https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=172.64.236.161explain xkcd - User contributions [en]2026-06-27T08:20:48ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:3084:_Unstoppable_Force_and_Immovable_Object&diff=376183Talk:3084: Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object2025-05-03T06:55:03Z<p>172.64.236.161: ad isaac</p>
<hr />
<div><!-- Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom. --><br />
lol, i remember this explanation from a minutephysics video. however, the version of the problem i heard, which is actually paradoxical, is "what happens when an immovable object meets an '''irresistible''' force?" [[User:Not without text|Not without text]] ([[User talk:Not without text|talk]]) 00:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)<br />
:That was also literally my first thought. [[169]], anyone? --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 05:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Come on, it's just an arrow made of W- bosons, right? [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 03:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)<br />
Is there no joke here? Is it just the solution? [[User:Broseph|Broseph]] ([[User talk:Broseph|talk]]) 06:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I remember an explanation by Isaac Asimov in one of his books which was like "by definition, an immovable object will not move at all under any force in the universe, and an unstoppable force will move all of the objects in this way" and then explained how the definitions conflicted each other and as such prevented both from being able to register for the hypothetical at the same time [[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.161|172.64.236.161]] 06:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)</div>172.64.236.161