For the thinkers out there...

[orphman]

"force" is a poor choice of words and not what the OP or the guy who originally thought of this question had in mind, IMO. See force: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force

A force is not a thing, not an object, has no mass. It does not exist in the physical world. So, instead, I applied the properties of a force to something that does exist in the physical world.

Or, if this is really a philosophical question about non-real objects then I think the only answer can be "much debate by people with too much time on their hands."

Maybe someone else can provide some physics-centric feedback to my post found here: http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3180054&postcount=43

gravity it a force... which fits your definition... so yes a force... hence all the black hole and light speed talk... but yea i think he was going for two objects but what he posed as the question and what he really said are two different things.hence the debate.

 

[orphman]

Update

update..

ok so we have come up with a few answers to the Question we all tend to agree is not valid for various reasons. i.e. two mentioned criteria do not exist. or debate on the criteia itself. so here it goes...

the unstopable force would
A go throught the object
B be deflected/diverted by the object.

A1- this force would be a black hole and we need some major NASA help.


this is only a few answers to the force-vs-object Q..
lots answered object object...