Paradoxes
Created 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:34:45 UTC by
Alabastor_Twob
Created 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:34:45 UTC by
Alabastor_Twob
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:34:45 UTC
Post #224583
If an unstoppable object hit an immovable one, what would happen?
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:36:31 UTC
Post #224584
The unstoppable one would go straight through the ummovable one whilst the ummovable one wouldn't move from it.
Or the unstoppable object would go round it, over it, under it etc etc..
Or the unstoppable object would go round it, over it, under it etc etc..
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:45:02 UTC
Post #224589
The unstoppable object would rebound from the other one and keep his previous speed, only in a different direction.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:45:17 UTC
Post #224590
What if the unstoppable one couldn't change direction?
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:46:13 UTC
Post #224591
Then it would go straight through it. The unmovable one isn't invincible.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:51:26 UTC
Post #224593
The fallacy in the scenario is that nothing is unstoppable and nothing is unmovable.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 11:56:19 UTC
Post #224594
But what if they were?
And notice that in the name of the forum i used the plural of paradox.
What came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?
(the answer depends on your defenition of chicken egg)
And notice that in the name of the forum i used the plural of paradox.
What came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?
(the answer depends on your defenition of chicken egg)
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:05:54 UTC
Post #224598
That's like saying "what would a massless particle be like" (in modelling terms). They're mutually exclusive.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:12:29 UTC
Post #224599
Even energy has mass (i.e. photon).
Energy and mass are two different manifestations of the same thing.
Energy and mass are two different manifestations of the same thing.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:39:53 UTC
Post #224601
What came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?Egg.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:41:59 UTC
Post #224602
we never said that the immovable object is harder than the moving one. maybe the unstoppable one just gets obliterated and keeps going in tiny little particles ^^.
btw eggs came first, after all dinosaurs laid eggs =D
btw eggs came first, after all dinosaurs laid eggs =D
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:43:47 UTC
Post #224603
this just isn't worth discussion.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 12:46:25 UTC
Post #224605
Egg, came first, long live evolution theory!!
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 13:09:31 UTC
Post #224611
What came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?The cock that laid the chicken
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 13:38:25 UTC
Post #224613
This statement is false.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 14:11:45 UTC
Post #224617
If an unstoppable object hit an immovable one, it'd just keep going, surely? Immovable ain?t no mach for the unstoppable... 
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 14:57:59 UTC
Post #224620
Could God make a burrito so spicy even he could not eat it?
It boggles the mind.
It boggles the mind.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 21:13:15 UTC
Post #224640
If a man with a split personality tries to kill himself, is that a hostage situation??? 
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 21:30:28 UTC
Post #224641
If you were to build a time machine and you travel backwards in time for the sole reason to correct a past event and you succeed you would then have no need to have built the time machine. However if you hadn't built it you wouldn't have been able to travel backwards in time in order to fix that which was the sole reason for the aforementioned time machine (which would of course no longer exist)
...as fascinating as paradoxes are this thread makey brainy hurty.
...as fascinating as paradoxes are this thread makey brainy hurty.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 21:34:38 UTC
Post #224642
So... its like...
The Juggernaut versus the Blob... from X-men.
Honestly, my head heads.
The Juggernaut versus the Blob... from X-men.
Honestly, my head heads.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 21:39:07 UTC
Post #224643
Technically, the unmovable object is also unstoppable. Relativity people.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 21:53:15 UTC
Post #224644
The unmovable and unstoppable objects would reach equilibrium - both movable, both stoppable. That is, of course, assuming that both are indestructable.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-06 22:33:07 UTC
Post #224648
This is a lie.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 00:14:22 UTC
Post #224651
If a man with a split personality tries to kill himself, is that a hostage situation???That's "Fight Club".
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 09:38:39 UTC
Post #224657
If you were to build a time machine and you travel backwards in time for the sole reason to correct a past event and you succeed you would then have no need to have built the time machine. However if you hadn't built it you wouldn't have been able to travel backwards in time in order to fix that which was the sole reason for the aforementioned time machine (which would of course no longer exist)That reminds me. I saw Back to the Future 2 ages ago, and in it the elderly version of that big bully guy stole the time machine and went back in time to give his younger self the sports book. But for some reason, he comes back to the same future that he left.
How is this possible?
eggs came first, after all dinosaurs laid eggsYes, that's why I changed the original question and emphasised chicken egg.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:15:31 UTC
Post #224686
If Dave was awesome.... wait that'll never happen....
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:16:55 UTC
Post #224687
Yes, that's why I changed the original question and emphasised chicken egg.lies noone ever said: what came first the chicken or the chicken egg?
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:18:04 UTC
Post #224688
If me and Kasperg made a coop map, would the internet be able to contain it?
Actually him and I should just do it and get it over with.
Actually him and I should just do it and get it over with.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:24:54 UTC
Post #224689
Actually him and I should just do it and get it over with....but just make sure you use protection.
Remember what happened last time...
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:26:17 UTC
Post #224690
...0 0...
(___)
(___)
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:48:01 UTC
Post #224692
If Godzilla invaded tokyo but there were no buildings to smash, would he sti fight the giant moth?
Would anyone even care?
Would anyone even care?
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:54:11 UTC
Post #224693
If you were to build a time machine and you travel backwards in time for the sole reason to correct a past event and you succeed you would then have no need to have built the time machine. However if you hadn't built it you wouldn't have been able to travel backwards in time in order to fix that which was the sole reason for the aforementioned time machine (which would of course no longer exist)Let's go physical.
I'm not actually believing in this theory but it is worth thinking about.
You are in a specific point in spacetime, and you want to get to another one.
But as I said, I doubt that theory is true, but it is cool though.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 15:55:37 UTC
Post #224694
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 16:06:27 UTC
Post #224695
infinite amount of quantum dimensions solves that one. 
But if both realities continue as they do but you're on a different path, and since you left one reality, you dissappeared from that one and there are now two of you on the path you just joined.
You could continuesly visit other paths of time to create an army.
But if both realities continue as they do but you're on a different path, and since you left one reality, you dissappeared from that one and there are now two of you on the path you just joined.
You could continuesly visit other paths of time to create an army.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 16:14:58 UTC
Post #224698
Two of you in the same dimension? Where did the other one come from? :S
The one who "disappeared" from the first reality was in fact simply moved to the other by taking quite a detour through the fourth dimension.
Edit: Ahha! I think I figgured out how you thought rimrook.
You thought of that "imagining the tenth dimension thing" right?
If you travel back into your own childhood and cancel one reality out than there must be two of you, yes indeed.
But wait a sec.. what if you would travel into a point in time BEFORE your own childhood, and then triggering an event preventing you from being born.
In that way your "old future/reality" can't be canceled out because then you would have no point of existing in the new one.
Therefore, realities can't cease to exist.
The old reality is still there, and you're no longer in it, you've moved from one reality to another.
Awesome.
The one who "disappeared" from the first reality was in fact simply moved to the other by taking quite a detour through the fourth dimension.
Edit: Ahha! I think I figgured out how you thought rimrook.
You thought of that "imagining the tenth dimension thing" right?
If you travel back into your own childhood and cancel one reality out than there must be two of you, yes indeed.
But wait a sec.. what if you would travel into a point in time BEFORE your own childhood, and then triggering an event preventing you from being born.
In that way your "old future/reality" can't be canceled out because then you would have no point of existing in the new one.
Therefore, realities can't cease to exist.
The old reality is still there, and you're no longer in it, you've moved from one reality to another.
Awesome.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 17:16:06 UTC
Post #224702
Or... if you prevent yourself from existing, you will just.. cease to be.
nobody knows nor will we ever know.
Which is why im going outside and getting some fresh air before my head explodes.
nobody knows nor will we ever know.
Which is why im going outside and getting some fresh air before my head explodes.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 17:48:10 UTC
Post #224705
You can't cease to be because there will be a reality where you failed to stop yourself, or even decided not to.
Even, there is a dimension out there with a female version of yourself. Thats the only reason I'd EVER go through dimensions.
Even, there is a dimension out there with a female version of yourself. Thats the only reason I'd EVER go through dimensions.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 18:20:04 UTC
Post #224706
so you can go f*ck yourself??
no disrespect of course..
but i'd find it quite weird to see myself as a fem.
no disrespect of course..
but i'd find it quite weird to see myself as a fem.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 20:11:33 UTC
Post #224711
It's like masturbating.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 20:31:18 UTC
Post #224712
well.... either you hate yourself or love yourself and you get some from you're female counterpart.
If you hate yourself.... you're in the wrong dimension! so you now need to look for the one where you're female AND you like yourself
If you hate yourself.... you're in the wrong dimension! so you now need to look for the one where you're female AND you like yourself
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 20:52:33 UTC
Post #224716
rimrook....i had sex with your other-dimensional self. she was too hairy.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 21:19:49 UTC
Post #224721
That's "Fight Club".Haha, so it is.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 21:58:23 UTC
Post #224723
rimrook....i had sex with your other-dimensional self. she was too hairy.Than go to the dimension with the one that shaves you quantum nub.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-07 22:29:00 UTC
Post #224724
i stopped looking after 32 dimensions
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 00:31:03 UTC
Post #224725
I am content with one dimension.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 00:42:25 UTC
Post #224726
How do you work satch? I need at least 3...
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 05:44:44 UTC
Post #224732
hehe, ye 3 dimensions are plenty
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 06:01:38 UTC
Post #224733
OK HERE's 1:
Assuming that longcat is infinitely long and speedycat is infinitely speedy:
If longcat was to fall straight forward, towards speedy cat (who is at longcat's paws) and speedycat was to speed away from longcat in the same, constant direction as longcat's descent, would speedycat be able to avoid being crushed by longcat ?
see my diagram:
Assuming that longcat is infinitely long and speedycat is infinitely speedy:
If longcat was to fall straight forward, towards speedy cat (who is at longcat's paws) and speedycat was to speed away from longcat in the same, constant direction as longcat's descent, would speedycat be able to avoid being crushed by longcat ?
see my diagram:
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 06:46:44 UTC
Post #224734
No.
Posted 17 years ago2007-06-08 06:54:10 UTC
Post #224736
Why don't we stay in the same spot when we run forward on a bus? 
You must be logged in to post a response.