This damn quote is driving me crazy

[Lucky~9~Lives]

Loshi Deneb

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Arguing the question is such a cop-out =/

Oh, okay. Tits would happen. Lots of tits. Bit late now, mind...
- ninja

[Xitemo]

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Not exactly. I know it's impossible, but so is infinity, yet we still have a whole branch of mathmatics revolving around it.

[Lucky~9~Lives]

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Not exactly. I know it's impossible, but so is infinity, yet we still have a whole branch of mathmatics revolving around it.

Infinity isn't a self-contradicting concept i.e. there's a difference between not existing and being self-negating.

[Sweetpea The Tigress]

Loshi Deneb

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Arguing the question is such a cop-out =/

I was under the impression that there would be some kind of universe destroying explosion... confused

[Xitemo]

Loshi Deneb

*Assuming this is possible, which it isn't, but for the sake of argument*

Um. The unstoppable force would be forced to occupy a space that was not blocked by the immovable object.

Therefore it would change direction to go around the immovable object.

This sounds valid, but something feels just a bit off...wouldn't the force have to stop for a split second to change directions? Or no?

[Xitemo]

Sweetpea The Tigress

Loshi Deneb

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Arguing the question is such a cop-out =/

I was under the impression that there would be some kind of universe destroying explosion... confused

That sounds like a sort of possiblity...but where would the expolsion come from? The unstoppable force splitting?

[Xitemo]

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."

What would happen? No matter how I think about it, I can't come to an answer :/

It's a nonsense sentence, like 'what happens when a triangle has four-sides?' - if there is an unstoppable force, there can't be an immovable object by definition, and vice-versa.

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Not exactly. I know it's impossible, but so is infinity, yet we still have a whole branch of mathmatics revolving around it.

Infinity isn't a self-contradicting concept i.e. there's a difference between not existing and being self-negating.

What about Infinity minus infinty? It equals zero. Which is a real outcome.

[Iggy The Balrog]

The existence of either invalidates the exist of... the other one.

The situation is voided by definition.

[Lucky~9~Lives]

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Lucky~9~Lives

Xitemo

Hmm. True, but this is a hypothetical situation. So hypothetically what would happen?

Again, it makes no sense - it's as valid as asking 'hypothetically, what purple monkey dishwasher?'.

Not exactly. I know it's impossible, but so is infinity, yet we still have a whole branch of mathmatics revolving around it.

Infinity isn't a self-contradicting concept i.e. there's a difference between not existing and being self-negating.

What about Infinity minus infinty? It equals zero. Which is a real outcome.

No, not always...and even if it did, so what?

Iggy The Balrog

The existence of either invalidates the exist of... the other one.

The situation is voided by definition.

Bingo.

[Xitemo]

Iggy The Balrog

The existence of either invalidates the exist of... the other one.

The situation is voided by definition.

I know I know, I'm not here to argue if it could happen, becasuse it couldn't. This is -hypothetical-. for arguement's sake we'll say they are both drawing their energy from a seperate but equally infinite energy source.

[Loshi Deneb]

Xitemo

Loshi Deneb

*Assuming this is possible, which it isn't, but for the sake of argument*

Um. The unstoppable force would be forced to occupy a space that was not blocked by the immovable object.

Therefore it would change direction to go around the immovable object.

This sounds valid, but something feels just a bit off...wouldn't the force have to stop for a split second to change directions? Or no?

No. The molecules of the object could maintain cohesion and would simply shift their direction of force. Think of a ball, for example. It can go in a straight line, unspinning. It would then hit the object, and then roll in a direction where it's force could go. Very similar to how a vacuum "must be filled", the object would act as though the entirety of space around it was a vacuum, and therefore must move in another direction.

[DJ-Anarchy]

Michael Noire

it's the same thing that happens when you divide by zero.

Yep.

http://shhac.info/x/b/divide_by_zero.jpg

[C H 3 R R Y S o D A]

it bounces off?

[Lucky~9~Lives]

Xitemo

Iggy The Balrog

The existence of either invalidates the exist of... the other one.

The situation is voided by definition.

I know I know, I'm not here to argue if it could happen, becasuse it couldn't.

Irrelevant. Another tack:

"What would happen if the four-sided triangle were red?"

See how meaningless that is? Because we define triangles as having three-sides, not four - and an immovable object, by definition, voids the possibility of there being an unstoppable force, and vice-versa. Having them in the same sentence (scenario) is thus meaningless - not only could it not happen, it makes no sense.

[Xitemo]

Loshi Deneb

Xitemo

Loshi Deneb

*Assuming this is possible, which it isn't, but for the sake of argument*

Um. The unstoppable force would be forced to occupy a space that was not blocked by the immovable object.

Therefore it would change direction to go around the immovable object.

This sounds valid, but something feels just a bit off...wouldn't the force have to stop for a split second to change directions? Or no?

No. The molecules of the object could maintain cohesion and would simply shift their direction of force. Think of a ball, for example. It can go in a straight line, unspinning. It would then hit the object, and then roll in a direction where it's force could go. Very similar to how a vacuum "must be filled", the object would act as though the entirety of space around it was a vacuum, and therefore must move in another direction.

Hmm....yeah that makes sense. Technically that doesn't violate either of the conditions for either object.