English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-14 03:50:15 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music Polls & Surveys

Sometimes I despair.....(head in hands).

2007-06-14 03:59:27 · update #1

18 answers

You are describing many marriages. I guess which ever is the woman at the time, will win.

2007-06-14 03:55:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The Irresistible force paradox is a classic paradox formulated as follows:

What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

Confusing? Common responses to this paradox resort to logic and semantics.

Logic: if such a thing as an irresistible force exists, then no object is immovable, and vice versa. It is logically impossible to have these two entities (a force that cannot be resisted and an object that cannot be moved by any force) in the same universe.

Semantics: if there is such a thing as an irresistible force, then the phrase immovable object is meaningless in that context, and vice versa, and the issue amounts to the same thing as asking, e.g., for a triangle that has four sides.
This paradox is a form of the omnipotence paradox, but that paradox is most often discussed in the context of God's omnipotence (Can God create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?).

The paradox should be understood as an exercise in logic, not as the postulation of a possible reality. According to modern scientific understanding, there are not and indeed cannot be either irresistible forces or immovable objects. An immovable object would have to have infinite inertia and therefore infinite mass. Such an object would collapse under its own gravity and create a singularity. An irresistible force would imply an infinite energy, which by Albert Einstein's equation E = mc2 is equivalent to an infinite mass. Note that, in the modern view, a cannonball which cannot be deflected and a wall which cannot be knocked down are both types of the same (impossible) object: an object with infinite inertia.

An example of this paradox in non-western thought can be found in the origin of the Chinese word for paradox (Chinese: 矛盾; Pinyin: máodùn; literally "Spear-Shield"). This term originates from a story in the 3rd century BC philosophical book Han Feizi.[1] In the story, a man was trying to sell a spear and a shield. When asked how good his spear was, he said that his spear could pierce any shield. Then, when asked how good his shield was, he said that it could defend from all spear attacks. Then one person asked him what would happen if he were to take his spear to strike his shield; the seller could not answer. This led to the idiom of "zìxīang máodùn" (自相矛盾), or "self-contradictory".

Solutions
Many possible solutions have been proffered, including one that has the immovable object never moving and the irresistible force never stopping; the irresistible force becomes exponentially slower forever, in order to avoid violating the trait of the immovable object, and so the two never actually collide. A similar solution has the two objects pass through one another, so the force never stops and the object never moves. Neither is a real solution, as the question is "What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" Another idea is that the irresistible force will remove a piece from the immovable object or the irresistible force will deflect similar to a light beam on a mirror. Some may maintain that as both have equal physical power (infinity), they will merely cancel each other out and neither will move.

Another approach to this paradox is to simply state that the object will continue to exist, since by definition an irresistible force is an immovable object.

The correct solution is that the paradox itself is a contradiction. If there exists an irresistable force, there is no immovable object, and vice-versa.

2007-06-14 10:58:09 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

It `s all a little play on words as there is no such thing as an unstoppable force except the passage of time and there is no such thing as an unmovable object.
It is just company speak to confound the staff.

2007-06-14 11:00:37 · answer #3 · answered by McCanns are guilty 7 · 1 0

If the unstoppable object is clever enough,it will avoid the unmovable one...(if it really want`s to remain unstoppable)

2007-06-14 11:00:46 · answer #4 · answered by Mark 2 · 1 0

it will make a hole in the object and go through or bounce off

what may happen on the 24th on november this year 2 atoms wil collide and there is a one in 50 million chance that a black hole will be created or the fabric of space will rip some thing likle that will happen find out how to stop them fromm killing us all horizon hadron particle collider will destroy al life on 24th novermber 2007 kis your buts goodbye ne wbig bang is the aim of the experiment to find a stupid particle that may not exist

2007-06-14 10:57:40 · answer #5 · answered by Daniel B 2 · 1 0

Quality Entertainment!

2007-06-14 10:55:02 · answer #6 · answered by Iggy 7 · 1 0

Chuck Norris

2007-06-14 10:53:57 · answer #7 · answered by mrbatfink 3 · 1 1

I reckon there would be a massive explosion with shrapnel flying every where and everyone would try and run for cover and you would get the odd mad few trying to get footage of it and then they would die and the world would come to an end.

2007-06-14 10:59:42 · answer #8 · answered by Jane H 4 · 1 0

A heck of a big bang so take cover. It could go on for a long. long time.

2007-06-14 10:54:35 · answer #9 · answered by SYJ 5 · 1 0

Chaos ensues....it is a push and pull match, to the death.

2007-06-14 10:54:53 · answer #10 · answered by Rowan 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers