Comments on: What would happen if an unstoppable force met an immoveable object?

By: Bruce Armstrong

Bruce Armstrong — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 05:22:00 +0000

And what entire point is he missing exacty?

By: gehringer

gehringer — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:23:00 +0000

…from your frame of reference.

By: Derek Graf

Derek Graf — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 19:09:00 +0000

Ok king nerd

By: EichaelThe0ne

EichaelThe0ne — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:11:00 +0000

I totally agree. It feels like the guy in this video was trying to be one of those fancy new hip vid bloggers who can memorize a script really well and emote as though it is the first time. Honestly, I lost track of what he was saying because IT WAS BORING. You know what I think about when I think about this phrase? Heath Ledger swinging upside down from a cable while doing some of the best acting ever acted.

Not this. Not even close to this.

By: justonpayne

justonpayne — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 07:07:00 +0000

Remember that smart ass in high school who would go on semantic diatribes to prove how smart he was, but everyone knew he was missing the entire point?

This video.

This stupid, stupid video.

By: Erik Osterholm

Erik Osterholm — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 03:00:00 +0000

If they are polite, they will shake hands and say, “Nice to meet you.”

By: pjcamp

pjcamp — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 02:21:00 +0000

What happens is minute physics takes 3 1/2 minutes.

By: DevinC

DevinC — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 01:02:00 +0000

The video was a purely physical approach to the problem. But it’s not just a physical question, it’s a logical one: what happens when two contradictory definitions are both true at the same time?

Well, let’s see what happens when we assume two contradictory premisses, one the negation of the other:
A & not A (contradiction!)
So A,
So A or B (where B can be anything at all, and ‘or’ is inclusive, i.e., if both A and B are true, then A or B is also true),
But not A,
So B (because if one half of an ‘or’ is false, the other half must be true to make the ‘or’ true.)

So the logical answer to the question is anything can happen. If you live in a universe where two absolute but contradictory definitions are both true, your universe is so screwed up that causality is completely out to lunch.

By: bluest_one

bluest_one — Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:35:00 +0000

I always thought it was “the unstoppable object stops and the immovable object moves”.

By: Zach Wagner

Zach Wagner — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:07:00 +0000

The answer is “They surrender”.

By: NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA

NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:42:00 +0000

What was it, Thor’s hammer thrown at Dr. Manhattan… or something.

By: bjepson

bjepson — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:12:00 +0000

Where’s the kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom!

By: zombieite

zombieite — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:32:00 +0000

So, the fact that this question has never made any sense to me indicates that I was right all along.

By: Wreckrob8

Wreckrob8 — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:17:00 +0000

There would be a semantic meltdown.