They would bounce back in the opposite direction.
With out batteries some electronic machines , objects etc. do not work . Most of the machines , objects etc. consist and needs batteries (NOTE :- ( I HOPE MY ANSWER IS CORRECT ))
no
Nothing would happen.
Exorable isn't an actual word. Inexorable is a word and means "unstoppable; adament and pitiless; not moved by anyone's attempts to plead or persuade," or "relentless; a person or attribute that cannot be persuaded by request or entreaty." Synonyms include unstoppable, inevitable, unavoidable, inescapable, unchangeable, relentless, inflexible, adamant, and obdurate. Used in a sentence: The inexorable tyrant cared for no one but himself and would not change his mind or course of action for anything.
No I want the answer
the particles would split tocreate multiple unstoppable objects
If the unstoppable object was smaller, then it would pierce a hole through the immovable object, not moving the object, and not stopping.
Since these are extremes that cannot be acheived due to the laws of physics, it cannot happen. However, If it could happen, I suspect a paradox would occur.
Since these are extremes that cannot be acheived due to the laws of physics, it cannot happen. However, If it could happen, I suspect a paradox would occur.
Since these are extremes that cannot be acheived due to the laws of physics, it cannot happen. However, If it could happen, I suspect a paradox would occur.
Nothing
All the objects will float if there will be no gravity. Gravity is the earth's pull on objects.
If objects didn't have mass... then you would be floting in the air and...every thing wouldn't stay in place.
they would both lose.
Basic paradoxes are examples of questions that cannot be answered. For example, what happens when an immovable object meets an unstoppable force? Since neither an immovable object nor an unstoppable force exist in reality, there is no way to determine what would happen in this theoretical situation. Source: personal experience
The days would be shorter. Objects would be slightly less heavy, but not noticeably.
This is an exercise in logic. If an unstoppable force exists, then an immovable object cannot exist, because it would be able to be moved by the unstoppable force, and vice versa. Sideways Logic The unstoppable force does not "stop", the immovable object does not move : the unstoppable force ricochets off the immovable object!