The eternal debate...
B
>>722818319There is no debate just funposting.
Portals cannot exist so its pointless to argue
>>722818319A, but it would roll at least once due to the force of the slam, not just fall over.
A
>>722818383Correct.Anyone saying A has not thought about it for more than a minute
>>722818319None, portals can't get placed on moving objects
>>722818319>The eternal debategood thing you will die soon spammershit
>>722818319B has more interesting gameplay potential, and less importantly it is also just correct.
>>722818383FPBP. Afags eternally and permanently BTFO
>>722818539Implode's in you'are path
how fast is the elevator going for starters?
>>722818383FP(B)P no one with an actual education in physics will say it is A. Only retards think that.
>>722818837It doesn't matter. It's B anyway. It would just launch at a slower speed if the plstform is moving slow.
>>722818870Explain how it's B then if you have a supposed "education in physics"
>>722818837Judging by the speed line, just fast enough for whatever relevant effect, presumably.
>>722818319Can we reschedule this? I've got a school thing due tomorrow but I also want to participate in this thread and BTFO AFags.
isn't the block stationary so it should be A right?how would it go from not moving to moving where is this force that acts upon it, where did all of this energy come from?
>>722818919Speedy thing go in, speedy thing come out.Motion is relative.You don't even need an education in physics. Those 2 statements are enough to figure out it's B if you have an IQ above 30.
A is correct. Anyone who says B is below average IQ incapable of understanding concepts that the existence of portals create.
>>722818319
>>722818319simulations recreated in game engines and theorization from physisicists both lean towards Bi still understand the appeal of A
>>722819032How is the box stationary?
>>722819094look at the lines
>>722819117The speed lines? What do they prove? The cube is moving along with the surface of the earth as it rotates, which is orbiting the sun, which is orbiting the galaxy, which is orbiting the local group, which is orbiting who the fuck knows what. There's no such thing as stationary.It's also moving towards the portal, because the distance between them is decreasing over time, the definition of movement.
>>722818319Both break the laws of physics for different reasons. B breaks the fewest.
>>722819274None of that changes the fact it's just sitting on the platform.
>>722819534Correct. It's stationary relative to the platform it's on. It's also moving relative to the portal, which means it will keep moving after it exits the other portal.
as bits of cube are coming out of the blue portal move out of the way of the next line of bits, they will need to do so faster due to the speed of yellow portal, so this speed will be conserved
>>722819274the box literally has zero momentum, it's literally at rest. it's not going to go flying out the other portal with a great velocity.
>>722818319It's a paradox. Portals that can move with reference to each other move the Universe with reference to itself meaning the box is both moving and not moving at the same time. The answer isn't A or B it's C, "true != false".
>>722819674>cube is moving towards the portal>"it's at rest"
>>722819674parts of the box being pushed into the portal and out of the portal will absorb momentum the same way anything you push and squeeze absorbs momentum. This is literally hydraulic press, and it will shoot like hydraulic press
>>722819796you're a midwit who probably watched a few pop-sci videos on youtube.
Here, a simple shitty slop video for you retards because none of you took a high school physics class:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGW_HATHIqE
>>722819064B fags think both these scenarios are the same because portals take the movement and inertia of themselves and the object going through them, and transfer it to the object when it's pushed out.
>>722819634Why won't it keep being stationary relative to the platform it's on? Why does one frame of reference take priority?
>put GoPro on the inside of a bucket>drop bucket on top of frog >from anyone watching the footage, the frog is shooting up into the bucket then stopping suddenly>explain to frog that due to physics, it must shoot up into the air and hit the bottom of the bucket>frog ribbits at meHow can I convince this frog guys? I tried making a mspaint image where it talks dumb and gets horribly maimed but it's still not shooting up into the air.
>>722820236>Why won't he keep falling down relative to the room he's in? Why does one frame of reference take priority?Because that's the way portals work. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out.
>>722819674False.
>>722820707So if I drop a hoop over an object, that object is moving?
>>722820828Relative to the hoop, yes.
>>722820236Let's reframe the scenario. You're on a moving train going 100 miles per hour. Someone places a portal on a wall in the train that leads to a stationary room in a house. Someone in the house looking into the portal can see that you're just standing there. Considering that I'm sure you'll agree that if you were to jump off a moving train, you would probably tumbling and splattering into a million pieces, what do you think is going to happen if you decide to jump into that portal and into the stationary room?
>>722820876So why doesn't everything go flying off when I do that?
>>722818319portals destroy the regular laws of physics so this debate is both arbitrary and pointless. not to mention even with in game rules, you cant have a portal in motion in relation to the other one.
>>722820934Because a portal is not a hoop or a doorway, it's a wormhole connecting two completely disconnected points in space.
>>722820924Nothing because both portals are stationary relative to the train and the room, and presumably you're also stationary to the train and the portal.
>>722821119For all intensive porpoises it is
Since fucking when was A *plop*? That's always been B.
>>722820924Nothing?
>>722821167So you agree it's B, correct?
>someone drops a hula hoop 100 feet above me>as it passes over my body I suddenly skyrocket into the air!!B fags are truly fucking retarded
>>722821119>connecting two completely disconnected points in space.Connects the disconnected. So it's connected now just like the hoola hoop example. Got it. It's A it will always be A. The box never has momentum the comnection just changes one of its comnecting points. This does nothing to the momentum of the box. A wins.
>>722821119So the portals make the guy standing on the exit side correct?
>>722820924What if the person in the house can see you going by on the train through the window as well? Does this change the result since he now has two perspectives?
>>722821229No, as the object is stationary relative to the room, while the portal is not.
>>722820546>>722820828>>722821247>>722821248
>>722821352Why does the room matter?
>>722821369Functionally speaking there's no difference between those two.
>>722818319It's A. The block doesn't have any kinetic energy going into the portal so it won't have any coming out.
>>722821418The same reason the train in the last example matters.
>>722821369According to A fags if you hold your hand over the orange portal you won't actually feel the box bumping into you because it's not moving.
>>722820626>Btard invents an unrelated example scenario where the object passing through the portal is literally movingMany such cases.
You're on a train which is going 100mph, the train has a hole in carriage going straight through it from front to back. How fast is the hole moving?
The way you actually prove it's B is asking what would happen if you were to be standing flush against the blue portal while this is happening. If the person believes the answer is A, the box would completely stop the moment it touched you and the hydraulic press would crumple and/or explode.
>>722819064See, this guy gets it.
>>722821475Didn't you say that nothing will happen? You won't fly out the portal at the speed of the train? How does the train matter then?
>>722821494According to Bfags your hand won't touch the box because it's moving relative to the entrance portal.
>>722821575More like>Bchad uses a different scenario to illustrate that his claims are logically consistent
>>722819064There is exactly 0 difference between these scenarios. They are for all intents and purposes identical. B is the answer to both.
We know that portals can affect things on the other side of the portal, there's no "membrane" so to speak stopping things being affected until they reach the exit side. (Moon scene, Chelle getting sucked in) Would this not mean the box would begin moving immediately and woosh up to meet the descending portal?
>>722821856It's not the same though, so it doesn't illustrate anything, other than maybe that you don't understand the original.
>>722821953No. It won't gain any momentum because it's already moving relative to the portal.
>>722821780>If the person believes the answer is A, the box would completely stop the moment it touched you and the hydraulic press would crumple and/or explodeNo why would anything happen to the hydraulic press? The box would just stay where it is.
>>722818319B - object with no momentum suddenly gains momentum? How? Drop a hoop onto a object, see if it launches itself into air at the velocity the hoop was falling.
>>722821947>there's no difference with being forced through a tunnel vs a tunnel passing over you
>>722821856Actually it's>different scenarios with whatever headcanon fits the creators preferred answer
>>722821973>It's not the same thoughCorrect. that's the point. B has consistent logic that works the same across all situations while.
>>722822035Correct. I'm not sure why you think that's somehow incorrect. Did you ever learn basic relativity in school?
>>722821796>Didn't you say that nothing will happenYes? I believe I explained that fairly succinctly.>You won't fly out the portal at the speed of the train?No, since the portals are both stationary in their relative frames.>How does the train matter then?You're asking why it matters whether an object is stationary relative to another when discussing relativity? Well the short answer is that, depending on what motion is occurring in the relative frames, it can drastically affect the outcome in our examples.
>>722822054>headcanonB in that picture is literally what happens in game.Can you explain to me what the logic of A is and how it makes portal flings possible?
>>722822057What does a bad faith example have to do with logical consistency? Every normal person (Afag if you will) knows that B happens in your unrelated example because the person gains momentum after he jumps. The cube in the original is stationary with zero momentum.
Speed of orange portal only affects the rate at which new stuff comes out of blue portal, not the velocity of that stuff
>>722822158Why did you swap the letters? A here is actually following the logic of B.
>>722822243look again you ESL
>>722822192How do you enter a portal if you're stationary relative to it?
>>722822013The hydraulic press is moving. If the box is not in motion and has no momentum like in scenario A, then the moment it comes into contact with you, the press would be unable to continue moving at all and all of that energy is getting transferred back into it. Otherwise B is correct, the press has slammed into the platform and you now have a box-sized hole punched out of your midsection.
>>722822224It's not about gaining momentum after jumping. It's about the fact that portals are proven to change momentum (a vector) because they change direction, which means it's B.
>>722822216B fags would be really mad at this if they could read
>>722822309I did. A here is the portal exiting the orange portal at the same speed it entered the blue portal, aka B.
>>722822216Still B. Not sure what that's supposed to prove.
>>722821454the theory for B is that the force of the moving platform is transferred through the portal and onto the objects passing through iti still think it's A but i can see the argument for this being valid
>>722822357According to that logic if the hydraulic press is already down and you throw the box back through the blue portal then the hydraulic press should explode instead of the box just bouncing back?
>>722822310You move through it. As you are the object moving relative to the train and the portal, you exit with however much forve was necessary to carry you through, and exit the portal with your movements adjusted to the new relative frame.i.e, if you're moving at 10km an hour relative to the train and portal, you exit at that speed.>What about the A B question?Well that's simple, the cube is not moving relative to the room and portal, the portal is moving relative to the room and the object.>That's not how it works in game In all but except one instance, you're only ever in a single frame (room).The instance in question, the moon segment, proves A.
According to B fags, if you throw a box through the blue portal, it'd have no momentum when exiting the orange portal, because the blue portal was "stationary"
>>722822696>You move through it.So you're not stationary relative to it.>the cube is not moving relative to the room and portal, the portal is moving relative to the room and the object. Those are literally the exact same thing.>The instance in question, the moon segment, proves A.False. The moon scene is perfectly consistent with B: relative velocity in = relative velocity out. It's incompatible with the A idea that velocity relative to the room is preserved. But please, enlighten me, how does it prove A?
>>722822662No you fucking idiot. In that case the press is not moving. In the example I gave the press is moving and depending on how fast it's going, it's going to end up damaging itself due to conservation of energy if you act like a wall for the box due to the box supposedly having no momentum despite moving relative to where you're standing. I'm not exactly sure what you're imagining would be the case here, but A doesn't work in this scenario the way you're imagining it because it creates an even greater paradox. If the press were to slam into the platform, while the box supposedly does not move, and you don't move either because the box supposedly has no momentum, you've created a paradox where the box has basically popped out of existence into some undefined backrooms null space. Either B is true and energy is getting transferred into you, or A is true and all the energy of the press moving is going back into it due to the box coming into contact with you acting as a completely immovable wall.
>>722822769No. It would keep moving at the same relative velocity it entered. Just like the box in the original scenario keeps moving.
>>722823303Oh no no no A bros
>>722818319A, why should the portal on the piston transfer momentum onto the cube? If I tell niggers to carry a doorframe and run up to you, and you stand still, their momentum isn't transferred onto you as they pass you either.
>>722822769You know what? If the orange portal was retracting, it would be possible to throw a box through the blue portal and have it emerge stationary to the room. That's the thing with having a solid theory that works on different scenarios/values.
>>722823583See >>722823303The blue/orange lines impart momentum.
>>722823257>So you're not stationary relative to it.When going through the portal? No, of course not. I believe you're confusing my illustration of how you're stationary relative to both prior to entering the portal, as me stating that you're stationary period? That's my best faith interpretation.>Those are literally the exact same thing.They aren't. Imagine you're equidistant between a sign and a person. Is there zero difference between you walking towards them and vise versa?>False. The moon scene is perfectly consistent with B: relative velocity in = relative velocity outIf it were, Chell would have been torn apart. Since she wasn't, the only possible conclusion to draw is that an object's momentum is adjusted relative to the frame that an object exits. Take your train example for instance. If we were to reverse what happened, would you suddenly be slammed into the back of the train carriage? No. Your exiting the portal was adjusted to the speed relative of the train and the portal.
A chads, we meeting up this year?
>>722819037The thing going in isnt speedy. Its standing still retard
>>722820546>bfags are dumber than frogs confirmed?!
I'll say it again. It's A because A makes the most sense at a glance and Cave Johnson wouldn't allow some nerd scientist to whine that it's B. If B happened he'd make them start over from scratch until they made a portal that achieved A.
>>722823294Considering that the cube drops out of the portal in A and B: the piston slams down, the portal of entry touches the platform, and the part holding the cube is functionally replacing the surface of the portal of exit. So the question should be: is the energy of the piston transferred to the part of the platform which is touched by the portal of entry or does this part become isolated? Moreso, is the part of the platform and the stand it rests on stamped out by the portal? The box is actually completely irrelevant.>>722823793...
>>722823858>prior to entering the portalHow does that matter? It doesn't matter if you stand in front of your door prior to entering it. You're still moving relative to the door while entering.>Is there zero difference between you walking towards them and vise versa?There is a difference if you include the sign. But just like the room, the sign doesn't matter. What matters is the relative velocity between cube and portal. Would you get a different result if instead of a room, the cube and portal were inside a tunnel or in space moving at a fixed velocity?>If it were, Chell would have been torn apartBy what forces or acceleration? She moves through the portals at a fixed velocity You know what would actually tear her apart? Suddenly decelerating to the surface velocity of the earth when passing through the portal like A claims.>an object's momentum is adjusted relative to the frame that an object exits.Which is exactly what B claims. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out.
Anyone who actually played portal will answer A
>>722824184Don't you ellipsis at me, I'll interrobang your mom you cheeky sot.
>>722823583No. But you keep moving away from the niggers (as you should always do whenever you see one) at the same velocity you moved towards them before passing the doorframe. Just like the cube keeps moving away from the portal at the same velocity it had before entering the portal.
>>722823303AI video
>>722824004You either missed the second sentence of my post or you have an IQ below 30. For your sake, I hope it's the former.
>>722824268>interrobangThanks for teaching me a new word. I didn't know ‽ had a name.
>>722824110Still the only argument for A I've ever heard that makes any sense.
>>722818539Earth is moving and so is the moon
>>722824185>How does that matter?Why it matters is because it was to illustrate a basic tenant of relativity, namely that objects moving at the same speed as each other will appear stationary and to illustrate the significance of you moving through the portal, rather than the opposite.>There is a difference if you include the signOh good, so you d->But just like the room, the sign doesn't matterOh. Oh dear. I don't think I can continue this conversation with you if you're incapable of understanding the significance of even that.>By what forces or acceleration?The differential between the moon's movement and the earth's?>Suddenly decelerating to the surface velocity of the earth when passing through the portal like A claims.I don't think you really understand what I'm talking about, but I'll give it one last try.No deceleration occurs at any point from the perspective of the object exiting a portal. What happens is that the force, lets say the entrance frame (not just the portal) is moving at 100km, you enter at 10km, and the exit is at 20km. How fast would you exit?10km.
>>722824513Relative to my balls faggot.
>>722819037The block never moves, the portal is not applying force to it. It's the same as if you throw a hula hoop over a block, the block itself never moves. The only thing that would pull it would be the gravity as it emerges in the new location.>>722819064Imagine instead of a portal there it is just an ordinary hole in the top of the press, this would still be correct in both cases. In the first the block remains in place as the hole passes over it, maybe being shaken a bit by the force of the slam from the plates connecting (really depends how heavy and rigid the press is). In the second case the block would have momentum and pass through the hole and fly upward as the platform is left behind.The portal works the same way but with separated entrance and exit
>>722824947>The block never moves>it emerges in the new location
>>722824618I'm a different anon, but I'm curious what you think B is if that last part is how you would describe A.
>>722824618You didn't answer what would happen if there was no room. Would the portal and cube behave the same? In that case the room doesn't matter.>The differential between the moon's movement and the earth's? So you agree she gets accelerated to the velocity of the moon upon exiting the portal?>lets say the entrance frame (not just the portal) is moving at 100km, you enter at 10km, and the exit is at 20km. How fast would you exit?Do you mean like picrel? In that case you exit the orange portal at 10 km/h relative to the orange portal or 30 km/h relative to whatever reference frame the orange portal is moving 20 km/h relative to.
>>722825114It's not moving through force it is changing location through a dimensional portal that is moving around it.
>>722822134You're a midwit trying to sound smart if you think relativity is even remotely relevant to this problem. This is basic classical mechanics.Draw out the force diagrams for each of the three images, then figure out which one makes sense. Keep in mind that Portal's physics kept conservation of momentum.
>>722823303I never got hula hoop analogy because it still works with bare A fags just retarded
>>722824198Then I assume you can use your A logic to explain how portal flings work, right? Or the moon scene?
>>722825310>it is changing locationThat's called moving.
>>722824642Right. Seems like it's the latter.
>>722825352>doesnt "get" it.>calls those who do retardedBest and Brightest
>>722822016>>722824947>HoopSee >>722821369>The block never movesYou also missed the second sentence in my post.
>>722818319B, one motherfucker did this at the fair in town. He hulahoop and drop it so he flew and rippen through that canvas ceiling above him. I guess it fling him about a block away before he landed in somebody's yard.They still use the same hulahoop but there's a huge duct tapped patch over one of those triangles in the ceiling.
>>722818383If you're an idiot
>>722818319C
>>722825450>A tards
>>722825310>moving through forceYou don't even know what movement and force are. Force causes acceleration. An object that is moving will keep moving at a constant velocity unless a force affects it.
>>722825324>Portal's physics kept conservation of momentum.False. Momentum is a vector. Portals affect the direction you're moving. Thus, they don't conserve momentum.
>>722818539We're giving them the benefit on the doubt on that but we refuse to accept the result is still anything other than A>>722819064Finally someone understands
>>722819274>duh me no know what speed lines isAverage Btard
>>722818319Attach the cube to a string and you can truly visualize how stupid B's idea is
>>722821780>and the hydraulic press would crumple and/or explode.How are you stupid Bastards this dumb?
>>722822447>the portal exiting the orange portalThis is why Btards shouldn't Be allowed on the internet
>>722825557>An object that is moving will keep moving at a constant velocity unless a force affects it.Yes, that's basically I said, that's why >>722819064 is correct.But in the OP the block is not moving, no force was applied, it never accelerates and has no momentum before the portal reaches it so it is A.Yes at the very end it moves slightly when it is pulled down by gravity.
>>722823303Abros, our response?
>>722818539canonically they can be
>>722825889BASED
>>722826118Oh no! A minor typo! I might as well kill myself now. You know what I meant with that post. The point I was making is perfectly clear even if you have to take a couple seconds to realize I meant to write cube instead of portal. So how about you actually refute that point instead of focusing on a small error.
>>722825365>Then I assume you can use your A logic to explain how portal flings work, right? Or the moon scene?Holy hell you people actually are this stupid
>>722826164All movement is relative. The cube is moving relative to the portal. It will keep moving after it exits the portal.
>>722826285>I might as well kill myself nowYou think the answer is B. You should have killed yourself long before thisCube doesn't enter the portal at any speed. The portal itself is speeding to the cube.
>>722825309>You didn't answer what would happen if there was no room. Would the portal and cube behave the same? No, since how the portal functions is dependant on whatever surface it's affixed to.>So you agree she gets accelerated to the velocity of the moon upon exiting the portal?No, because acceleration requires an increase in speed over time. It doesn't increase to it, it's set to it by virtue of the state of the exit portal.>you exit the orange portal at 10 km/h relative to the orange portal or 30 km/h relative to whatever reference frame the orange portal is moving 20 km/h relative to.Yes, correct. The key thing you seem to missing is that the object experiences no difference between being at 30km, or at 110. For the object, it was always travelling at a constant 10km.Now, if the object is stationary entering a portal, what would its speed after leaving the portal be?>>722825291The above should explain it, but the short of it is that Believers can't wrap their head around portals being essentially magic.
>>722826329Well, if you're so smart, you must have it all figured out. So explain how portals work in your A logic. I'll go first with my B logic: relative velocity in = relative velocity out. This one sentence explains every portal interaction seen in the games. Do you Afags have anything like that?
>>722826431>Cube doesn't enter the portal at any speedFalse. It can't emerge from the other side if it doesn't enter. Are you saying it's actually C: the portal stops at the cube?
Clearly and measurably the cube is moving as it comes out of the exit portal. What force would cause it to stop? Does it stop instantly (infinite deceleration) or does it gradually slow down? Would it still be A if instead of a cube it was something really long like a 10m ladder? Or 4 cubes stacked on top of each other?
>>722818319There are too many variables. If the gravity on the side of the blue portal is strong enough to lift the cube before the force of the descending platform hits the black platform, then it's A. If it hits the black platform before the cube can be lifted by the gravity then it's something similar to B. In conclusion: This debate is retarded.
>>722818319It's a. The portal doesn't carry momentum
I haven't taken physics since undergrad. Am I dumb? Am I old?>A box is stationary on a platform.>A hydraulic press descends with an orange portal mounted on its underside.>A blue portal is placed far away on a ramp at a 45° angle.>As the press moves down, the orange portal moves over the box, teleporting it bit by bit to the blue portal.>The box does not move on its own - it stays still as the orange portal moves down.>As parts of the box pass through the orange portal (due to the portal’s movement), they appear at the blue portal.>The box emerges from the blue portal at rest, then is affected only by gravity on the ramp.>There is no added momentum or launch effect.Keep in mind the game doesn't actually let you move the objects the portals are attached to. This is operating under the assumption that if you could move a portal by moving its anchor point, it wouldn't impart a force onto the object it's moved around, since they don't when at rest.
Afags are flat earthers, it's the only way their model functions.
>>722821780>The way you actually prove it's B is asking what would happen if you were to be standing flush against the blue portal while this is happening. If the person believes the answer is A, the box would completely stop the moment it touched you and the hydraulic press would crumple and/or explode.You would get pushed due to the differential of force on each side of the portal caused by the press, but not because the box is moving, you would basically be pushed by the compression and expansion of space. As space expands on your side of the portal it would push you.If you had a stronger force on your side of the portal then yes you could stop the press on the other side and the portal would be forced to stay in place.
>>722826476>No, since how the portal functions is dependant on whatever surface it's affixed to. It's not affixed to the room. It's affixed to the piston. You could replace the piston with a plate that falls from the ceiling and it would function the same.>No, because acceleration requires an increase in speed over time. It doesn't increase to it, it's set to it by virtue of the state of the exit portal.Sure, whatever, that's just semantics. Point is, her velocity changes to the velocity of the exit portal on the moon plus the velocity she entered at. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. Just like B.>The key thing you seem to missing is that the object experiences no difference between being at 30km, or at 110.Yes. I know that. We feel force/acceleration, not velocity. That just proves B though. A is the one where an object has some magical objective velocity relative to a universal reference frame. Bfags all recognize that momentum is relative. Under A logic the answer to that would be that the cube exits the portal at 110-20=90 km/h relative to the portal or 110 km/h relative to the ground.>Now, if the object is stationary entering a portal, what would its speed after leaving the portal be?It would exit at the velocity it enters the portal at. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out>essentially magicSo you admit you have no explanation for their behavior? No way to model them and predict how they behave? What about the fact that Bfags do have that. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out explains every single portal interaction seen in the games. Despite that you remain an Afag? That's like saying that the earth is flat and god created it so it's useless trying to understand anything even though science has had a very accurate model of the universe for hundreds of years. You're very dedicated at least I'll give you that.
>enter a door at x miles per hour >exit door at x miles per hour Why is this so hard for afags to understand?
>>722826901If portals worked by teleporting objects piece by piece, how do they keep their momentum when going through?
>>722827428Cube isn't entering the door dumbfuck. The door is passing over the cube
In this thread, I shall say it is B.In the next one, I shall say it is A.
>>722827456You know what I mean. It's appearing at the blue portal. Passing through whatever scifi wormhole links the two. We've all played the games and know what we're talking about. Want to address the actual question instead of playing with semantics?
>>722827535That's the same thing.
>>722827535Afags are midwits that argue semantics instead of arguments confirmed.
>>722821248Are you able to purchase a hoop at your local store that allows you to move the “entrance” and “exit” independently?
B GODS stay winning
>>722818383(B)ased.
>>722827594C, plop.
>>722826476>The above should explain itFrom what I can tell, all of the above is just you trying to explain A. I'm still wondering what you think B is intended to represent.
>>722827591Except portals function more like wormholes. It's not a teleporter but completely continuous. Toss a cube through and it'll keep moving. Momentum is relative, as you would know since you've taken physics, so there's no difference between a cube moving into a portal at x m/s and a portal moving over a cube at x m/s. In either case the cube enters the portal at x m/s, it passes through the portal at x m/s, and since there's no force to stop it, it keeps moving at x m/s.
>>722827682Yes, it's called a slinky.
>>722827587beyond my comprehension
>>722827751Why?
>>722827263>It's not affixed to the room. It's affixed to the piston.Which is affixed to the room. Again, the sign.>Sure, whatever, that's just semanticsIt very much isn't.>Point is, her velocity changes to the velocity of the exit portal on the moon plus the velocity she entered at. Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. Correct.>Just like B.No, wrong. The relative velocity of the cube is 0, and becomes 0 on the other side.>A is the one where an object has some magical objective velocitySetting aside that these are pretty much just magical portals, this doesn't require anything magical barring them.>Under A logic the answer to that would be that the cube exits the portal at 110-20=90 km/h relative to the portal or 110 km/h relative to the ground.No, it would exit at 20km, the exact same relative speed as the exist portal, barring however long it takes for the entrance portal fully envelop it.>It would exit at the velocity it enters the portal at.No, it would exit at the velocity it's at relative to the entrance room, which is 0, and it's velocity would be set to an equivalent on the exit room, which would also be 0.>So you admit you have no explanation for their behaviorI've given multiple explanations, you just don't like them.
>>722827734>The press on the left is pushing the block downwardsAnd you agree with this?
>>722827587Based. I kneel.
>>722827648There's a huge difference between a door passing over you and you stepping through a door.You live in a world without inertia and momentum.
>>722827796And you can reproduce mechanics from Portal using your slinky?
>>722827850it's an AI typo, it clearly meant pushing downwards towards the block
>>722827871What is the functional difference between you running into a doorframe and a doorframe smacking into you?
>>722827594Afags plz respond.
>>722827871momentum is what makes it B, because the cube has to move out of the portal.
>>722827751It's either A: the cube keeps the trucks momentum or B: the cube exits at the relative velocity it entered. It makes no sense to keep it's momentum relative to the portal on the x axis but lose its momentum relative to the portal on the y axis.
>>722827779>Explain BBasically there's no difference between the piston accelerating down and the ground moving up and into the portal, and will result in the exact same thing happening due to (a misunderstanding of) how relativity would function in that example.
>>722827930The momentum. If the door is moving you need a force applied to it to stop it. If you are moving you need a force applied to you to stop you.
>>722821248>The box never has momentumEverything has momentum, always. It's all relative.
Afags need to play kerbal space program. The fact that they rely on some "refference frame" as if it's some divine entity is baffling.
>>722827970The cube does not move out of the portal, it remains stationary while space compresses and expands around it.
>>722828075Again, what's the functional difference for you? You are meeting a doorframe with your forehead.
>>722828184You can push an object with another object coming out of a portal, how does that work?
>>722827908No, it's not. That entire analysis works on the assumption that the press is putting a downward force on the block, while also somehow letting it move freely through the portal. It says it right there. Did you not read your AI slop before posting?
>>722828184i can't really argue against your headcanon, since that's not how the portals act in the game
>>722818427You go by the established canon in the game which is B. The problem is people are too stupid to understand that B is canon in the games.
>>722828061That is just describing an outcome of a specific example rather than what actually happens in heneral. Before you were talking about how the rate you enter the portal on the way to the moon sets the rate you exit the portal as you come out on the moon. Something like that is what I'm looking for that that would be the equivalent B equation I could use to figure out what happens.
>>722828331not my slop and no i didn't read it, lel
>>722827826>Which is affixed to the room. Again, the sign.You could have the piston affixed to a spaceship floating in place above the room and the answer would be the same. Thus, the room is irrelevant.>No, wrong. The relative velocity of the cube is 0, and becomes 0 on the other side.Relative to what? The room? Chells velocity relative to the room is let's say 3 m/s in the moon scene. By your logic she would keep a velocity of 3 m/s relative to the room on the moon side and the moon would go flying off at whatever the velocity of the moon is relative to the surface of the earth and the room.>Setting aside that these are pretty much just magical portals, this doesn't require anything magical barring them. The whole idea of A is that there's some objective universal reference frame and every object has a momentum relative to this that portals preserve.>No, it would exit at the velocity it's at relative to the entrance room, which is 0So it wouldn't exit? It would just stay in the middle of the portal moving at 0 m/s?>I've given multiple explanations, you just don't like themYou haven't once given an explanation on the level of Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. If you can't give an explanation that can be used to model how portals behave in the games in every situation, your theory is worthless.
It has a velocity relative to the portalIf it doesn't have a velocity relative to the portal, it can't even exit the portal.
>>722828331>That entire analysis works on the assumption that the press is putting a downward force on the blockIf you're insisting that the motion of the cube doesn't change on going through the portal. Yes it is.Every bit of the cube that goes through the portal is now moving downwards from within the orange portal. That is then applying a downwards force to the cube on the platform. At the same time the part of the cube yet to go through the portal is then pushing against the cube that has left. Which is what causes B to happen.Assuming you don't just acknowledge that the motion of the cube does it fact get changed by going through the portal directly. It's B either way.
Objectively B. Portals are solid objects, so it's basically just a high speed press launching the cube. If portals were holes (like in the hula hoop posts), then I'd be A.
>>722828184>It's okay bro it will just compress all the air between me and the portal into an infinitesimally thin space I'll be fine
>>722827826>Which is affixed to the room. Again, the sign.You could have it affixed to a spaceship hovering above the room and the end result wouldn't change. Thus, the room is irrelevant.>No, wrong. The relative velocity of the cube is 0, and becomes 0 on the other side.0 relative to what? Let's say Chells velocity relative to the room in the moon scene is 3 m/s. By your logic, her momentum would stay at 3 m/s relative to the earths surface on the moon side and the moon would fly away from her at whatever its velocity is relative to the surface of the earths surface.>Setting aside that these are pretty much just magical portals, this doesn't require anything magical barring them. Except a magical objective reference frame that goes against everything we know about physics.>No, it would exit at the velocity it's at relative to the entrance room, which is 0So it wouldn't exit? Exiting requires moving and it can't do that if it's not moving relative to the portal.>I've given multiple explanations, you just don't like them.You haven't given a single explanation that can be used to model and predict how portals work in the games like Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. Unless you can give an explanation like that, your theory is worthless.
>>722828513>>722828945Fuck I stepped away for a second and forgot I already posted it and thought it just got erased somehow. Ignore the second one.
>>722828789This is how you know Btards are stupid. Achads would still stand back from the portal because they know that even though it's never going to come flying out the blade is still going to stick out of the portalIf Btards were slightly smarter they would put the Abro about 4 feet back and realize just how stupid they are for picking B
>>722829153>stationary knife can stab a stationary man with no forces, velocities or momentum involved
>>722828789>>722829258you WON>>722829153you LOST
>>722827825because the cube itself has no inertia
>>722819064>>722821454>>722825693Exactly.B fags are retarded, or it's just a meme to pretend to be retarded.
>>722829532Everything with mass has inertia.
>earth is moving Explain this afags
>>722825693This webm is what Btards actually believe.
>>722829709>uhhh ackshually we are all moving at a million kms/h right nowfuck off, you know what i mean
>>722830017Yes. And it makes perfect sense and is logically consistent with everything seen in the games.
>>722830108How's that relevant to inertia? Inertia is simply a property of mass that makes it so the object resists changes to its movement. Velocity is completely irrelevant to inertia.
>>722818319What "debate"? It's B. Surely we're not pretending that complete idiots are on equal footing with people who can think logically?
>>722826353You don't understand what relativity is or how it works. You are "moving" relatively to a window frame dropping on you but you do not magically catapult out of it the moment you pass through it.
>>722820707Pictured: the world moving down and left around stationary cube (then coming to a stop instantly with no inertia as if whatever force was moving it hit a wall, or rather in this case, the floor). The cube also stays stationary but now in its new location. It then falls over due to gravity, if the slope is steep enough for its centre of mass to tip.
>>722830108If you are trying to argue that the cube has zero momentum, notice that it is speeding and does in fact have momentum relative to the ground, the blue portal, the commonly called static environment...
>>722830326We're not that's why we educated people are ignoring you dumb as fuck Btards
It's fun playing Troll or Retard with the pro-B posts.I'm thinking it's mostly trolls.
>>722830514Well, you're lying about ignoring us just like you're lying about being educated
>>722828085>Everything has momentum, always. It's all relative.In most cases people are talking relative to space, or earth. You could reasonably assume these portals are in a common reference otherwise it is an entirely different argument.>>722828219>Again, what's the functional difference for you? You are meeting a doorframe with your forehead.Because there is a world beyond me and the doorframe. If I am in a room and a doorframe flies past me it slams into the wall, if I fly past the doorframe I slam into the wall.>>722828267The portal effectively is compressing space between its entrance and exit, when an object goes through it gets compressed and expanded. see >>722827184>>722828365>i can't really argue against your headcanon, since that's not how the portals act in the gameThere's nothing in the game that conflicts with that. Assuming that the object in your image was stationary when going through the portal then it is not moving space is effectively "moving" around it (but calling it movement is a simplification because it's more like a cardboard box being collapsed and then pulled back apart. From your perspective though it looks like movement. But since the box itself does not have momentum it would simply fall forward once the portal passes.
>>722828668irrefutable
>>722830592You're definitely both
>>722830428Ironic post
Strawpoll fags, what are we at? A or B.https://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyBhttps://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyBhttps://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyB
>>722830661>In most cases people are talking relative to space, or earth. You could reasonably assume these portals are in a common reference otherwise it is an entirely different argument.Isn't it funny that I only had to read this with no further context to know you were going to argue for A? You fundamentally misunderstand what you're trying to talk about here. The distinction you're making doesn't actually exist.
>>722830839Fact is not a democracy
>>722823858The one thing that will never happen with B is things being torn apart, as B is continuous relative motion on either side of the portal. Does anyone who argues against B actually understand it?
>>722830476>the world moving around stationary cubeWhy does the portal move the world but not the cube? What makes the cube different from the world?>then coming to a stop instantly with no inertiaI'll let this go for now to avoid distractions.
>>722830661>relative to spaceNo such thing, and I'm quite serious. For centuries people assumed you could impose an absolute coordinate system upon space and measure "true" velocities and positions. But it's literally impossible.
>>722819064Yep, that's pretty much it
>>722831160You can, with God
>>722830428Portals aren't window frames. Each portal is half a window frame that can move separately from the other half. Only if you put the portals on 2 sides of a plate like here >>722822158 will they function like a window frame or hoop or whatever. That situation is also perfectly compatible with the B claim that Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. As it enters one portal at the velocity the contraption is falling, it will exit the other portal at that same velocity, which cancels out due to the other portal moving in the opposite direction at the same velocity.
>>722831183It's precisely half correct
>put two portals on the same side of the same wall>enter one>according to afags you instantly get flung at the speed of the earth as your momentum relative to "absolute space" is redirected
It should be B, but in the Portal universe it's actually A because Cave Johnson didn't like how B worked and forced his engineers to break the laws of physics even further and make it A.
After reading every explanation for B, i've come to realise B fags think the rotation of the planet will somehow accelerate the passing object as if going through the portal suddently removes it from the speed of the earth and kicks it in again on exit. It makes no sense as the portal we discuss is just a hole and not some interdimensional gateway that removes you from earth in between your travel, but its the only one that has some merit in saying why an object would suddently gain momentum in the opposite direction of a moving portal that, as a hole, has no way of passing momentum to that object, even more in the opposite direction of its movement.
>>722830661>relative to spaceWhat point of space? There is no universal coordinate system or a "center of the univese".
>>722831341>make shit up>say it's what people that oppose you thinkAre you israeli by chance?
>>722831398Speedy thing goes in speedy thing goes out is the afags mantra
>>722823303idk why i jumped at this
>>722831493>afags don't understand what their own model necessarily implyYou're a flat earther and therefore jewish.
>>722831398>After reading every explanation for B, i've come to realise B fags think the rotation of the planet will somehow accelerate the passing objectRead harder maybe
>>722831501And yet it's actually how B works
>>722831213Can you point to where this "center of the universe" or "god" is located? If you can, go prove hundreds of years worth of geniuses wrong and claim your Nobel prize.
>>722831501>>722831801If no force is being applied on the object, how will it speed up on exit? The only force here is the downward press, and it has no way to transfer force to the object, and even if it could, it wouldnt send it to the OPPOSITE direction of its movement.
>>722831949No force is applied and the cube does not, in fact, accelerate; it merely continues its motion in a different frame of reference
will the cube come out flying?don't think so cuz it doesn't have materials that comes after to push itwill it come out static ?nope
>>722818319A, the momentum of the cube is what matters, not the wall.
>>722831501They're not even wrong with that. They're just missing the second part: "all movement is relative"
>>722831949Space moving around an object is functionally identical to an object moving through space.
>>722818319A chads win another thread
>>722830839After all these years, /v/ is still 50/50 A and B.
>>722832508You've never won a thing in your life and you cope by declaring victory anyway without earning it
>>722818539>sv_allow_mobile_portals 1
>>722832558seething b cuck
>>722832118Then it's A.>>722832353So it's A, unless space itself speeds up the object in the opposite direction.
>>722829258>>722828789>no one wants to acknowledge the fact that the only reason this would stabbed the guy is that the entire world space on the orange side is moving relative to the blue portal. When you move portals you are essentially moving an entire universe equally that is the only way to explain one side moving but the other seemingly not moving
>>722829532It's riding on a truck, of course it does.
>>722832734I think you've got them mixed up. A is the one where the cube magically accelerates (or decelerates, same thing). B is the one where the cube simply keeps moving as it was and no acceleration is involved.
>>722818319A is the only one that conserves energy. With A, all the energy is spent when the plates slam together. With B, you get all the energy from the slam plus the magic energy in the cube that appears out of nowhere, creating more energy than you put in.The only way B would be possible is if the plate pushing down felt resistance when the cube passed through it, which all evidence from the game shows not to be the case.
>>722832765A fags: The cube isn't moving, so B would break conversation of momentum and energy.Also A fags: A moves space itself and can create as much energy and momentum as it needs.At the very least there is definitely some explanation that is necessary. If I am supposed to believe that space can move the knife, why wouldn't space also move the guy as well rather than stabbing him? It seems odd that you take for granted that something seemingly unexpected will move the cube, but then also take for granted that something seemingly normal will happen when the knife hits the guy.
>>722818383actually mentally retarded
>>722832120This is functionally identical to a regural syringe with the front cut off. The cube goes out flying like it does in the original.
>>722832948But the cube is not moving, there is not movement on the cube, there is no force imparted on it. If the portal passes through the cube, it still will not be moving, and it definetely wont fly off with all the speed that was not being applied to it.
>>722831341>>according to afags you instantly get flung at the speed of the earth as your momentum relative to "absolute space" is redirectedThat's B you stupid piece of shit
>>722833045Portals already break conservation of energy so using it in an argument is worthless.
>>722822158if both portals are doing the same motion then B cube shouldn't move either
>>722822769Btards have been real silent since this post
>>722833196Because the man is grounded to the orange side by being there. The knife is attached to an arm so it’s still transitioning between the two. If there was no stand the knife would just drop. I know people here like to shit their pants when you treat the portals as doorways(which they are) but picture yourself in a room. You don’t feel anything but you look out the door and see motion outside. Logical conclusion is that the entire room is moving with you in it. This is no different. Now take this moving room scenario I made and apply a hanging knife in the doors path
>>722833517>But the cube is not movingFalse>there is not movement on the cubeFalse>there is no force imparted on itCorrect. Which is why it keeps moving instead of decelerating.>. If the portal passes through the cube, it still will not be movingThe how did it go through the portal without moving?>and it definetely wont fly off with all the speed that was not being applied to it.Speed is not "applied" to something. Consider taking a physics 101 course before trying to argue about something that's beyond your understanding.
>>722833425well yea but the last drops of water doesn't come out as strong as the first drops yes?the air at the start tho yea that part was flying
>>722833768That post literally got 2 replies disproving it. What else do you want?
>>722818319Always defended B, but I came to understand it is A.
Anyone saying anything like>speedy thingis doing 15th century physics.
>>722833840>Because the man is grounded to the orange side by being there.Why does that matter? If the portal paused a moment and then the man could onto the knife, could he then have space moved around him the same as the knife? These rules just come across as arbitrary unless someone puts in the effort to try and defines why being grounded is special and how it works.>Logical conclusion is that the entire room is moving with you in it.I get what you are saying, but I was mainly just trying to mock people who act like A doesn't break conservation of momentum.
>>722822769well yes the blue portal was shooting up air the whole time orange was moving
>>722827995C, plop.
>>722834202Not necessarily. If you recognize that "speedy" is relative, you arrive at B.
>>722827898Mine? No.
>>722834394My point is that speed is relative. It's not a property that matter has.
>>722833517>But the cube is not moving
>>722827825Cube ain't a speedy thing. Non speedy thing goes in, non speedy thing goes out. Simple portal.
>>722834603Most things in the picture.
>>722834634>>722834603
>>722833907>The how did it go through the portal without moving?The portal is a hole in a moving surface, the hole moved, not the cube. It just so happens the other side of the hole is somewhere else.>Speed is not "applied" to something. Consider taking a physics 101 course before trying to argue about something that's beyond your understanding.Did you really write all that just to say "you're dumb" and not provide an explanation for anything?
>>722834697Relative to the speedy thing used as an example in the adage "speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out."
>>722833517If the cube isn't moving in A, have you considered that the cube might also not be moving in B? If changing position over time does not necessarily mean something is moving, then there is no way to prove that B involves any motion. Your argument falls apart if it is entirely based on if the cube is or is not moving since it might not be moving in either answer.
>>722834686How about the one relevant thing, the falling portal?
>>722834603If i stand besides a speeding train, im moving relative to it, even though im not moving at all. Regardless, neither it or a moving surface with a portal will make me fly away.
>>722834851So you're saying there's only one universal reference point? Try to stay consistent.
>>722834580I know. That's what I was saying too. "Speedy thing go in..." isn't necessarily wrong, just incomplete. It's missing the second part which is "momentum is relative".
>>722834870>even though im not moving at allRelative to what?
>>722834796I dont understand your logic. The cube is not moving on both, the difference is that in B it suddently gains momentum and flies away on the other side of the portal, which cant happen, as theres no force being applied to it for such a thing to happen.
>>722834980So you're saying that the cube goes plop because the exit portal is moving, gotcha.
>>722834765>the hole movedCorrect, which means the cube also moves, because all momentum is relative.>Did you really write all that just to say "you're dumb" and not provide an explanation for anything?Yes. And I will keep doing so until you demonstrate a basic understanding of physics.
>>722818383So if a portal zooms down around a person but stops suddenly half way (say around the hips) does the upper half of the person rip off and fly away? Does the person continue to be pulled through the portal? Do at least their arms fly upward for a second? I'm genuinely curious.
>>722834963There are infinite reference points, but only a few relevant ones. So let's start from the start, what is the cube passing through?
>>722834963No. He's saying that the only reference frame that matters in the context of portals are the portals themselves.
>>722835058I'm saying that the cube might not actually have momentum in B even though it appears to be flying away. With portals involved, it isn't out of the question that the spacial distortion will create the illusion of perceived continued motion away from the portal rather than the illusion of perceived motion of the cube just rising up from the portal. The point is that you can't assume that energy isn't conserved in B since you don't know if the cube has momentum or just appears to have momentum.
>>722835172Answer the question or admit defeat.
>>722835204You B fags seems to love spouting the word relative and calling others uneducated, but regardless of semantics explain why the cube would suddently speed away when on the other side of the portal.
>>722835208At the moment that the portal stops moving, the person's torso is moving relative to their legs, so it pulls them through. If the velocity was extremely high you might see them rip in half but at the speeds we're usually concerned with that wouldn't happen.
>>722835358It wouldn't suddenly speed away. It would continue moving. How about YOU, yes (YOU) explain why the cube would suddenly stop when on the other side of the portal.
>>722835314The cube can't not have momentum, as it is show flying away. It's like a car crash, the car stops but the driver flies away because the momentum it got from being in the moving car remains. Also its a crude 2d drawing, what the hell are you talking about with spacial distortion?
>>722835358The cube measurably has a velocity and momentum as it emerges from the exit portal, even before it has entirely passed through, see >>722828668Once the base of the cube leaves the portal, we don't care about portal physics any more so it's just basic Newtonian mechanics. An object in motion continues moving (flings in a parabola due to gravity).
>>722835236A magic hole in reality. Ok my turn, what's the cubes momentum relative to the platform it on? Seems like a rather important reference point to start with.
So far B is winning.https://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyBhttps://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyB
>>722835567Zero. My turn, is the cube passing through the platform?
>>722835475It doesnt stop because its not moving, it's on a flat unmoving surface. The surface on the portal is moving, the portal passes through the cube, and the cube appears on the other side. The cube remains still the whole way, all that happened is a hole fell around it. There is no movement to be stopped or force to send it flying away suddently.
>>722835625No. It's pretty flatly sitting there, minding it's cubey business. Why does the zero become not zero without any external force being applied, assuming a flat exit rather than the slope for ease of mind in this example.
>>722835558How does it gain a velocity? The portal transfers speed to it? In the opposite direction of the surface it's in?
>>722835535>The cube can't not have momentumIt obviously can or A wouldn't be possible either. You have said yourself that the cube isn't moving and doesn't have momentum even though its position is changing over time. How else would you get around that conflict other than to accept that the cube actually can change potions without momentum?>what the hell are you talking about with spacial distortion?I'm talking about how A works. The cube doesn't move, but its position changes because of space moving over it. It isn't out of the question that something similar could also apply to B where the perceived motion is just a change in position without momentum. It seems a bit wonky, but it isn't something you can rule out since we don't really know how portals would work in this situation.
>>722835836It doesn't, because the cube is no longer on the platform once the portal falls on it.Now, if the platform was on a piston speeding towards a stationary portal, what would be the momentum of the cube relative to the platform?
>>722831398>After reading every explanation for B, i've come to realise B fags think the rotation of the planet will somehow accelerate the passing object as if going through the portal suddently removes it from the speed of the earth and kicks it in again on exit.It is indeed true that Afags don't understand B.
>>722835881>How does it gain a velocity? Effectively the portal transfers velocity to it, yes. The velocity of the object coming out of the portal (relative to the portal) must be the same as the velocity of the object going in to the portal (relative to the portal) otherwise smooth motion through the portal is impossible>In the opposite direction of the surface it's in?The direction of the velocity is "through the portal" which is consistent on both sides. Relative velocity is conserved.
>>722836007>the cube is no longer on the platformSee now that's where you're incorrect otherwise what you asked before would also be incorrect. The cube must still be on the platform since it doesn't fall through. Please correct this error before proceeding
>>722835881cuz the orange is moving and the blue is not so the cube has to instead of blue
>>722835208This is quick napkin math but probably mostly correct, anyway here we go. The person will experience a force that is equal to F = (mass that entered the portal) * ((velocity the portal was moving)/(time it took the portal to stop))If the tensile strength of his body is high enough, he will be accelerated by a = F/(his entire mass)This simplifies to him flying at at the same percentage of the original velocity as the percentage of his mass that entered the portal.
>>722836117Can you circle the cube in this picture?
>>722836007A stationary portal relative to what?
>>722835923The cube did not change position, it was on a flat surface and remains on the same flat surface(although it slides of in the image as the other side is perpendicular). What changed was the moving surface with a hole on it. The hole passed through the cube, and it remained in the same place. It just happens that the other side of the hole is somewhere else. I understand why one could call that moving, the cube is effectively somewhere else, but it didnt leave its initial spot.
>>722836267To the room the platform and piston are in.
>>722836232I am assuming you were also too lazy to rotate the exit 45 degrees as I am, but please continue with the flat plane assumption and see the cube circled in green. Can you name the dark grey surface the cube is on, the red line is pointing towards it if that helps.
/sci/ has caused irreversible damage to the planet with this single imagetwo fucking decades later and niggers are still doing the skub antiskub
>>722836060Alright, this is what i dont get. I can only the the portal as a hole connecting a place to another, so how can it make the cube have any speed at all?
>cube resting on surface at 0/ms>portal slams down around it>mystery force suddenly pulls the cube off of the surface>a force with acceleration > which would imply that at some point before the portal hit the bottom of the surface, the cube started getting sucked upward by.... nothingB fags, everyone
>>722835687>unmoving surfaceSee >>722834603>the cube appears on the other sideYes. By changing its position over time, aka moving.>The cube remains still the whole wayIt verifiably does not. Exiting the portal requires movement.
>>722836354Thanks this helps. Also zero. In both examples, please tell me the cubes relative momentum to the floor walls and any other outer edges of this room before reaching this portal, and any differences between the two examples.
Quick test, 3 scenarios. If you get all 3 answers right you can take sensei on a date.1:>there's a stationary portal on the wall next to me>the other portal is inside a train moving at a constant 100km/hAs I step through, what happens?a) I fall over and tumble as if the ground was swept from beneath my feet (like stepping through a door onto a moving train)b) I step through smoothly, not noticing the speed of the train2:>there's a stationary portal on the ground next to me>the other portal is on the bottom of a plane moving at a constant 1000km/hAs I jump through, what happens?a) I fall straight down without any horizontal momentumb) I fall diagonally down, like a dropped bomb3:>there's a stationary portal on the ground next to me>the other portal is on the surface of the Moon which is moving at ~3600km/h sidewaysThe force of different air pressure between the Moon and my test chamber pulls me through at ~5km/h. What happens next?a) The Moon flies away from me at ~3600km/h and I'm left stranded in spaceb) I stay close to the Moon and can be pulled back through by a robotic arm
>>722832734>Then it's A.Nope, you just don't understand what it means to translate motion from one frame of reference to another. You mistake your vantage point for absolute, mistake the subjective for objective
>>722836298The cube can't be somewhere else and also in the same spot. You are using the distance to the platform to define where the cube is, but that isn't reliable when there is a portal involved. Otherwise you could just as easily say that the cube in the original problem is moving and has momentum before the portal gets to it since its position relative to something on the other side of the portal is changing. That isn't intended to be an argument for B, but just showing that measuring velocity through a portal to some reference point doesn't always work as you would expect.
>>722836649The cube didnt change position, the portal did. The other side of the portal is somewhere else. The cube did not change it's position, a hole in the fabric of space and time did.
>>722836573Try considering any point on the cube, or in picrel any rung on the ladder. If it doesn't have a velocity relative to the exit portal, it can't move away from the exit portal so you'd get some nonsensical result like a compressed or fused cube that's 1 atom thick. If it does have a velocity, it must be B.
>>722836841What happens to the space next to the exit portal prior to the experiment? Does it get bent out of the way?
>>722836872dang you made the point i was about to make lol
>>722837003yep
>>722837003The space is still there, at most a bunch of air is now somewhere else.
>>722830948No but it does clue you in what the intelligent answer is when B gets more popular the more experience a community has with the question.>>722832543B gets a slight lead these days. Which fucking tells you something when a community completely inexperienced with the topic gets A as a vast majority.
>>722818319I only ever consider this problem as if I were the cube myself and think about it as if I were in gamewhich is why I'd pick A
>>722836872It doesnt need velocity to exit the portal because the portal is falling around it.
>>722836573The portal also connects a state of motion to another.The easiest way to see is, imagine there's a portal inside a building. The other end is enclosed in the wagon of a moving train. You walk into the portal in the building, and you walk out of that portal. You have effectively "gained speed", but it's been seamless because the portal simply connected your room with the wagon even though they are moving at different speeds.Now remove the room and wagon, and the math is still the same because what matters is the portals.
>>722837119So the space isn't bent, which means the cube moves.
>>722837081>>722837119Could I start the portal really high up and move a huge column of space through to really fuck shit up? That would be fun.
>>722818427>No sense of imagination >Lack of abstract thinking >Hates funJeet or Jew?
>>722837174
>>722837174How does it MOVE through and away from the portal without velocity?
>>722837219no no i just meant the air would be moving or compressing or decompressing for a lil bit
>>722836635This.
>>722837310It doesnt need velocity, the portal is FALLING AROUND IT
>>722836540Sorry didn't catch that flat part. Let's correct that.So the cube is resting on the platform?
Portals don't move.You're all retards.
>>722836060>>722836872And there you have it folks. Irrefutable concrete proof that Btards are stupid as shit
>>722836759>stationary>>722834603
>>722836685Zero with a stationary platform and some positive value when it's on a rushing piston.Now can you tell me the momentum of the cube relative to the entry portal in both cases?
>>722836635>>cube resting on surface at 0/ms>>722834603
>>722837561Relative to the room I'm in, which is a permanent structure on the surface of the Earth.
>>722837498Thanks, That rotate tool is tricky, lets continue where we left off, grey surface marked by the red arrow, what is that?
>>722836759All 3 are b. Now take your clothes off. We're skipping the boring date and getting straight to the fun stuff
>>722837396Yes. Which means the cube is MOVING THROUGH THE PORTAL
Portals aren't even real so this is all a waste of time LMAO
A or B ?
>>722837167You'd pick the one where your insides are liquified by instant deceleration and you die painfully instead of getting a fun little boost and landing safely? Is everything ok, man? Do you wanna talk about it?
>>722837869I bet you ate breakfast yesterday
>>722837597>>722837658
>>722837971>he thinks yesterday is real
>>722837785It's the surface of the platform in another room, now feel free to tell me, if the piston in >>722837498 reverses, will the cube reappear on the platform? Or even in your picture, if the piston nearly instantly reverses to -100000 MPH, will the cube lose contact with the platform at any moment?
>>722837952>instant deceleration >is standing still on a platformlol
>>722837593Some value in both cases assuming the entry portal is referring to the edges of the portal anomaly and not the space between which could be argued as being a stable folded space link to the the exit portal so you could argue in the first instance 0 as well. Portals are weird like that.
>>722838206>standing still>>722834603
>>722818319I'm convinced none of you guys understand how physics work in outer space. Aren't you guys taught how scientists use planetary gravity to slingshot spacecraft as free inertia propellers? In the movie Apollo 13 the astronauts turned off almost all power to wait until they're at the proper distance to turn the boosters back on to propel them with the moon's low gravity as a slingshot back to Earth. Apply that logic to the Portal example in OP, if A worked in real life then the astronauts wouldn't have gotten a boost at all.
>>722838318The surface im on, as well as the exit portal you dunce
>>722837978And why does the room matter? What if the other portal is in a different room that's moving relative to the first room?
>>722837910
>>722838264So the cube has momentum relative to the entry portal? Then why would it stop after passing through it? What force would act on it to stop it?
>>722838135>another roomThis is the only room that exists in this example, the rest of the universe has been filled in with concrete due to budget cuts. Which room do you think it's in? Do you think this is alright if hand and another cube has replaced the first? Also no, no it does not.
>>722818427Get it guys, those are bevers...they like to eat straws or something...
>>722837790Straight to the fun stuff you say? If you insist...
Portal A fags are the people who would say the Planets are rotating around Earth 300 years ago by the way.
>>722838489B fags argue that the box on the pillar would suddenly shoot upward LOL
>>722838459See, now you're just avoiding answering. It matters.
>>722837910B
>>722838494It does not what? There were two questions.
>>722838354And what if the exit portal is also moving?
>>722819064I'm glad I'm not alone. B people are so loud that I started to doubt myself. Thank you.
Why are A fags such high school dropouts? A stationary object can't suddenly be pushed into motion BECAUSE...IT JUST CAN'T OKAY?!
>>722830839The more things change, the more they stay the same.
>>722838708Pushed by what?
>>722838493The object in motion relative to the rest of the example, the piston, has reached a stop due to colliding with the platform, with all relevant forces dispersed as they usually do on hitting the floor platform. Why does 0 relative to the external planes become not 0?
>>722838607Ok, one at a time then to avoid confusing you. ask away.
>>722838489You're forgetting all the air that's going through the portal which would make the cube and pillar shoot up into the stratosphere
>>722838592Use your understanding of A to explain to me what happens if the exit portal is moving.I'm feeling generous so I'll even go first. The main idea of B is that Relative velocity in = Relative velocity out. This means that you exit a moving portal at whatever velocity it's moving at plus the velocity you entered the entry portal relative to it.Now, your turn. What happens if the exit portal is moving at, say 5 m/s?
>>722838875Do this for Apollo 13 re-activating its thrusters in the moon's rotation.
>>722838772I'm just asking if we're on the same page. The cube has momentum relative to the entry portal whether it's the cube riding up to it or the portal falling down towards the cube.
>>722838489L-lewd!
>>722838945Please answer the question asked and not your own.
>>722838489A fags argue that the box on the pillar would suddenly stop moving LOL
>>722838574Holy kek
>>722837174>>722837396You're demonstrating how bad a grasp you have on this.All you understand is WHY the cube exits the portal. But you don't understand HOW. You understand that the cube exits the portal because it enters on the other end. But when you're asked the fundamentals of HOW that's supposed to happen when exiting a stationary exit requires motion, your brain does a complete 404 file not found and you default to you only thing you understand, that the cube must exit because it entered the portal.
>>7228388411. Is the cube resting on the platform here >>722837498
>>722838964Yes but relative to the rest of the planes the object that has this relative momentum changes, which is important to keep in mind .
>>722839025The box is sitting on the surface, not moving. Explain how it would just suddenly jump upwards?
>>722839084>which is important to keep in mindWhy?
>>722839025They're not moving you fucking Brainless moron
>>722838562We're stationary! Nothing is moving or rotating! You're crazy to think so!
>>722839025A fags argue that the webm is accurate. B fags argue that the box would fly up and if you go fast enough the pillar would rip apart too.
Explain this Atards
>>722839081Yes until gravity inverts because you decide to be cheeky, now back to >>722837785 what is the distance between the cube and the grey surface you add oddly reluctant to admit is the platform?
>>722839207The Church would like to know your location blasphemer
>>722839269Birmingham.
>>722838543I was mostly talking about sex but I guess this works too. Assuming the top of the orange portal in the picture correlates to the top of the blue portal and it's rotating fast enough, violet on bottom because the light is being compressed there due to the portal rotating and red on top for the opposite reason, so B. You still have your clothes on though.
>>722839207WHEEEEEEE!
>>722839207>This is what Btards and Globeheads unironically believe
>>722839207Goddamnit not again. Do you know how long I spent lining them all up neatly?
>>722839480
>>722837557Irrefutable proof that you are full of shit, you mean. You'd refute it otherwise.
>>722839272Here you go.Now, if the piston explosively reverses after landing, does the cube lose contact with the platform even for a moment?
>>722839178Because otherwise you can make incorrect conclusions based on insufficient information.
>>722839269Bomboclat
>>722839613>>722839548>>722839480If celestial objects moved on a X and Y axis, wouldn't that cause cataclysmic effects? Submarines can only move in 3D because of how gravity affects them underwater, that rotation you're replying to would mean airplanes can suddenly move in 3D above water.
>>722838543Oh shit, I remember this autism from /sci/.
>>722839753How does anything that isn't the cube or the portal affect the interaction between them?
>>722839002Wait which question are you talking about? The one from the anime girl post? I went up the reply thread and didn't find any others.
>>722839698No, it shouldn't even for a moment. Now how can the cube be both that far away while still touching it?
>>722839123>>722839182>>722839246It is moving, retards. Quite fast even. If something exiting the portal like that "is not moving" then Chell would be squashed like a bug after jumping into the portal even though she expected to fly out. The momentum she entered with is what she exits with no matter what.
>>722818319Portals are proven to violate energy conservation and keep the impulse relative to the portal so b
This threads reminds me of the lore about HP Lovecraft. He wanted to be a scientist but because he was so bad at math and physics he gave up. Something about how refrigerators work made him go insane.
>>722839838Because the question is asking how it interacts with the rest of the room once the portals do their thing. Satisfied yet?
>>722838768Itself. Or more precisely the each matter of the cube is pushed by the other matter of the cube.Basically you either understand that portals can intrinsically change motion of objects just like how they change position and orientation. Or you claim they don't, in which case the matter of the cube will end up exiting into each other, pushing each other.
>>722839921Lovecraft also was freaked out by Calamari and Italians
>>722839921I love the fact that shadow over innsmouth is just him working out his terror at discovering he was part Welsh. The weird glassy eyed fish people taking in an incomprehensible tongue just suddenly become hilarious.
>>722839123>sitting on the surfaceCorrect>not moving>>722834603>ExplainIt would simply keep moving.>>722839182>They're not movingAgain, >>722834603>>722839246And B fags would be correct.
>>722839882Yes because SHE'S entering you fucking dipshitThe cube isn't going into the portal the portal is going around the cube
Despite all the great debates I still believe it's A.
>>722819032>he thinks you need a force to keep an object in motion in motion(And before you even give me your predictable retarded retort: the answer is air resistance)
>>722839480>>722839613>>722839792If you liked that, you're gonna LOVE Saturn
Been a while since the last (B)eta (B)itch humiliation thread thread.
>>722840106This KILLS the /b/tard
Niggas be believing B and then not believing in Christ because muh science.
>>722839882>rephrases entire thing >chell entering (with momentum from her jump)>not portal entering around chell(who is just standing on the ground)Bfags...
>>722840106As if we're just supposed to take the word of some random idiot on the internet
>>722818383
>>722840242JFC Saturn calm down, you're an absolute mess.
>>722840291I believe in B and Christ.
>>722838543>>722839825Actually I remember most of the autism didn't centre on the actual problem, which is trivial. I remember the OP was just a weirdo who had personal beef with me because he didn't understand my explanation and he latched onto a simple but wrong one instead lol
>>722840350>bfags have no brainLike pottery
>>722840106Jay is an idiot then. If orange portal flies at you at 50mph, causing you to go through blue portal at 50mph, then gravity isn't going to stop you from flying upwards. It will begin decelerating you to stop at the top of an arc in the air.
>>722838671You should doubt yourself, in fact
>>722840291Nothing more pathetic than a false flagging Btard
>>722840242Who actually believes this?
>>722840467im not going anywhere if the portal comes to me and I’m stationary, retard
>>722839863So the cube is sucked back into the portal with near-infinite acceleration? What force accelerates it? The platform doesn't pull on it, does it?>how can the cube be both that far away while still touching it?Because the portals transfer matter. So in case where gravity would pull the cube into the portal but something is blocking the exit, it gets pressed against it. Unless the gravitational force was so strong that the cube would crush through the blockage on the other side.One more thing here>>722839272>until gravity inverts because you decide to be cheekyWhy does that matter? Wouldn't the platform keep the cube in place with its own gravity since it's resting on it? Why/why not?
>>722840467Your dumbass has no right to call anyone an idiot
>>722840242It's hurting my head thinking about this. If our solar system is on the bottom of the Y axis of outer space, it would explain why it's so dark. And if Earth actually on a higher Y axis, we would be at the ceiling or closer to Heaven. We must be at the surface bottom if its so dark, like the deep sea creatures. This is frightening the more I think about it.
>>722821947retard alert retard alert retard alert
So what would happen if the portal devours the whole contraption instead of just the cube?Nothing or will it be torn apart by the force?
>>722839925But once the portals do their thing the cube is in a different place, so whatever the environment was on the entry side ceases to be relevant. Unless you claim that it can somehow affect the cube through the portal.
>>722840802Nothing will happen to the cube or the pillar it stands on. The orange portal may shut off when it crashes to the ground though depending on the speed
>>722840106Let's ask the guy who came up and programmed portals before he was hired to make Portal.
>>722840769We are on a Starship traveling through the galaxy, brother
>>722839269The train is in motion, therefore the nigger inherits its velocity. The platform the cube is on is stationary, therefore there is no inherent velocity for B to occur.A-chads keep winning
>>722840802It will experience that same force pulling at it. If it's weak, then it will rip apart. If it's strong, then you wouldn't see any effect but you could measure that it occurred.
>>722840954Boomer has no idea what he’s talking about
>>722840954>There's no way to solve this.>There is no right answer>proceeds to pseud his way through physicsThe appeal to authority only works if we're talking about how it would function in-engine (if moving portals hypothetically worked) which he specifically rules out. Outside of that context, this asshole is just another scream in the cacophony. Jay answered the question from the in-engine perspective.
>>722840954Did you even read his post? He can’t even answer how the cube is suddenly pushed up, and even he clarifies that the pedestal the cube is on is small enough to enter and "push" it through
>>722841186Exactly. Jay has no idea.
You don't even need a degree in physics to know the right answer.
If I was god I would beam this webm into the brain of every Afag 24/7 until they repent.
>>722840242Damn, and there's still that orbit trail from some autistic nigga moon outside the screen.
>>722841295In-engine a stationary cube cannot go through a portal. So it's not A.
A-fags completely, irrefutably, permanently BTFO'd. Of course, they will, as always, refuse to accept evidence of their colossal wrongness right in front of their faces. I pity them. Not every brain is fit to bear the burden of understanding it takes to be a B-chad.
someone post the webm of the test in portal itself
>>722841425uuhhh but its moving??
>>722841495I trust the guy that worked on the engine over you.
>>722841545Trust the actual engine.
>>722841425>animated by a bfag>"erm this is proof bfags are right!"Just embarrassing
>>722841425But the platform the box is on is moving.
>>722840825They're in a different place which is also the original place. The platform the cube started on is right there under the cube despite the distance between entry and exit Portals. The two places have merged.
>>722841678that was a literal glitch
>>722841791This is how the engine handles the scenario. In-engine it's not A.
>>722840585You seem to be confused. Perhaps have a think about the question some more and come back.
>>722841425>it's another "bfags switch it to the box moving up into the portal instead of the portal moving down onto the box" episodeCan we stop this rerun?
>>722841678The engine is flawed; the creator's vision is not.
>>722841684It's food for thought and visualization help. Do you think it would behave differently or that it doesn't relate to the original problem? How exactly? Why? What are the aspects that matter?
>>722841425This webm that proves the answer is A?
>>722841780We are already having this discussion with another anon and he seems to have bowed out. Is the cube resting on the platform in this picture? >>722837498
>>722841538>>722841684>>722841721It's not moving. It's literally the animation of the scenario in Op.
>>722841154>stationary>>722834603
>>722841425I don't like this one since it doesn't really do anything different compared to the original other than hiding what is and isn't moving. There isn't anything there that is going to change someones mind to trick them into saying something that would go against their original beliefs. You can see this in the replies you have gotten so far. This is the best one if you want to actually get to people. People who say the answer is A will consistently change their explanation for how A works when trying to deal with it.
>>722841929Exactly. The actual creator says B.
>>722841949It's not properly factoring in the upward momentum of the platform after it exits the portal so the cube would likely not bounce as freely as it does in the webm.
>>722839207>>722841085>orbit lines form shapes that resemble the double helix of DNAKino.
>>722841912Sure, here you go.
>>722842141It is moving and you understand this but insist on bad faith discussion. The cube has upward velocity in >>722841425 and does not in the OP.
>>722842457uuhh but its moving??
>>722842457Again irrelevant bfag animations, where did the cube get the momentum to hop off of the surface from?
>>722842550indeed
>>722842286The "actual creator" said there is no answer and never attempted to answer from how the engine would handle it, the only context in which his authority mattered. We don't need another lap of this logic. Twice is quite enough.
>>722842275A-fags just can't wrap their brains around this. Their minuscule mind just can't grasp real, actual physics nor how it could apply to these fictional, hypothetical, yet plausible physics. And yet, somehow, they still have extreme confidence they are right. It's the conundrum of the 20's. Ignorant, blatantly wrong people ferociously spouting their objectively wrong opinions and ignoring any real evidence they're wrong.
>>722842585From the portal
>>722842594lmao dumb globie glowie
>>722842063Yes, although you've inverted it.
>>722841514>>722842275The box in this one literally has momentum though, unlike the cube in OP.>>722841425>>722842141>>722842457>exit portal not 45 degreesPeak Btard dishonesty.
>>722842141It's embarrassing how you had to edit this to make it look like the answer isn't obviously A
>>722842674Portals don't impart momentum.
>>722842704>>exit portal not 45 degreesDoesn't matter, still flings out
>>722842458It's literally not a bad faith discussion. Movement is literally, unironically, 100% based on relativeness. As demonstrated in the webm, the exact same "movement" can be created by the orange portal moving down or the blue portal moving up. It makes zero difference. Therefore the outcome is the same. There is no "movement" tank that is being filled up with "movement" particles for one scenario and not the other. This is reality and you just look silly rejecting reality.
>>722842757see >>722842275Portal-relative momentum is conserved, but to an external observer, momentum is altered.
>>722842636He said there is no right answer in real life. However, he would do B in game.
>>722842275That's still just A. How are you people this dumb?
>>722842275>bfag touching the cube and not the portal for the 183848844th time
>>722842063>hey let's get rid of the 45° tilt on the exit platform so we can discuss the problem without having the box sliding off be an issue that keeps cropping up>What's that? Intentionally misinterpret to laser focus on the box sliding off? Don't mind if I do Yeah I wonder why these discussions never get anywhere.
>>722842886The guy outside the train sees a stationary cube engulfed by a moving portal, which results in the cube gaining velocity.
>>722818319Mayhaps B is correct if, when the two platforms collide, there's enough energy being transferred to propel the box? Otherwise, where does the energy come from?
>>722842714It's embarrassing that tiny brains like you need a thousand, intricate animations to try and get through your thick skull to get your imbecilic mind to understand. It's embarrassing you have zero ways of your own to prove your retarded idea. It's embarrassing you just reject all evidence you're wrong and sit there keeping your smug face on saying no no no while actual intelligent people take pity on you, having sympathy trying so hard to reach you. But they'll fail. You're just too damn dumb.
>>722839921How DO they work? Im completely uninformed and the only method is forcefully compressing gas?
>>722842886It could be A, but >>722842952 and >>722842704 don't understand how A would work here as expected. If someone doesn't know how A works here, I can't trust their answer for the original.
>Btards' shit railguns out of their sphincter at 900m/s instead of just plopping into the toiletThat must be quite the spectacle.
>>722843083Conservation of energy is a dumb thing to invoke given that even stationary portals blatantly violate it.Portals conserve the relative velocity of things which pass through them, that's why the cube flings out and in fact that's why it can even pass through in the first place.
>>722818319Afag>approach issue with poise, take the problem exactly as it isBfag>approach with a warped "understanding" of physics, resort to making tons of gifs and text, ALL of which alter initial conditions in an attempt to build credibility
>>722842681This shouldn't matter. If the cube is resting on the platform, why would it stop?
https://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyBhttps://strawpoll.com/e2naX9a7lyB
>>722843215>Portals conserve the relative velocity of things which pass through themIf this is true, then it seems to me the box would stretch and tear itself apart from the sudden input of energy
>>722841416Yeah, logic points to B
>>722843396But you don't take the problem as is. You don't understand the problem as is.
>>722843491If it were not true, then Chell would smash herself to a pulp trying to fall through a portal to fling herself upwards
>>722838489i'm not a physicist but this feels offyou sure your not breaking some natural laws here? lol
>>722842294Are you trying to argue that the box would be shot at an [apparent] angle of 45º downwards maybe? I disagree but I would understand that concern. Still you're opening up to the idea that the box does indeed shoot out of the portal. Think more about it.
>>722842294>>722843965Also keep in mind that the platform has a constant speed. No acceleration.
>>722842874>I would program it like BThis is ignoring how the engine current handles things moving through portals and the developer design document for Portal logic. Jay answers how the engine would handle it if the least intrusive amount of tweaking were done to the current engine and a box could move through a portal. Dave answered it as though the engine doesn't handle portal interactions correctly at a fundamental level. It is plain to see that portals don't impart force onto whatever passes through them in game as was the design intent by the developers which Jay confirms and the engine does not have frames of reference for physics interactions outside of the rendered area.Put more simply, Dave is answering the question as how he would best redesign the engine to account for his flawed perception of the hypothetical reality of portals and Jay is answering how the logic of the engine works and would handle the situation if collision was slightly different.
>>722843931Yeah, this was intended to show that A is completely nonsensical but of course they just declare that they see no problems because they're either too dumb or too dishonest
>>722844062>Jay answers how the engine would handle it if the least intrusive amount of tweaking were done to the current engine and a box could move through a portal.Actually he doesn't even seem to have understood the question.
>>722844158>the person that disagrees with me obviously didn't understand the question
>>722823303NOOOOOOOOOO THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO GO
>>722844307The question has one correct answer, in this case B, and if someone disagrees they didn't understand the question.
>>722844307Well, you all do. But he specifically doesn't give an answer that actually fits the question.
>>722841319Doesn't matter dumbass. It's still better than literally getting momentum wrong like Jay did.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASUUN0W4_JY
