Shouldn't this trope be named "Irresistible Force Meets Immovable Object"? I've never heard this particular term, only "irresistible" against immovable instead.
I think it was already discussed in Image Picking.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The question is meaningless, because it can't happen. If an unstoppable force exists, then by definition there can be no immovable objects. If an immovable object exists, then there are no unstoppable forces. The two cannot exist in the same universe. It's a logical impossibility.
Hide / Show Replies
You can go to Trope Talk if you're interesting in discussing that bit, but this page is for talking about the state of the description and examples.
I have my own theory on the whole thing:
It all depends on how unstoppable a force is or how immovable an object is. Thus one of three things could happen:
1) If Force is stronger than Object, Force would move Object. (F > O = M)
2) If Object is stronger than Force, Object would stop Force. (O < F = S)
3) If Force and Object are of equal strength, Force would penetrate Object, leaving a hole behind. (O = F = P)
Thank you for your time.
Edited by 99.112.89.185
I think that if the Unstoppable Force were to ever crash into the Immovable Object, they would simply switch places (the Unstoppable Force becomes the Immovable Object and vice versa). The reason this is is because all of the UF's momentum (which is probably infinite, hence the "unstoppable") is transferred to the IO. Thus, the IO becomes the UF, and the UF, without its momentum powering it, becomes entrenched where it sits and becomes the IO.
Going to the current page image, it occurs to me that this is practically and literally demonstrated by the real difficulties in chemical engineering involved in working with fluorine and especially its acid compounds. I've read that fluorine's acids are so hyper-reactive that there are only a handful of substances that can be used as containers to store them in - that the acids can eat through practically anything. Of course, in reacting with their containers the fluoric acids cease to be acids and cease to be potent reagants. And the material used to contain them also ceases to be 100% unreactive. This is a variation on the theme of "the unstoppable force stops and the unmoveable object moves".
I just don't know enough about the chemistry or the engineering involved to be able to accurately write this, and I'm also mindful of the style point concerning referencing any page image in the page text (because page images may be changed, leaving a bafflingly irrelevant comment in the body of the work).
So is this idea worth following?