Re: [Phys-l] (no subject)

[curtis osterhoudt <flutzpah@yahoo.com>]

It might be interesting to argue that the theoretically unstoppable object 
cannot be accelerated in any manner, and thus a co-moving frame constitutes a 
perfectly inertial frame. Go from there. Of course, to one outside of this 
collision's light-cone, nothing will have happened. A world-ending happening 
should at least have the courtesy to end *all* of the world, right?

 /**************************************
"The four points of the compass be logic, knowledge, wisdom and the unknown. 
Some do bow in that final direction. Others advance upon it. To bow before the 
one is to lose sight of the three. I may submit to the unknown, but never to the 
unknowable." ~~Roger Zelazny, in "Lord of Light"
***************************************/




________________________________
From: Brian Blais <bblais@bryant.edu>
To: Forum for Physics Educators <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Wed, February 23, 2011 7:40:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] (no subject)

On Feb 23, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Connie Tyree wrote:

> A student posed the following question:  What would happen if a 
> theoretically unstoppable object collides with a theoretically unmovable 
> object? He predicts everything...the world...would end.  I know the world 
> will not end...what is the opinion of this group?
>
> Connie L Tyree

I would say that in theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice 
they're not.  


I would add that the question is not defined, that the terms are not defined 
(there is no such thing as a theoretically unstoppable object, for example...the 
concept itself is not well defined).  thus, any result is possible but no result 
is derivable.


            bb

-- 
Brian Blais
bblais@bryant.edu
http://web.bryant.edu/~bblais
http://bblais.blogspot.com/



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l