Unstoppable force vs. Immovable object

[Kyūbi no Yōko]

Yes, absolutely not related to Naruto (obviously).
But I want to see what you think.

Which one wins?

(I completely understand it's very complicated)

[Shikamaru Nara]

Unstoppable force.

It's unstoppable.

[ILIKEPIE]

unstoppable force it usally sends the immovable object flying

[Shikamaru Nara]

I c wat u did der.

[NBT]

Hogan.

[Kyūbi no Yōko]

Originally Posted by Shikamaru Nara

Unstoppable force.

It's unstoppable.

The object is immovable too. So how is the force going to move the object?

--

I'll explain.

The "Unstoppable Force vs. Immovable Object" is also known as the Irresistible Force Paradox. A paradox defies logic.

The apparent paradox arises because it rests on two premises—that there exist such things as irresistible forces and immovable objects—which cannot both be true at once. If there exists an irresistible force, it follows logically that there cannot be any such thing as an immovable object, and vice versa.

[The 1st Hokage]

Ustoppable force can't be stopped. You don't have to move something to beat it. Trust me.

[Frost ninja]

Juggernaut?

Yeah, unstoppable force.

[Wooster]

I will answer this if you can answer how many angels can dance on a head of a pin

[tsuki]

The correct answer is that they both cease to exist.

[The 1st Hokage]

Originally Posted by Wooster

I will answer this if you can answer how many angels can dance on a head of a pin

How many souls does a ginger have? None!

[Cult of Personality]

I win.

[9tail]

Lies. What would happen is that the object does not move, but the force moves past the object. It does not say that the force is infinitely powerful, just that it will not stop.

[Frost ninja]

Pretty much, being unstoppable doesn't necessarily mean it keeps a continual direction or applies infinate force, simply that it cannot cease movement. An immovable object, however, is an object that by nature cannot have any movement, regardless of circumstance.

So while the unstoppable force can be altered in direction by anything that would prevent its nature from existing (Hitting the immovable would stop him, so by nature he would keep moving in a different direction), the immovable object stays still since it cannot have motion.

Unstoppable force runs away.

[Taka-hebi1]

Neither nobody wins immovable isnt moved and unstoppable isnt stopped.

unstoppable hits immovable and unstoppable exerts force on immovable but isnt considered stopped because it exerts force but would unstoppable hitting immovable mean unstoppable's kinetic energy turns into potential?
but would that mean its stopped?

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Taka-hebi1

Neither nobody wins immovable isnt moved and unstoppable isnt stopped.

unstoppable hits immovable and unstoppable exerts force on immovable but isnt considered stopped because it exerts force but would unstoppable hitting immovable mean unstoppable's kinetic energy turns into potential?
but would that mean its stopped?

Assuming the unstoppable force would be applying all of its force to the immovable wall, it wouldn't stop per se but rather cease to move forward.

[Vivi]

Neither wins due to Paradox.

[Nick Tasogare]

Wouldn't the unstoppable force just move through the immovable object? The unstoppable force can't be stopped, and will continue moving forward. the immovable object can't be moved, so the unstoppable force just goes through it. Just because something can't be moved doesn't necessarily mean it is indestructible.

EDIT: Mfw I saw this was the BGs -

[Frost ninja]

Originally Posted by Nick Tasogare

Wouldn't the unstoppable force just move through the immovable object? The unstoppable force can't be stopped, and will continue moving forward. the immovable object can't be moved, so the unstoppable force just goes through it. Just because something can't be moved doesn't necessarily mean it is indestructible.

EDIT: Mfw I saw this was the BGs -

Well the thing is its unstoppable.
Not necessarily unturnable, unshakable... The idea that it would project itself through the object doesn't seem as plausable as it changing course when met with opposition. After all, the only way to judge it as "unstoppable" would be to prevent its movement and still have it move. Since the wall doesn't prevent its movement, only momentarily hinder it with a clear redirect path, the wall sits there and the force goes on its way due left.

And as the wall is "immovable" it is a granted its not possible to destroy a part of it since that section would then become "movable". If its part of the wall, any amount of force can be applied and it will not move in entirety, meaning yes... indestructible wall.

It wouldn't need to go through the wall, not when it can go around it by its own note. Unless you are saying the unstoppable force is moving through a hallway built with immovable objects, with no entrance or exit, in which case it fulfills its purpose by going from wall to wall and not stopping inbetween them.


A better question is putting an unstoppable force in an immovable body cast, and seeing if it can retain motion.

[Vatanui AKA Pride]

Funny how even The Dark Knight stopped to reflect on this subject.