>accelerates the piston in one example to give the cube extra momentum
>in the next example the piston is stationary but the cube still jumps for no reason
0/10, vibe a noose around your neck

>>17085138
This. I'm a Bfag but this is extraordinarily bad.

Th piston is not stationary, you can see it moving out of the orange portal

>>17085137
If you said A wanting a big thread then I have my doubts.

>>17085137
So have we finally ascended to a lew layer of AI retardery? Beyond trusting AI's output unquestioningly we now have tards trusting the results of an AI generated physics simulation?

Not to mention the whole argument hinges on a set of assumptions about how portals supposedly "work." That's what makes it such a good troll.
Your physics simulation automatically will have built into it the assumptions that result in A or B.

We don't know how portals work, but we know physics. My whole point is to convince you that physics rules still apply normaly as long as you switch reference point at the moment a point passes through the portal.

The examples show that doing that works, newtown laws work. And if you can accept that, then the only logical solution is B.

>using relativity to prove your point
Someone get the aetherfag in here

>>17085140
I just added scenario 15 specifically for slow minded people to cross the gap themselves.

>>17085154
The real problem with your argument is you're treating the portal as a tangible object that "teleports" things in discontinuous space rather than a simple hole in continuous space. The argument for A still retains classical Newtonian physics. It just treats the "jump" in position as an illusion.
The position line remains differentially smooth in either model.

>>17085161
Newtonian physics cannot explain why the cube's speed would suddenly drop to 0 once the blue portal stops (scenario 16).
You cannot deny that the cube has velocity in world space after it crossed the orange portal and before the blue portal stops.
Therefore it has kinetic energy, and that energy cannot vanish for no reason. Unless it was glued to the piston.
Therefore the only plausible explanation is that it keeps its speed up and gravity pulls it back down.

>>17085172
From the perspective of the pedestal it is sitting on top of, the cube did not change speed. It was stationary at the start and so it remains at the end.
From the perspective of the piston, the collision with the pedestal caused the speed change.
From the perspective of the orange portal, well its backside was attached to the piston.

Again, the model is perfectly self consistent. You're attacking the issue from entirely the wrong angle.

>>17085137
It can only be B if the cube is thrown into the orange portal. You're retarded

>>17085176
Scenarios 15 and 16 have the same setup on the orange side, and two different setup on the blue side.
There is no way you can justify having a different outcome on the orange side and be consistent.
Either the cube sticks to the platform in both scenarios, or it flies off in both scenarios.

>>17085194
>on the orange side
Again, you are stuck to this notion that there's a discontinuity in space involved here.
The crux of the A argument is that there is no magical transition from one frame of reference to another here. It's a seemless continuation. Something being different "on the blue side" is going to result in different activity "on the orange side" because it's all one continuous frame of reference.

>>17085172
>Newtonian physics cannot explain why the cube's speed would suddenly drop to 0 once the blue portal stops
Relative to what? What is your reference frame? Why does the velocity only increase relative to side B? Why is there no acceleration on side A or relative to the platform the cube is sitting on? Where does this increased momentum appear from?

>>17085172
the cube's speed relative to the portal will still be zero when it passes through because the only thing making the cube move from the blue portal's perspective is it's own movement, once the orange portal slams into the platform the cube is resting on, all illusion of the cube's momentum is gone and we're just left with the change in direction of gravitational pull on the side of the blue portal, causing it to slowly fall out.

File: 1741542487438600.png (111 KB, 800x800)

111 KB PNG

>>17085137

>>17085254
audible kek from me.

>>17085137
it's B because the cube has inertia.
does it have a speed coming out of portal? yes. it's done. jannies delete this shit thread

Alright, since there's more people coming in on the A side, I'll reiterate that both answers are internally self consistent. They just rely on a different set of baseline assumptions about portals.
>Side A:
A portal is, apologies for the jargon, a localized topological nonconformity. There's no spacial discontinuity. There's no "spooky action at a distance." There's no distinction between the frames of reference on either side. It's all one continuous, albeit counter-intuitive, manifold. The box doesn't launch because there is nothing could have caused it to.
>Side B:
A portal is a discrete entity that allows objects to "teleport" across two discontinuous regions in space. Spooky action at a distance is, not only implied, but necessary. The two sides of the portal represent distinct reference frames with the only linkage being the portal itself. The cube launches because Inertia is conserved as an object emerges, completely agnostic to what is happening on the side it came from.

So there you have it. The whole argument is about the same physics being applied to two different sets of assumptions regarding a fictional concept. Both sides take their own assumptions for granted and assert the other doesn't understand physics at the most basic level without ever addressing those assumptions.

>>17085269
no, the cube does not have inertia, the surface the orange portal is attached to has inertia, as soon as it comes to a rest, the apparent movement of the cube in relation to the view through the blue portal also comes to a rest.
you are retarded.

>>17085272
Everything has inertia, retard.

>>17085272
>the apparent movement of the cube in relation to the view through the blue portal also comes to a rest.
>you are retarded.
what the actual fuck are you on about? freeze frame half way and analyze the cube. the half on the blue side has a speed relative to B blue portal, and thus in the B universe.
this is not debatable under any circumstance. the cube has a velocity relative to blue portal, there is no way you are so fucking braindead that you do not understand that the part of the cube that is outside of blue portal has speed relative to blue portal. you must be monumentally fucking retatded if you think the cube coming out of blue portal is somehow stationary in relation to blue portal even if it FUCKING COMES OUT OF IT
so, half way through if you analyze the cube it has inertia in B frame, thus it "pulls" on the other half.

again, no matter what you say the cube has velocity relative to blue portal, thus obligatory has inertia. this is not debatable unless you are braindead on life support.

>>17085271
if B, can the part of the cube already through the portal have a continuous structural connection to the part that has not quite gone through yet? and if so, would this tension force between the momentum and the at rest part of the cube affect the final velocity of the cube on the other side?

>>17085274
the cube at rest has inertia that keeps it in place because no force is acting on it, gravity is still pulling it downwards towards the surface it continues to rest on, it has no reason to float or start moving, it may only tip over or start sliding due to the change in the direction of gravity on the other side.

>>17085275
if you run towards a table with a cube on it, does the cube jump at you you when you suddenly stop?
no.
same thing on the side of the blue portal, if you were to put your face level with it, within reach of the total height of the cube, and you slammed the piston down, you would feel the momentum of the piston relative to the pedestal if your face hits the cube before the piston hits the pedestal
if your face is slightly further away from the blue portal, the cube loses its momentum relative to you the moment the piston that is pushing the portal against it comes to a stop, meaning the cube never even touches your face.

you are a retard.

>>17085277
just extend the experiment and make the orange portal go down the pillar. and then stop.
so on blue portal you'll have the cube emerging with the pillar pushing it and when it stops the cube will keep going because from B perspective it's pushed by the pillar
there is no way you do not understand this, it was always B. Atards are really hopeless and do not understand the errors of their ways

>>17085279
everything you said is complete schizophasia. see >>17085280

>>17085276
Fuck if I know, dude. Portals aren't real.
Let's say the piston stops halfway across the cube.
If the answer to your question is "yes" then I think the cube still launches. This arguably solves potential conservation of energy problems since then we could say the portal (and whatever device is maintaining it) expends energy to facilitate the launch.
If the answer is no, then I guess the portal just slices the cube in half.

>>17085280
>>17085281
and even if you stop at the atomic interface between cube and pillar, the cube has momentum in B frame so it would pull on itself.

you cannot explain speed in B frame. you need to explain it, but you just cannot. no matter what you say, if you ignore addressing the speed the cube has, it's pure nonsense. you must deal with the cube's speed anon. there is no way around the cube's speed. adress the cube's speed. do not reply without addressing the cube's speed. if you say anything without addressing the cube's speed you are a massive weak faggot

address
the
cube's
speed
relative
to
blue
portal

NOW!

>>17085283
"The speed relative to the blue portal" is only a meaningful question at all if you make assumptions that result in B anyway.
See >>17085271

>>17085285
the cube has a speed going into orange portal (relative to orange portal), thus it has the same speed coming out of blue portal (relative to blue portal)
wtf?? how can you just ignore the speed in A? ......?????

File: end of debate.png (76 KB, 1000x600)

76 KB PNG

>>17085280
>>17085281
weird samefag
>>17085282
>>17085283

get rekt nerds

>>17085271
>A portal is, apologies for the jargon, a localized topological nonconformity. There's no spacial discontinuity. There's no "spooky action at a distance." There's no distinction between the frames of reference on either side. It's all one continuous, albeit counter-intuitive, manifold.
And how does this, y'know, work?

>>17085290
notice how you conveniently avoided addressing the cube's speed relative to blue potal. why would you ignore it?

>>17085290
>If we remove portals it works like A
Afags can't think with portals, erry tiem

>>17085293
because the speed relative to the portal is an illusion, just like you can delude yourself into thinking a cube you are running towards is the object with velocity, you are fooling yourself into thinking that the cube has a velocity when it is the piston with the portal with the velocity.

yes, a cube you are running towards is moving relative to you, but it the cube who is at rest and it is you who has inertia, when you stop, it will be you who feels the Gforce while the cube remains unaffected by your shenanigans.

>>1708529
>if i keep pretending the portal magically imparts momentum on the at rest cube then it works like B
Bfags can't think with portals, erry tiem.

>>17085296
>because the speed relative to the portal is an illusion
lol you brainlet, it's the same on both sides, going in and coming out. all the portal games behave like that. literally all the portals do this, speed going in = speed going out in the other portal's frame, relative to that portal.

I hope now it's clear how brain damaged Atards are.
>speed is illusion saar, train no speed ACK!

File: es.png (57 KB, 1200x630)

57 KB PNG

What happens now?

>>17085298
nope, going in, the cube continues to have zero velocity, it is only travelling through the portal because the portal is moving toward it, when the piston comes to a stop on the pedestal, it is the pedestal the orange portal is attached to that feels the g-force of coming to a stop, not the cube, since it never moved, it's movement from the perspective of the blue portal is an illusion, just like the illusion of you on the street moving very fast from my perspective as before i hit you with my car.
from my perspective, you and the rest of the world looks like it has a momentum relative to me, but it is i who has the momentum, and when i stop, you will not suddenly crash towards me, i will experience the forces of stopping.
>y-you're an i-indian!
i am not, sorry my projecting ranjeet friend.

>>17085302
>nope, going in, the cube continues to have zero velocity
holy shit RELATIVE TO ORANGE PORTAL IT HAS SPEED otherwise it wouldn't like...go in.
>saar speed no real saar

this is brainrot, I'm bouncing

>>17085298
>b-but in my favourite videogoyme!!!
the sheer audacity of Btards.

>>17085303
it has the illusion of momentum from the perspective of the blue portal, it has no actual momentum, you keep asking for an explanation for a speed that doesn't exist.
>i-i'm bouncing
bouncing with anger, yes, because you lost ;)

sit and bounce this dick faggot.

>>17085290
>>17085295
Also, it doesn't even actually describe the scenario without portals because that's fundamentally impossible and the source of the issue. If you have a stationary hollow cage and a cube moving into it from below then that cube has momentum. And that describes what happens at least as well as the other way around. You got to visualise it.

>>17085297
>pretending the portal magically imparts momentum
You mean the thing portals are known for and they built two entire video games around?

>>17085306
>and a cube moving into it from below
but it is not, the cage is slamming onto the at rest cube from above, as was very clearly demonstrated by the speedlines above the cage in the illustration, the pedestal has no speedlines because it is not moving.

>>17085307
>b-but in my videogaymes
lol

>>17085308
>but it is not
It objectively is bruv, there's no getting around this, if you deny it you're simply not even seeing what's happening

>>17085309
Ah, which real portals are you talking about then?

Achads win again
Bchuds hopelessly BTFO'd into next fucking tuesday

>>17085310
it objectively is not, as shown in the illustration.
>there is no getting around this
there is nothing to get around, you are wrong.
>which real portals
none, since they fundamentally do not exist and cannot exist in the real world.

>>17085313
>it objectively is not, as shown in the illustration.
The illustration that, therefore, fails to represent the scenario in any way.

Because if it did then there would be a cube moving into a stationary cage.

>>17085316
it presents the scenario perfectly
well, A does anyway, B is an example of Btard delusion, where cubes gain momentum for no reason because the thing that was moving towards them stopped.
>because if it did then there would be a cube moving into a stationary cage
no, because that's not the scenario we have been set up with, the portal is on a piston that moves towards a cube at rest.

best debate /sci/ has had in 10 years.

>>17085300
Hello? Anyone?

>>17085319
as long as the piston moves downward, the distance of the person running away will not change relative to the cube, from both perspectives
as soon as the piston has slammed down, the cube stops moving and the person running away can see the guy standing in front of the portal get punched in the face during the last few seconds of the cubes movement.

>>17085317
>it presents the scenario perfectly
No. You simply fail to understand the scenario.
>no, because that's not the scenario we have been set up with
It absolutely is. The blue portal is not moving no matter how much you hallucinate it. Yet, the cube moves relative to it. There is only one possible conclusion.

>>17085322
i understand it perfectly well, it is you who repeatedly deludes himself into thinking the pedestal is moving up, when it is at rest and the piston is the only thing moving in frame, any momentum starts and ends with the piston.
>the blue portal is not moving
neither is the cube, the piston is the only thing moving, when it comes to a stop, the illusion of the cube's velocity from the perspective of the blue portal also comes to a stop, you are retarded.

if i have an open door on wheels, and i move it over you while you are standing still, and i stop moving the door after you are on the other side, you have not gained any velocity, both sides of this door are in the same refernce frame from a person looking side on, they are not in two different reference frames because both portals are in the same world.

>>17085286
What speed?

>>17085292
Like walking through a door. The act of passing through a portal of this variety is completely mundane and you'd have no way of even knowing you crossed it if not for the boundary surrounding said portal.

>>17085286
no, the orange portal has a speed relative to the cube, as it is the thing moving down, not the cube.
the cube has no speed relative to the world, neither does the blue portal, the orange portal is the only thing with speed and that speed is towards the cube until it slams into the pedestal and stops, when it stops, the only thing with motion in the reference frame stops, there are no two reference frames, just one.