the unstoppable force and the immovable object.

This is truely one of the great paradoxes, and scrambles the brain with our modern way of thinking, as there is so much going on in our minds we tend to add in variables like the direction of the unstoppable force and the the shape of the immovable object.





To see a possible answer to this paradox first all variables must be removed. Space and time included. There must be empty nothingness, so they can be introduced together at the same time. Now ask the question.

What happens when a unstoppable force meets a immovable object?

A possible answer is, a simultaneous big bang and black hole, and looking at this structure of energy created by the reaction of the force and the object, the immovable object instantly repels the unstoppable force, off goes the force in all directions for infinity...BIG BANG....and the birth of creation.



So what are the object and the force?

The object stays still, it is immovable. In a univers full of motion it must be the center.

The force is always moving, it cannot be stopped. If the object is still in the center the force must be every thing else.



Now, as the variables were removed, it was only fair that we added infinity into this vision. This is fair because it gives room for infinite possibilities to happen, and there was room for this because nothing exsisted before.

This theory gives rise to all matter, and the object and the force would be magnetism and electricity. This reality could exsist within the single thought of pure conciousnes arising from pure nothingness.



Life and then conciousness must be added in here now. In that order and when the time is right. And that should just about bring us to today.



we all have infinity in all directions. this makes each one of us the center by default. everything moves except the centre. this makes us an immovable object and part of a unstoppable force. you are great!

You're suggesting that creation began after an unstoppable force met an immovable object.

You do realise, of course, that your "nothingness" then has something in it? In fact, two somethings? ...an unstoppable force, and an immovable object?

sounds like your "creation" was beaten to the punch...

reply to post by Awen24


I'm just playing here, not claiming.

If there was nothing, and the nothing, after forever became aware it was nothing and just decided to be something. Everything is an idea stemming from that self awarenss.

reply to post by Wifibrains

Have you been reading my Daniel threads?
I've been making a point of quoting this paradox.

If not, the simple answer is as follows;
"If an irresistible force meets an immovable object, one of them is exposed as a fraud".

(Because it's not possible for both of them to exist at the same time)

reply to post by DISRAELI


I did read that and yes, you got my brain spinning. Lol.

So in this instance what is the fraud! Everything or nothing?

reply to post by Wifibrains

In your scenario, as far as I can see, the "immovable object" is not moved- "It stays at the centre"..
If it has not moved, then the "irresistible force" has been resisted. It evaded the problem by "going round" the object.
So it wasn't irresistible.
That seems to make it a fraud.

reply to post by Wifibrains


I love it.

Free will is an interesting concept,
when there are so many centers of god no doubt.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

In your scenario, as far as I can see, the "immovable object" is not moved- "It stays at the centre"..
If it has not moved, then the "irresistible force" has been resisted.
So it wasn't irresistible.
That seems to make it a fraud.

I would say both won and lost the game, by creating a third avenue.
Sort of a flipping inside out in 3d terms it could be said.

reply to post by Dustytoad

The possiblity that both are frauds can never be ruled out.
Strictly speaking, my formula should have said "At least one...".

reply to post by DISRAELI


Hmmm, so where does that leave us? Duality. Lol

Question answered.



You're welcome.

reply to post by Wifibrains


Of course they are the same thing....

reply to post by Wifibrains


An unstoppable force... does not imply that it is moving. In fact, go push on a wall. You are exerting a force on it and are going nowhere. Force is dependent on acceleration, not velocity. You push on this wall and neither are moving nowhere and thus one would assume that there is no force... but in reality both are exerting the same force on each other.

This means, not looking at stupid variations in shape and whatnot... Just math... An unstoppable force and an unmovable object can exist. The force goes on forever but moves nowhere, and same is true of the object, It never moves but exerts an "unstoppable" force on the opposite force. Completely plausible.

EDIT: In response to other posts here I am saying that one of them doesn't have to be a fraud to fit the paradox, they just have to be the same thing, or two equivalent things. (Honestly that makes it less of a paradox because two things of equivalency can exist without being contradictory)

reply to post by Wifibrains


I disagree with your conclusions Wifibrains but I like the processes and new slants you brought in

In my opinion, the unstoppable force and immovable object cannot coexist in the same universe, any universe that has laws that allows both to form has opposing laws and therefore must cancel itself out of existence. However, if an unstoppable force is possible in one universe and it truly is unstopable, then it should be able to jump between universes.

reply to post by Wifibrains


In this universe, there are no infinites... except, maybe, the size of the universe itself.

There is no object that is absolutely unmovable no no force absolutely irresistible or unstoppable. It's all human concept to measure values that we cannot fathom. We have to create a common reference point even where none exists.

The unstoppable force and the immovable object are entirely human creations.

Time is the unstoppable force, space is the immovable object.

Originally posted by GalaxyEyes
Time is the unstoppable force, space is the immovable object.

Space is empty... it is nothingness by itself. It is not an object

Time is not a force but a scientific concept to fill gaps in a specific equation to understand the universe. Besides that, even if it does exist, it is clear by way of those who wrote the book on it that it can be manipulated.

Originally posted by Cinrad
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

I disagree with your conclusions Wifibrains but I like the processes and new slants you brought in

In my opinion, the unstoppable force and immovable object cannot coexist in the same universe, any universe that has laws that allows both to form has opposing laws and therefore must cancel itself out of existence. However, if an unstoppable force is possible in one universe and it truly is unstopable, then it should be able to jump between universes.

Ok, we are in charge here so if we want to put them together in one space we can. To play with your concept for a min, what if, we we add in harmony, or chaos, or anything Inbetween as they are different ends of the same stick. Or both at the Same time even. It seems all the perceptions that contradict each other are what create reality.

reply to post by redoubt


I was going to say, is there not room for infinite possibilities, the the I thought. There isn't. Unles square orbits are possible? I don't thinks so. So pissibilities are limited.

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by Wifibrains

 

An unstoppable force... does not imply that it is moving. In fact, go push on a wall. You are exerting a force on it and are going nowhere. Force is dependent on acceleration, not velocity. You push on this wall and neither are moving nowhere and thus one would assume that there is no force... but in reality both are exerting the same force on each other.

This means, not looking at stupid variations in shape and whatnot... Just math... An unstoppable force and an unmovable object can exist. The force goes on forever but moves nowhere, and same is true of the object, It never moves but exerts an "unstoppable" force on the opposite force. Completely plausible.

EDIT: In response to other posts here I am saying that one of them doesn't have to be a fraud to fit the paradox, they just have to be the same thing, or two equivalent things. (Honestly that makes it less of a paradox because two things of equivalency can exist without being contradictory)

edit on 21-2-2013 by PhysicsAdept because: (no reason given)

You post confused me lol, your first paragraph debunked and your second agreed it was plausible. That's what I made of what you wrote anyway. Keeping the paradox there. Haha.