both items are satisfied-He has created a mountain that he cannot move, but he is not limited to not moving it. Instead of trying to fight with the mountain, just change the rules of the game.

In this instance, I would say yes, they can both exsist - what happens when they collide, however? any of your three examples are valid possibilities, though I don't see them as the most simple explination. This is a bit tougher than the God question, because the generalisation of the object and the force sortof eliminates the option of consciously changing the rules - there is no assumption of an aware being here.
I think I'd need clarification before I felt comforatble in an answer. Is the force instantainous? ie does it hit the object as a small point in space? or is it like a wind, hitting the object steadily over time? Is the object breakable (given that it is immovable)? or would breaking the object be considered moving parts of it, and therefore in violation of the first precept?