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

  • ripcord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    But black holes have finite mass. By “heavy” you’re implying it’s infinitely heavy or something.

    You can definitely also lift a black hole.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Well I don’t know about any objects more massive than black holes. I think a black hole is really the only viable form a body can take once there’s enough matter in one place, like there’s an upper limit for the size of stars and after that anything larger collapses into a black hole.

      An object of infinite mass is a contradiction, a universe can’t exist with a single object of infinite mass, it would consume everything instantly.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        OK, but being very massive is not the same as what was being discussed.

        You can also “lift” a finitely massive black hole with anything else massive.

      • Snazz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        It may be worth it to decide how we define ‘unstoppable force’ and ‘immovable object’.

        An Immovable Object has 0 velocity:

        v = 0

        Acceleration is the time derivative of velocity:

        a = d/dt(v(t))

        a = d/dt(0)

        a = 0

        And we know that

        a = Fnet / m

        An object with infinite mass would satisfy this equation, but an object with no net force would too. We could add a correction force that will satisfy the constraint of 0 net force.

        |Fnet| = 0

        ∑Fi = 0

        Fcorrection + … = 0

        To satisfy Newton’s 3rd law, we would need a reaction force to our correction force somewhere, but let’s not worry about that for now.

        A physics definition of ‘Unstoppable Force’ is:

        |Funstoppable| =/= 0

        In this case the gravitational force fits this description, given a few constraints

        Fg = Gm∑ Mi / xi2

        As long as the gravitational constant G is not 0, our object has mass, and

        ∑ Mi / xi2 =/= 0, then

        |Fg| > 0

        But this does feel kinda like cheating because it’s not really what people mean by ‘unstoppable force’. the other way to define it is just immovable object in a different reference frame.

        a = 0, |v| > 0

        I’m gonna stop here because this is annoying to type out on mobile