Irresistible force paradox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

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

What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?

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 (矛盾), literally "spear shield." This word originates from a story where a seller was trying to sell a spear and 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 all spear attacks. Then one person asked him what would happen if he were to take his spear to strike his shield. He could not answer, and this led to the idiom of 自相矛盾, or "self-contradictory".

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.

[edit] Solutions

the iresistable force is not imovable so it will move towards the imovable object until it is superimposed on the the imovable object producing a imovable object with an iresistable force (ct).

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.

[edit] The irresistible force paradox in popular culture

  • In the NFL, these terms are commonly used to describe a game when a high-powered offense meets an excellent defense.
  • In a Knight Rider episode (Trust doesn't Rust), the paradox is wrongly attributed to Zeno of Elea and its meaning is intentionally distorted.
  • In the 2002 World Cup final between Brazil and Germany, Brazil was referred to as the irresistible force (as they had scored more goals than any other team), and Germany as the unmovable object (as they had only conceded one goal in the whole tournament). Brazil won.
  • A variant of the paradox appears in the novel Walking on Glass by Iain Banks, where the solution is: "the immovable object moves; the unstoppable object stops."
  • Another answer is given in a MENSA puzzle book by Victor Serebriakoff (the former head of MENSA): by allowing the two to come together, a realistic answer that matches the semantics of the question is "an inconceivable event".
  • In World of Warcraft. when a player gets exalted reputation with the Alterac Valley battleground, among the rewards are The Unstoppable Force (a two-handed mace) and The Immovable Object (a shield). While they are specifically made for player versus player combat, they have no special properties contradicting each other, so the paradox itself is not addressed in-game.
  • The former X-Men villain known as Juggernaut used to be known as the unstoppable force. Another X-men villain called Blob, is said to be immovable, though he has been moved before by beings such as the Hulk. Many fans have had discussions over what would happen if the Juggernaut ran into the Blob.
  • Jarvis Cocker references the paradox (in a sexually suggestive way) in the Pulp song "Seductive Barry" (on the album This Is Hardcore), concluding that "when the immovable (or unmovable) object meets the unstoppable force, there's nothing you can do about it." Many lyrics websites misquote him as saying "unbelievable object".
  • In the comic All Star Superman, Lois is threatened with death by the Ultra-Sphinx. To save her, Superman must answer the Ultra-Sphinx's question correctly: "What happens when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object?" He thinks for a moment, and then correctly answers: "They surrender".
  • The tagline of the 1988 movie Bulletproof is "An unstoppable force is about to meet an unmovable object!"
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/r/r/Irresistible_force_paradox.html"
In other languages