Posted: 12/11/2002 7:35:31 PM EDT
|
Which one wins? |
|
Quoted: which came first, the chicken or the egg? The egg. Whatever animal the chicken evolved from laid an egg which contained the embrionic material that became the chicken. I think the real question is; did a supreme being cause the evolution of the chicken because they had already invisioned barbeque sauce? |
|
Quoted: The force is unstoppable. The object is immovable. The force will flow through or around the immovable object. That is a given by the definition of the question. They both win. Ah, but the individual atoms of the object will increase their kinetic energy as the force "flows through" the object, thus causing the atoms to [u]move[/u]. |
|
Obviously the Unstoppable force wins. The body that is carrying the kinetic energy always transfers some to the second body. Even if the Immovable Object has infinite inertia, so does the Unstoppable force. Therefore the ratio of their respective inertial forces is I(UF)/I(IO) = infinity/infinity or 1. At any value greater than zero, the Immovable Object will be displaced. The only value for I(UF) that satisfies this condition is infinity. Any other value yields zero. Unstoppable force wins. |
|
The real question here is "Is the 5.56 round sufficient when confronted with an unstoppable force or an immovable object" Personally i'd prefer the 50mm bigassmofo round chambered in a full auto bolt action revolver for such a confrontation. ALL YOU UNSTOPPABLE FORCE ARE BELONG TO US! |
|
Quoted: Is there a corollary question.....Black Hole v. White Hole? What is the result? I'm only assuming there IS a white hole, after all if there wasn't you would simply call a Black Hole the Hole. This is obviously a racist post i demad you explain yourself at once [:D] mike |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Is there a corollary question.....Black Hole v. White Hole? What is the result? I'm only assuming there IS a white hole, after all if there wasn't you would simply call a Black Hole the Hole. This is obviously a racist post i demad you explain yourself at once [:D] mike Wait a second...you mean this isn't the Macallan's 100th birthday leg-pulling celebration? OK, I'd like to express my profound regrets to all those who are offended and to their wives also, of course.[;)] |
|
Is there a corollary question.....Black Hole v. White Hole? What is the result? I'm only assuming there IS a white hole, after all if there wasn't you would simply call a Black Hole the Hole. The black hole is a outer space phenomenon. The white hole belongs to Laura Prepon, and I'd hit it. [;)] And I'll go with the immovable object, just to be different. |
|
Your question if flawed. [b]Newton's Second Law[/b] [i]A body subject to a non-zero net external force will have an acceleration that is proportional to that force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the body. F=ma.[/i] Combinine this with the [b]First Law of Thermodynamics[/b] [i]The change in internal energy of a system is equal to the heat added to the system minus the work done by the system. deltaU=Q-W.[/i] Also known as conservation of energy. No energy can be created or destroyed. It may only change phase. Therefore the "immovable object" is only a specified phase of chemical energy (and I'm assuming at absolute zero or it will in fact be moving) in a localized zone of lower entropy, and all force is by definition unstoppable since energy may only change phase, the answer is none of the above or both but not one or the other. |
|
That question is on a level with these: If there is a line of truly infinite length extending through the universe, does that line have a midpoint? Is ANY coordinate or positioning system relevant along its length? Is it possible for an object of infinite size to be moving along any axis that it is infinite in? The answer I'd give to the original question is that the irresistible (infinite) force would cause the immovable object to be converted to energy, as the conditions of the question do not specify that the immovable object is indestructible. And infinite force would indeed cause the object to be completely converted into energy in my opinion. Not that you could prove this impossible condition anyway. Or disprove it. CJ |
