Immovable object [vs] unstoppable object

[zman9000]

But was your spring massless with zero stiffness? :awe:

no, i was ten... but my brother said that part... and he was 8 :awe:/*cry*

And if you're not going to try to work toward a theoretical solution, there's no point in even discussing it to begin with.

we can, just not that one. springs.. just use a rubber Ball or rock... it will have almost the same effect... and besides, an unstoppable object does not slow down, change direction or form.

[Rockisftw]

I suppose a few things can be said..
Leaf, whats with all de formulas O-o!
Back onto the spring/rigid discussion, if it were between two rigid objects <assuming they are rigid, not springs or waves>; from the point of contact energy would just be exerted in some form or the other, sound, light, heat, etc, unless the "unstoppable" "object" is coming from all sides. In which case, we have to make up something imaginary here..

If it were based on a spring, the energy from an "unstoppable" force/object hitting the "immovable" object that acts like a spring, then the model would roughly equate
=====>|<=====
Yet, due to the very nature of being a "spring" means that it isn't immovable, it merely redirects the force back.
The other idea of it being an object at Absolute Zero <0K> is plausible, because we have absolutely no idea how Absolute Zero works. Mostly everything that we know and can formulate theories on are based on the idea that 0K is impossible. If 0K is possible, then nothing is interacting with it.. <Is that the right word? Maybe I should say influencing instead.> and the object itself is only capable of interacting with others <E.G. Gravity and so forth>. At least, my thoughts anyway.
Whoever said something about
            |======> <Infinity 1>
<====|======> <Infinity 2>
Minus the typing error, assuming the line is of the same origin; Where is the point of collision between the two forces? Don't they technically coexist? Based on the fact that this is also a mathematical equivilent, this graphed is either up or down the Y/X or a function, and if Inf. 1 is red and Inf. 2 is blue, its blue on the -infinity and purple on the +infinity. While coexistance is the word I used, there are probably more precise words, but you should catch my drift.

[Jiten]

As complex as it has gotten I'll give my influx:  If they collided and possessed infinite energy, the energy would just push away from each other due to the collision and disperse all over the lands. (Implicating that this is on earth) and they'd still collide with each other all day every day.  I think that sometimes, some people push far too deep into the void of thought when the think about things like this.

[zman9000]

from the point of contact energy would just be exerted in some form or the other, sound, light, heat, etc, unless the "unstoppable" "object" is coming from all sides. In which case, we have to make up something imaginary here..

wow... not to put you down... but i couldn't read/understand half of what you were talking about. but more importently, this quote from you...

energy being released... >_> o boy, and what really got me was this

unless the "unstoppable" "object" is coming from all sides.

where do i start... first off there is no energy being released as said objects are not breaking down...

and coming from all sides... explain to me how a solid object can hit something from all sides... and please leave the portal physics out of this.

[leaf]

If it's a gas exerting pressure on a solid, perhaps? That said, rock's post greatly confused me, too.

Leaf, whats with all de formulas O-o!

Uh... I haven't really been using many formulas here. I've been applying principles that have formulas associated with them, but it's not like I've been throwing a wall of formulas at you.

Back onto the spring/rigid discussion, if it were between two rigid objects <assuming they are rigid, not springs or waves>; from the point of contact energy would just be exerted in some form or the other, sound, light, heat, etc, unless the "unstoppable" "object" is coming from all sides. In which case, we have to make up something imaginary here..

You can make the assumption of a perfectly elastic collision. No energy is lost. No sound, no heat, no light, etc, are released. The total kinetic energy is the same before and after the collision.

If it were based on a spring, the energy from an "unstoppable" force/object hitting the "immovable" object that acts like a spring, then the model would roughly equate
=====>|<=====
Yet, due to the very nature of being a "spring" means that it isn't immovable, it merely redirects the force back.

I don't think you quite understand what a massless infinite spring of zero stiffness really means. While I'm sure you understand massless (m = 0) and infinite (its unstretched length is infinite), you may not understand what the physical meaning of zero stiffness really is.

A spring with infinite stiffness acts like a rigid body. It will perfectly resist deformation and directly transfer force from one side of the infinite stiffness spring to the other. A spring with zero stiffness, however, transfers no force. It is perfectly deformed, absorbing no energy in the process. Remember that formula you learned in physics for the spring force? F = kx? Or the potential energy of a spring? E = 1/2*k*x^2? Set k = 0 and see what happens to those. By setting the spring's stiffness to zero, it allows the sphere to collide with the spring and infinitely compress it, without transmitting any of the force to the cube. The sphere remains in constant motion the whole time, and never loses any energy or momentum. Then, since the spring is massless, even though it is being infinitely compressed, the center of mass of the object never changes, and is always located at the center of the cube.

The other idea of it being an object at Absolute Zero <0K> is plausible, because we have absolutely no idea how Absolute Zero works. Mostly everything that we know and can formulate theories on are based on the idea that 0K is impossible. If 0K is possible, then nothing is interacting with it.. <Is that the right word? Maybe I should say influencing instead.> and the object itself is only capable of interacting with others <E.G. Gravity and so forth>. At least, my thoughts anyway.
Whoever said something about
            |======> <Infinity 1>
<====|======> <Infinity 2>
Minus the typing error, assuming the line is of the same origin; Where is the point of collision between the two forces? Don't they technically coexist? Based on the fact that this is also a mathematical equivilent, this graphed is either up or down the Y/X or a function, and if Inf. 1 is red and Inf. 2 is blue, its blue on the -infinity and purple on the +infinity. While coexistance is the word I used, there are probably more precise words, but you should catch my drift.

The rest of this is all gibberish. I'm not even gonna try to make sense of it.

---

...however, I will admit, the "unstoppable object" exerting a pressure on the "immovable object" is an interesting idea. Congrats on coming up with that one, rock. If we assume the immovable object to be a particle of infinite mass in an inertial reference frame, we can define the "unstoppable object" as a hollow sphere of dynamic radius. The sphere is always a sphere (it cannot be deformed into a shape that is not a sphere), but it is possible to increase or decrease its diameter with infinite force. Since this is a pressure force, we can choose to have the sphere be compressed. Anything that is larger than the new diameter of the sphere will be crushed to fit within it. This sphere then crushes the immovable object. However, because the immovable object was already a point in space, it is impossible to compress it further than that. The sphere infinitely reduces its size to approach zero radius at the same point in space as the immovable object, but, because it is impossible to reach zero from a finite value, the unstoppable object never actually reaches zero radius. This process continues for eternity. The end result is that the immovable object never moves, and the unstoppable object never stops.

[Rockisftw]

If it's a gas exerting pressure on a solid, perhaps? That said, rock's post greatly confused me, too.

Leaf, whats with all de formulas O-o!

Uh... I haven't really been using many formulas here. I've been applying principles that have formulas associated with them, but it's not like I've been throwing a wall of formulas at you.

Back onto the spring/rigid discussion, if it were between two rigid objects <assuming they are rigid, not springs or waves>; from the point of contact energy would just be exerted in some form or the other, sound, light, heat, etc, unless the "unstoppable" "object" is coming from all sides. In which case, we have to make up something imaginary here..

You can make the assumption of a perfectly elastic collision. No energy is lost. No sound, no heat, no light, etc, are released. The total kinetic energy is the same before and after the collision.

If it were based on a spring, the energy from an "unstoppable" force/object hitting the "immovable" object that acts like a spring, then the model would roughly equate
=====>|<=====
Yet, due to the very nature of being a "spring" means that it isn't immovable, it merely redirects the force back.

I don't think you quite understand what a massless infinite spring of zero stiffness really means. While I'm sure you understand massless (m = 0) and infinite (its unstretched length is infinite), you may not understand what the physical meaning of zero stiffness really is.

A spring with infinite stiffness acts like a rigid body. It will perfectly resist deformation and directly transfer force from one side of the infinite stiffness spring to the other. A spring with zero stiffness, however, transfers no force. It is perfectly deformed, absorbing no energy in the process. Remember that formula you learned in physics for the spring force? F = kx? Or the potential energy of a spring? E = 1/2*k*x^2? Set k = 0 and see what happens to those. By setting the spring's stiffness to zero, it allows the sphere to collide with the spring and infinitely compress it, without transmitting any of the force to the cube. The sphere remains in constant motion the whole time, and never loses any energy or momentum. Then, since the spring is massless, even though it is being infinitely compressed, the center of mass of the object never changes, and is always located at the center of the cube.

The other idea of it being an object at Absolute Zero <0K> is plausible, because we have absolutely no idea how Absolute Zero works. Mostly everything that we know and can formulate theories on are based on the idea that 0K is impossible. If 0K is possible, then nothing is interacting with it.. <Is that the right word? Maybe I should say influencing instead.> and the object itself is only capable of interacting with others <E.G. Gravity and so forth>. At least, my thoughts anyway.
Whoever said something about
            |======> <Infinity 1>
<====|======> <Infinity 2>
Minus the typing error, assuming the line is of the same origin; Where is the point of collision between the two forces? Don't they technically coexist? Based on the fact that this is also a mathematical equivilent, this graphed is either up or down the Y/X or a function, and if Inf. 1 is red and Inf. 2 is blue, its blue on the -infinity and purple on the +infinity. While coexistance is the word I used, there are probably more precise words, but you should catch my drift.

The rest of this is all gibberish. I'm not even gonna try to make sense of it.

---

...however, I will admit, the "unstoppable object" exerting a pressure on the "immovable object" is an interesting idea. Congrats on coming up with that one, rock. If we assume the immovable object to be a particle of infinite mass in an inertial reference frame, we can define the "unstoppable object" as a hollow sphere of dynamic radius. The sphere is always a sphere (it cannot be deformed into a shape that is not a sphere), but it is possible to increase or decrease its diameter with infinite force. Since this is a pressure force, we can choose to have the sphere be compressed. Anything that is larger than the new diameter of the sphere will be crushed to fit within it. This sphere then crushes the immovable object. However, because the immovable object was already a point in space, it is impossible to compress it further than that. The sphere infinitely reduces its size to approach zero radius at the same point in space as the immovable object, but, because it is impossible to reach zero from a finite value, the unstoppable object never actually reaches zero radius. This process continues for eternity. The end result is that the immovable object never moves, and the unstoppable object never stops.

I just got out of Chemistry. And when a formula is used, meh. Fact of the matter is I've been up just over 40 hours and it looked like alot to me O-o.
And its called a perfectly elastic collision.. Thanks. I didn't know.
^Hence my level of education error, and the fact that I've always intended a spring to return force.. Like, with a pen.

And the gibberish.. Uhh.. How do I put it;
Someone said something about Absolute Zero which is 0K, and because noone knows how that acts except its particles do not move, nothing has outside influence on it.
So my assumption is it is able to affect other objects, while not being affected by other things.
And by the wierd lines, imagine your standard X/Y graph. One object goes from 0,0 to +infinity, +infinity. Let that line be colored red on the graph.
The second object goes from -inf, -inf to +inf, +inf, and set its territory covered to blue. You end up with purple as the "overlap" which.. do I really have to go over that?

[leaf]

...I understand that red+blue = purple. I also understand how that graph would look. What I don't understand is what that had to do with anything.

As for the absolute zero stuff, that was actually just supposed to be a way to restrict the immovable object's molecular motion, if that would be a necessary constraint. I don't think it would actually do much for the rest of the problem. In fact, using that condition probably just makes it harder to solve.

[Rockisftw]

I thought that would've disproven the fact that they are the "same" object as many people have stated, because if they were the same, then the universe is finite and it merely loops upon itself.

Meaning that in the end, they are two different objects which can technically coexist in the same space, at the very least on charts.

[Aile~♥]

Umm... what?

Rock, I can't even tell what you're trying to say with that.

[zman9000]

Umm... what?

Rock, I can't even tell what you're trying to say with that.

I think we can all agree that Rockisftw doesn't get this topic at all.
In fact i'm so confused that I almost feel like starting over.......

But at least I think each person should try to sum up their own answer for the problem, as short as possible, but not to short as to confuse people.
I'll then take those and put them in spoilers at the top of the first post with their name. Then we can go through them and discus them.

[leaf]

I'll just quote myself. Two possible solutions:

The unstoppable object is defined as a sphere of arbitrary size, arbitrary (and finite) velocity in the positive x-direction, and mass m1 = infinity. The immovable object is defined as a massless infinite spring with zero stiffness that extends in the negative x-direction from the origin, which is attached to a cube of arbitrary size with mass m2 = m1^2 and a = 0, v = 0, x = 0 with respect to an inertial reference frame. The sphere collides with the spring and compresses the spring infinitely, never slowing down or changing direction. The cube does not move from its inertial reference position.

If we assume the immovable object to be a particle of infinite mass in an inertial reference frame, we can define the "unstoppable object" as a hollow sphere of dynamic radius. The sphere is always a sphere (it cannot be deformed into a shape that is not a sphere), but it is possible to increase or decrease its diameter with infinite force. Since this is a pressure force, we can choose to have the sphere be compressed. Anything that is larger than the new diameter of the sphere will be crushed to fit within it. This sphere then crushes the immovable object. However, because the immovable object was already a point in space, it is impossible to compress it further than that. The sphere infinitely reduces its size to approach zero radius at the same point in space as the immovable object, but, because it is impossible to reach zero from a finite value, the unstoppable object never actually reaches zero radius. This process continues for eternity. The end result is that the immovable object never moves, and the unstoppable object never stops.

Both of these meet the conditions that the immovable object's center of mass does not have a change in position, velocity, or acceleration, and the unstoppable object always maintains a positive velocity.

[Jiten]

It would depend on what kind of energy is is driving the 2 against each other.  Personally,  if it was kinetic energy, I believe it would cause earhtquake.  Massive Tsunamis' would erupt do the vicious seismic activity from the 2 colliding together, ripping apart the earth bit by bit, causing mountains to develop at unrealistic speeds and eventually rip the earth into shards.  However, before that occured, there would be Climate changes with wind patterns and many more omnious things occuring

If it was electric energy, the oceans would be a instant death-trap, followed by vicious lightning surging through the skies, frying innocent people cooking them instantly.  Those who has more metal around them that day might get a bigger dose of lightning while acting as conductors (on a slight margin..) and pass it to other objects and people.  The power would indefinitely go out for the entire earth and it would be a pitch black death with rapid flashes of lightning.

If it was fire, I'm sure the energy scattered would burn the earth with hellish firestorms, ravaging the lands, causing destruction on a wide-edge scale that's so intense, that it would burn up the oceans waters and it would be like a oversized volcano.  Corpses would be charred within a few brief moments, ash in a few more, than ash in lava for the final moments.  Firestorms would be all over the planet like a sprinting inferno until the earth was engulfed in fire.

If the 2 Objects had water....Well this whole world would be blue.  People would drown, heavy rains, tsunamis' of greater capacity would drown everyone despite how high they were and eventually the world would be wiped out.  However it would still stand for each passing day.

If energy clashes with one another, they're bound to disperse offset energy somewhere else due to angles, collision of force,velocity, etc.  too many factors would come into play.  However,  if the main base foundation is purely the energy itself, then quite possibly, velocity & force would have very little to do with the situation of clashing, albeit nothing at all.  The objects would stay in the action that were intended for while they unknowningly ravage the lands to death that the Immovable Obect  & Unstoppable Object are taking place on.  I was under the assumption it was earth.

It's just a 2-hour development of a theory that would seem possible. 

All I can say in the Mist of all of this is this:  Limitless Possiblities...There's many other ideas out there in this world that we haven't discovered yet,  so it's unknown for now....

[Rockisftw]

Umm... what?

Rock, I can't even tell what you're trying to say with that.

I think we can all agree that Rockisftw doesn't get this topic at all.
In fact i'm so confused that I almost feel like starting over.......

More or less, I was just trying to look at other people's solutions and put out my thoughts on them. Not that I don't get the topic at all, and you really shouldn't have said that.

[Jiten]

you really shouldn't have said that.
[/quote]

Hm..?  War in the Midst ? Well what are you thoughts on mine Mr. Rock ?

[leaf]

Ixion... your posts... make no sense... whatsoever.

Earthquakes? Tsunamis? Lightning? Infernos? What? Why? Why would any of that even matter? Who said that this was taking place on earth? And WHY would it be using anything except kinetic and potential energy?

[Jiten]

Ixion... your posts... make no sense... whatsoever.

Earthquakes? Tsunamis? Lightning? Infernos? What? Why? Why would any of that even matter? Who said that this was taking place on earth? And WHY would it be using anything except kinetic and potential energy?

I guess I built too much around the Idea ???

Oops.

On a side note, would the Kinetic Energy be even remotely close ?

[Misery]

hmm, and here I though this topic would die in peace...

Ixion: your post made me lol heartily. Hope you're not going to take that personally, I just thought it was funny.

leaf: regarding your cube with spring solution, there would be no need for the unstoppable object to be an infinite distance away from the immovable one's center of mass - it could just have hit the spring from any direction, and the same conditions would have been fulfilled. But anyway, we don't really have the problem statement of "how would it be possible for [these two objects] to collide?", there's only the simple question of "what would happen?".

It should be noted (although leaf kind of pointed it out already) that it's physically impossible for these two objects to exist in the same universe, unless we go with what Atrius said - they can't interact with each other (which would also mean they can't collide, which gets pretty funny if you think of the spear/shield version of it). There's a very simple reason for this - an unstoppable object is called unstoppable because there exists nothing that can stop it. Vice versa for the immovable one, if there existed unstoppable objects, it wouldn't be immovable.

[Jiten]

Huh,  well I can where that's going in some way.