Isaac Asimov answered this question rather neatly, I thought. I can't remember in which of his many books I read it (it was a long time ago), but the gist of his argument was this: A universe in which there exists such a thing as an irresistible force is, by definition, a universe which cannot also contain an immovable object. And a universe which contains an immovable object cannot, by definition, also contain an irresistible force. So the question is essentially meaningless: either the force is irresistible or the object is immovable, but not both.
This was my first introduction to philosophy. It was also my first introduction to the notion that ideas which are actually incoherent, when analysed, can nevertheless be extremely useful metaphors. I can think of no better way to describe some encounters between two-year-olds and their mothers, for example.
The correct setup would be "What would happen if an immovable object were confronted with an unstoppable force." We will have to further define out unstoppable force as having infinite momentum (right?) and the immovable object having infinite inertia (right.) Therefore, our unstoppable force would have an infinite energy (measure this in joules/calories/whatever) and the unstoppable force would be able to absorb infinite energy.
There would be an endless transfer of energy.
The two would appear as if they are resting, but are actually transferring their infinite energies from one to the other. Equilibrium or a relation would never be established since we're dealing in the infinite regarding energy.
the force goes through the object
They cancel each other out
when water vapor meets a cold object or surface the warmer droplets begin to condense and form into bigger water droplets.
When light meets any of the object it interacts with it...the interaction can be reflection, refraction, absorption, polarisation,diffraction or interference depending upon the nature of the body with which it interacts.
It is impossible for a juggernaut and an immovable object to exist in the same universe and dimension.
That will never happen - it can't happen actually. Any time you apply a force to an object, it will accelerate - its velocity will change.
It depends on the object that it goes through, because if a the surface of an object is big, the more drag it produces. If the object has a small surface that meets the air, then it won't produce drag that much.
Newton's second law of motion is when an object meets force it will accelerate.
Yes, a falling apple meets that condition.
An object can be rated on how well it meets given criteria. For example, food can be rated on how well it tastes, or how nutritious it is. But an object's rating does not necessarily equal how well it meets the given criteria; it is a subjective measurement representing how well the rater thinks it meets the criteria. For instance, a rater with a poor understanding of nutrition may rate a food to be more nutritious than it is. In this case, when an object's rating exceeds its actual value, it is considered overrated.