Title text:

Unstoppable force-carrying particles can’t interact with immovable matter by definition.

Transcript:

[An arrow pointing to the right and a trapezoid are labeled as ‘Unstoppable Force’ and ‘Immovable Object’ respectively.]
[The arrow is shown as entering the trapezoid from the left and the part of it in said trapezoid is coloured gray.]
[The arrow is shown as leaving the trapezoid to the right and is coloured black.]
[Caption below the panel:] I don’t see why people find this scenario to be tricky.

Source: https://xkcd.com/3084/

explainxkcd for #3084

  • Saleh@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    God is distinct from the creation and has no physical shape inside the creation so the idea of “object too heavy to lift” is already conceptually nonsensical.

    But also in the scope of our physics: What would an object be that is too heavy to “lift” for anyone and anything? It would be the heaviest object in the universe. So what will happen with the heaviest object in the universe? It would be the main center of gravity for everything else. In the same way you cannot “lift” the earth, but rather lift yourself from it as your force will just propel you away from the earth rather than the earth away from you, while you are inside the area dominated by earths gravitational field.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      When you jump you are pushing the earth away from yourself a little bit, and then some of your gravity pulls the earth back toward you. You have moved the earth, and for a brief moment your jump has in fact altered Earth’s orbit.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Relative to the sun, which is the next center of gravity. As you go up the chain you end up with the heaviest object which you cannot move relative to anything, as it is the logical point of relative movement for everything else.

        • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          Not relative to the sun, relative to momentum. Changes in the magnitude or direction of velocity are objective, not relative. These translate to real changes in momentum, from any reference frame. A real change in momentum is imparted upon the Earth roughly equal to your velocity relative to the earth multiplied by your mass at the moment your contact with the Earth ceases.

          ETA: I do actually agree with your salient point above: that lifting an object is relative to a given “down”, and so it is meaningless to expect to be able to “lift” the most massive object in the universe.

        • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          You need to be thinking about n-body physics though, everything affects everything. If the earth moves, that moves the sun a little, if the sun moves, that moves the local cluster a little, etc. Why wouldn’t that affect this heaviest object?

          I mean, are you suggesting that this heaviest object is simply the center of the universe and that all coordinates are defined around it? Because while that seems practical, I don’t think it’s how matter and space interact.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            The universe is expanding everywhere all at once in all directions. So space itself is “moving”. It is impossible to define movement except relative to another object made from matter.

            • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              24 hours ago

              Ok, I think we’re on the same page here. But I’m still not sure about one of your previous comments, you suggested that this “heaviest object” can’t move because it would be the logical reference to which any other body is measured.

              But I want to think about that a bit. Let’s say this heaviest object (HO) has something orbiting it and we’re looking at it from earth with a telescope. As the smaller body orbits, we would probably see this HO wobble, right? Meaning that even if it’s the most massive thing around, it’s still affected by other objects, it can be moved.