>Afags think it's A It's obviously B.

>A moves at 40mph to envelope B and is ejected at C which is moving at 40mph for a net change of 0
This is a door

>A moves at 40mph to envelope B and is ejected at C which is moving at 0mph for a net change of 40
This is a non existent portal anons are sperging about.

The numbers must be equal not counting gravity and wind resistance.

>>377038275
Because boxes and water pressure work the same way.

>>377038275
It's a combination between the two

>>377038275
It literally depends how fast the blue portal is moving.

It's the same in the box scenario - it depends ENTIRELY on how fast the blue portal is moving.

Water interacts with Portal but the cube doesn't
Inb4 b fags use relativity to justify their meme science

Stop making these threads. Portals are not real and the way they are presented in-game cannot be described from a real-world standpoint, thus trying to apply real-world physics is meaningless.
You may as well be debating about magic.

>>377038715
And neither exert force on objects entering them. Stop posting this.

>>377039169
>afag damage control

>>377039281
Momentum is relative and conservation of momentum prove you wrong.

File: solid column of water as long as the piston is moving.jpg (78KB, 900x720px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 900x720px

>>377038275
Fixed

Imagine the cube weighs a quadrillion tons. Simply moving the portal over it, no matter how fast, would not create enough energy needed to budge a cube that dense

Where does the energy come from? The momentum from the portal piston does not transfer to the cube

>>377038309

a is more fun and way safer

what is it with these threads the past few days

>>377039972
idk you tell me where the energy comes from. the cube """"""moves""""" as it's coming out the exit portal thats why the question is retarded

>>377038275
In this diagram, its B, because the water is being pushed out by the rest of the water in the container.

In the original problem, the cube won't move due to the fact that it has no momentum.

A fags and B fags should kill themselves for being such annoying cunts.

This is different from the cube because the water would be forced through the portal due to water pressure.

The cube is an enigma because it is moving relative to one half of the portal, and stationary relative to one half of the portal, yet the portal is a single point in space, and there is no other force that would force things happen such as water pressure.

>>377039413
Portals don't have mass so they can't transfer momentum

>>377040169
Momentum is relative.

>Trying to use physics to argue about something that cannot be described by physics

File: Afags.webm (718KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

718KB, 1280x720px

This kills the Afag.

>>377040410
An object at rest, ect. The cube has no inertia.

>>377040607
But it is not at rest relative to the moving portal.

>>377040607
The cube is entering at the speed of the portal.

>>377040575
i see nothing wrong with this

>>377040763
>A
>rocket is both outside of the exit portal and still only partway through the entrance portal
>nothing wrong with this
???????

>>377040152
What I'm saying is you'd need an equal amount of force to push a portal over an object needed to push it out.

In this case, since there isn't enough force to push over a billion ton cube, you literally couldn't push the portal over it. The portal would refuse to go over it

File: 1494845857661.gif (67KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 500x364px

THIS TRAIN HAS NO BRAKES

>>377040575
>>377040901
This has nothing to do with the physics of A or B. The artist just drew one version delayed for no reason.

I know it is from the previous thread but...
>>377037406
>>377033113
I refuse this is not a false flag

>>377038275
You fucking retard, water acts in completely different ways from a solid object.
Fuck you and your shitty bait.

File: bubble.png (33KB, 841x433px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 841x433px

this thread is fucking retarded

>>377041324
Afags BTFO

>>377040232
rolling for a cool one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TZd95BCKMY

daily reminder, this somehow works in the game

>>377038275
If a door frame is hurtling towards you at 100mph, do you fly off at high speed as soon as you pass through it?
You fucking idiot.

>>377041243
The artist drew A-fag "conservation of momentum" in a different context that shows how retarded it is when we're talking about portals that are both moving and non-moving. No delay was added. Just look at it.

>>377041802
Yes, look at it. The rocket is exiting the portal faster than it's entering it.

>>377041649
>>377038715

It seems to me that people are confusing the issue.

If portals apply no forces to the object, then the fact that it's a portal is Literally irrelevant.

Looking at it another way, from the cube's perspective, the fact that a hole into "another space" is being thrust upon it changes absolutely nothing about the fact that the cube is inert upon its platform, and it would remain so even if the portal's piston was jackhammering on top of it. On the other side, it would seem to appear and disappear very quickly, but never Mysteriously launch itself into the air.

The cube is Not being "thrust" out of the portal. functionally speaking, the universe is being Dropped on top of the cube. It might slide down the slope after depending on friction versus gravity, but whether it does or does not is in no way important to the experiment.

If as somebody proposed there was a second cube being dangled in front of the "exit" portal, than that cube would be displaced by or slightly displace the original cube as if it was being dropped upon it at a speed equal to that of the piston and an angle relative to the portals.
(ergo, A)

In the water example, its the same. the water will begin being affected By gravity the instant it the portal passes over it. If the piston is fast enough, you would again have a situation a lot like A. The only thing determining the how far the water extends beyond the portal is the speed at which the portal passes over it (versus the speed at which the water can then fall to the ground, but in no case should you expect the water to "spray" out from the portal by any distance much exceeding the depth at which the portal comes to "rest". The only complications here are caused by the piston itself (namely, the non-portal surface of the piston coming into contact with the water).

>>377039413
We're talking portals here, anon.

>>377040084
B could be more fun if you had a cute butt.

>>377041367
Not analogous. Air is held in place in A in the image you drew because the air is being compressed.
There would be no compressed air with the portals.

>>377038715
>>377041931
>There is a net change because I said there was
There is no evidence to suggest the physics of Portals are any different to traditional doors. What applies the force to the object going through the portal? Fucking magic?
Fuck off.

>>377038275
depends on how deep you put the blue portal you faggot

>>377042016
>If portals apply no forces to the object
Why are we assuming this? Where is the evidence that this is how portals with one half moving and the other half not work?

>>377041057
This is correct. The water problem and rocket problem are straw men that are not related to this problem mechanically at all.

>>377042241
>entrance moves 10000000 miles per second
>exit moves 0 miles per second
HURR DURR ITS A DOOR HULA HOOP CUZ IM FUCKING RETARDED

>>377041057
This is exactly right

>>377042016

Now, you could easily alter the experiment to make B a reality if the piston was fitted to the tank (what I mean is, if there was no portal it would be a closed system where the act of the piston's downward movement compresses the water. In this case, adding a portal would make the water would "spray" out of the "Exit" portal due to pressure, with the maximum "length" of the spray solely determined by the size of the portal relative to the entire piston. (small hole -> big pressure -> big spray). as the size of the portal approaches the entire area of the piston, you would end up with A again.

File: hoops.gif (17KB, 504x282px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 504x282px

>>377041649
>still using the door/window/hoop argument

>>377041057
This is the correct

File: Mj3Y0.jpg (15KB, 600x403px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 600x403px

Get on my level

>>377041057
Das rite

>afags are all autists fascinated by doors and hula hoops
Really gets the ol' noggin' joggin'
>>377042636
>strawman
>afags are this bad at arguing

>>377042241
>What applies the force to the object going through the portal?
The fact that the object moves relative to the exit portal, and the world on the exit portal side, as the entrance portal passes over it.
Why would the object move, then suddenly stop?

>Fucking magic?
Are you aware that portals are not real? We have no idea how a single point in space that is both moving and not moving would work. We basically are talking about magic here.

>>377042663
Right side is heavier right?

File: Afags_on_their_way_to_work.png (23KB, 1800x420px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 1800x420px

>this is what afags actually believe

so

why hasnt anyone bothered to do this test in portal to just end this discussion?

>>377042636
>Einsteins theory of relativity is a poor understanding of physics

>>377042663
Left is heavier. Displaced water is the same, but the left also has the weight of the ping pong ball.

>>377042814
kek

>>377042829
Because in-game, portals can't be placed on moving surfaces.

>>377042829
portal isn't exactly a test bed for realistic physics problems

>>377042814
The strawing of men is unreal here, typical of a bfag

>>377042663
The steel balll has the same surface area as ping pong ball but weights more. Due to archimedes' principle you have the same push on both balls, but the steel ball is moved less, since it takes a stronger force to move it the same distance.
The scale tips over in favor of the right side.

>>377042829
It's already been tested, the cube just gets stuck

>>377040410
OK FUCKER THE CUBE IS RESTING ON THE GROUND WHEN ALL OF A SUDDEN A PORTAL SLAMS DOWN ONTO IT. WHAT CAUSE THE CUBE TO MAGICALLY LEAVE THE FLOOR IT WAS RESTING ON?

>>377042814
>He doesn't know how to roll

>>377042906
Bfags don't actually know anything about relativity, they just parrot it because they saw a few posts that went above their heads and assumed they were right.

>>377043010
Better than the sucking of men, which is what Afags do.

>>377042984
yes they can

>>377043010
>strawmanning with the strawman argument

>>377042814
How is this relevant to portals at all, Bfag?

File: 1491852149882.jpg (593KB, 1781x3411px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 1781x3411px

/v/ will argue about everything

>>377043038
The steel ball doesn't move at all. It's not a part of the scale system, it just displaces water.

>>377043149
I am no longer an A fag

>>377043149
im a D fag

classic black

perfect to rip off a girl to see her pale legs through them

>>377043063
Portals go over all of our heads. No one has any idea how they would work because they aren't fucking real.

>>377043149
B makes me rock hard. Fuck.

>>377043171
If anything it not being part of the scale system means it is free to move. It's literally the same way dropping any item in water works after all.

>>377043149

E or F

feet are gross, cover that shit up

Whoever broke valve's canon and introduced a moving platform in portal 2 should be fired.

Also, whatever object tried to exit on the AB side would be disintegrated due to moving faster on one side than on the other.

>>377042365
It is my understanding that the proposed portals are purely a union of two distinct 'planes' in space of a given size.

Is the portal displacing matter, or is it simply a "tunnel" of functionally zero length uniting two points? If the latter, the fact that the entrance moves matters not at all.

The "non-portal" portion of the face of the piston will displace the air (or water), when you move it, but the portal itself will not.

>>377038275
Even if there's no portal momentum fuckery, it has to be B due to water pressure.

File: 1479039139766.jpg (10KB, 295x254px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 295x254px

>>377043149
>women wearing shoes that don't cover their toecrotch and no stockings
Anything but A

>>377043134
Speed is relative. The man is going 100mph relative to the building. If the man were to jump, he would still be going almost 100mph. His momentum is far too much to stop in time to survive his trip to work.

In relation to the piston, the block is moving fast. In relation to the ground it is resting on, it isn't moving at all. But this isn't about the ground. It's about the piston and the portal.

Fucking Afags man. Jesus.

File: 1490071802630.png (600KB, 544x761px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 544x761px

>>377043149
A or D please

>>377038275
What happens when you put an upside down cup into water?

>>377038275
You could easily recreate this in real life just put 4 pistons on each corner of a block with a hole in the center.

>>377043770
I've never been inside a cup before

File: portal vagina.png (9KB, 825x504px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 825x504px

With a portal moving up and down on your dick, would you feel pleasure and get hard, or remain limp dicked?

>>377042814
thats b you dumb fuck

>>377043959
i'd say there would be a slight electrical tingle, so b

>>377043408
>If the latter, the fact that the entrance moves matters not at all.
But it does. When the entrance moves over you, you're moving on the side of the exit.
A is using the entrance as a frame of reference (object is stationary, thing goes over it and doesn't impart momentum), while B is using the exit as a frame of reference (object necessarily moving at speed on exit side as entrance passes over it).
There is no way to know which is valid, because portals are not real. All we can do is try to apply physics as we know them to one half of the portal.

>>377044002
>man jumps off moving vehicle
>lands right where he jumped off
>B
good joke

Bfags explain:

What happens when the moving portal stops halfway? Does the box take off to go through the portal anyways? At what point does the box gain all that momentum?

>>377043770
see:
>>377042240

>>377044192
that image presumes that in A the cube has momentum like the guy on the car

B Fags, the box does not have any momentum

File: portalfags.png (80KB, 984x447px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 984x447px

>>377038275

>>377044376
A obviously

>>377044306
Momentum is relative, the box is travelling at the same speed it enters the portal.

>>377044096
The real question is why the cube isn't crushed by the weight of the universe that is functionally being dropped on it.

>>377044376
C. The man is shot through the portal with the momentum his upper body alone has gained until then.

>>377042663
oh I get it the water is being pushed down by the heavy ball because of its bouncy.
I was really confused at first, but then i realized its a string so it can flex and bend.

>>377044257
Half the mass is moving on the exit side as it goes through the entrance, so when the entrance portal stops, the half of the mass on the exit side continues moving and pulls the rest through at a net half speed.

>>377044306
>object is obviously moving on the exit side
>no momentum
good joke

>>377041057
THANK YOU HOLY SHIT

>>377044572

This.

Through some relativistic fuckery, the portal is transferring momentum to the object.

>>377044597
buoyancy*

>>377043959
It depends on how the portal works. If the portal selectively chooses material to travel through it, specifically just your dick, it would be A. If it simply connects two places in space, then you would feel some sort of change by virtue of the fact that your dick and air is displacing the air on the other side of the portal and vice versa as the portal moves back.

>>377038275
can you make it piss instead of water? thanks

File: 1493120984504.gif (367KB, 383x574px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 383x574px

>>377041057
not so fast fucker (1/2)

>>377044572
No, the piston is moving so fast that his upper body is imbued with so much kinetic energy that it explodes off the body half which is still sitting with no kinetic energy since it is not yet through the portal. Only the body part that is through the portal is given any energy for motion and it's enough to sever the upper half.

>>377044376

Probably the best analogy.

>>377044704
no. the man has no inherent velocity. So he'll just stay stuck halfway through both portals.

Portals are nothing more then two sides of the same doorframe. It does nog transfer energy to the object that's passing through. Even if the portal itself is moving.

>>377041057
This is correct, despite the amount of B fags having autism fits about relativity and still not being able to understand that same relativity they're talking about. The cube does have velocity as long as the blue portal is moving towards and around it because the whole universe moves around the box therefore the box is moving. But as soon as the portal stops moving the box stops moving.

File: 1493122332274.gif (3MB, 478x718px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 478x718px

>>377041057
>>377044764
(2/2)

>physicists say its B

>people on /v/ just say its A

who am i going to believe

>>377044797
If the piston is moving that fast, no part of him makes it through the wall of compressed air which slams him as soon as he hits the event horizon, being effectively crushed onto the platform at his feet.

File: 1472522209555.jpg (96KB, 840x700px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 840x700px

>>377044764
>>377044860
what have you done

>>377038309
A works, B doesn't.
In B every time you thrust, you'd move your ass away from your dick.

>>377038275
No its B this time but the block one is A

>>377044257

Well, anon, you may not know this but all matter is made up of teeny-tiny particles called "atoms". What we call a "box" is, in fact, a collection of small particles held together with electromagnetic force. If I pulled on the front end of the box, I wouldn't be pulling on the entire box at once but rather just a fraction of it's atoms which would, in turn, pull on the other atoms in the box, giving the -illusion- that the box is one solid entity that moves in lockstep. Try this at home with a more viscous solid like jello or a slinky -- pull on one end and watch the motion ripple through the object.

So it's inaccurate to say that "the box" gains all that momentum. Each of the box's atoms gains that momentum as they pass through the portal at which point they will pull the atoms behind them as well. If the portal stops halfway through, the atoms in the top half the box will impart their momentum to the atoms in the bottom half of the box, causing it to leap slightly.

>>377044931
There is no compressed air since it's not a magical barrier, once the portal is open the air pressure equalizes between both sides.

>>377041057
THIS IS CORRECT

IT IS CORRECT BECAUSE LOOK THERE IS TEN REPLIES THAT SAYS IT IS CORRECT

AND HE MADE A GIF AND ALL THAT ADDS NO ARGUMENT TO THE PROBLEM BUT JUST ILLUSTRATE HIS ANSWER IN ANIMATION, THEREFORE IT MUST BE TRUE

I MIGHT ALSO ADD THAT I AM NON IRONICALLY SILLY

>>377043959
It will hit my pelivs and snu snu my hips.

>>377044962
Are you blind or did you willingly ignore the piston pushing the orange portal to your ass and back?

>>377044842
Reality: Portals are not real, and there is nothing even remotely analogous to a point in space that is both moving and not moving.
Please stop trying to speak as an authority on magic in a video game.

>no kinect energy
>no momentum
And people think the movement of getting out of the portal continues. Please go back to third grade and learn basic physics

>>377044839

Walking through a door frame doesn't change your frame of reference dummy. You dont speed through a door way at 100mph in front of you and pop out one in the floor barely moving. Which is what is happening with the portals.

>>377041057
THIS IS not CORRECT

>>377045127
>never learnt the basic fact of all momentum being relative
Speak for yourself.
>>377045130
>>377038715

>>377042712
>XD MUH HULLABAHOOPS
Not an argument

>>377044860
It stops middway. The oc is asking for a straight thrust.

File: xevNO8W.gif (946KB, 301x308px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 301x308px

>>377045130
>You dont speed through a door way at 100mph in front of you and pop out one in the floor barely moving

Bfags were btfo by Buster Keaton long ago.

>>377045130
A door is not a portal where one half is moving and the other is not. If a door or a hoop or whatever other false analogy passes over you, both the entrance and exit are moving, so of course nothing happens.

>>377045127

>"no kinetic energy" he says as if that's any sort of argument when even stationary portals pull kinetic energy out of nothing.
>confident in his assertion, anon finds another thread to shitpost in about games he's never played.

>>377045330
this

you can do this with your hand, a table or anything

the only difference is with portals is youre in a different place

>>377045330
>Bfags will argue against this
But muh relativity!

B physic would literally tear the fucking world apart.

from outside point of view the box is not moving, it doesnt make any sense for the box to just go flying

>>377045130
But, that's when YOU are moving THROUGH the frame. then you have INHERENT velocity.

but in the portal question, the DOOR is moving around a STILL object. Which means the object has NO inherent velocity.

It's A, Bfag.

>>377045619
It's almost like portals are imaginary

>>377045619
It's the exact same physics as A (real world as we know it), except using the exit as a frame of reference rather than the entrance.

File: 2kQogTB.jpg (77KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x960px

>>377045103
>"heh, i'm the smart and enlightened one for dismissing the discussion and the whole thread, having fun discussing hypothetical situations is below me......."


>Please stop trying to speak as an authority on magic in a video game.

Yes you titanic faglord i'm definitely trying to inflate my own ego and impress everyone around me on an anonymous imageboard.

>>377045130
>running through a doorframe
vs
>a doorframe moving toward you then stopping
Theres a difference
See >>377041057

I cant tell if you boys are memeing or being serious at this point
its B btw, also portals don't exist and they break the laws of physics

>>377045810
But from that same point of view the exit portal isn't moving either. How does a box that isn't moving move through a portal that isn't moving?

>ITS ANOTHER HULA HOOP/DOOR WAY EPISODE
FOR FUCK SAKES YOU NIGGERS
THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN REFUTED AT THE START OF THE THREAD
HOW ARE YOU THIS FUCKING DAFT AFAGS
HOW DO YOU KEEP DEFAULTING TO THE SAME FUCKING ARGUMENT OVER AND OVER AGAIN LONG AFTER IT HAS BEEN REFUTED

>>377045862
Even objects at rest have potential energy, as the portal engulfs an object or person, it converts this potential energy by virtue of it displacing material in another system.

File: 729.gif (227KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 600x600px

>>377038275
>B fags got btfo yesterday
>come crawling back trying to save face

>>377046006
take a ball of something small, blue tac for example

place the ball on a table

take a toilet paper roll and slam the wooden tube over the ball

does the ball go flying out of a tube?

no because the ball doesnt have any momentum

>>377045238
That's not the point.

File: nazi zionists.png (202KB, 451x634px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 451x634px

>>377038275
It's A though.
Water doesn't have any kinetic energy, therefore it's just going to flow on the floor from the portal.
/thread

Going by B logic, not only the cube but everything below it should get sucked in too.

Shit isnt even consistent with itself.

>>377045050
Mad as fuck

>>377038275
Portals do not exert force.

>>377045923
There is nothing to do but pointlessly squabble about magic in a video game, or recognize that a portal with one half moving and the other not doesn't make any sense in physics as we know them.
Feel free to provide an example of something analogous to a portal if you disagree. I'd better not hear about a doorway or a hula hoop.

>Yes you titanic faglord i'm definitely trying to inflate my own ego and impress everyone around me on an anonymous imageboard.
I'm aware, that's why I pointed it out.
Please stop.

hey bfags

the only way that B would ever work is if portals exerted force and such, this would require

1. this to be stated and shown in the game

2. you to have a secret knowledge of portals we dont know about

simple fact is, by physics we know and have observed, it is A

What happens if the piston stops half way of the box's height?

>>377045918
The frame of reference is irrelevant to the conclusion. Take the Buster Keaton house drop here >>377045330

If we say that the house window frame is dropping at 50mph, then use everything on the in-side of the window as the frame of reference, now we have Buster Keaton moving towards the window frame at 50mph. Yet when Buster Keaton emerges through the window frame at 50mph, he doesn't go rocketing off the ground even though we're using the in-side of the window as our frame of reference.

This is because of simple energies, which remain constant and unchanged regardless of our frame of reference. Buster Keaton has no kinetic energy but what is being acted on him by the motion of the Earth, but the house and everything around him has that as well making it a cancelable variable. The only thing that has kinetic energy here is the window frame falling, while Keaton has no energy to impart movement.

So, even if we take the opposite side of the window as our frame of reference constant, thus making Buster Keaton travel 50mph through the window frame, he does not move from his place because motion is imparted by energies, and energies are irrelevant to relative motion here. Buster Keaton's velocity entering the window frame of 50mph does not impart motion because the velocity is only relative to our frame of reference and is not given by energies.

>>377046298
By your brainlet logic, it should be impossible for the water to be moving in any frame of reference, but if you look into the exit portal, you'll clearly observe the water moving in your reference frame. The portals present a lot of problems with the current model of physics, but you still need to be consistent. One of the simplest assumptions we can make is that the portals clearly add energy to the system somehow.

Please, in the future, don't speak authoritatively about things you don't understand.

>>377046579
Explain how the exit portal and the cube can be stationary in relation to each other and yet the cube can move through the exit portal.

>bfags trying to change the subject by using a whole different issue in the OP

in the traditional A/B issue, A is the choice

in OP's, if the orange portal goes right down to the bottom, the water will flow out at a speed depending on the speed of the piston

>>377041057
>momentum and relativity both don't exist
>but only sometimes, for no reason
Is there a less intelligent conclusion than this one?

>>377046298
If it has no kinetic energy, than how does it "move" through the portal? If the portal is what applies this change in position, does this mean they are interacting with one another in the same system and exchanging forces? How does the water displace air on the other side of the portal with no kinetic energy? If there is no air it matter on the other side of the portal, then wouldn't the vacuum pull the water through?

>>377046536
>I'd better not hear about a doorway or a hula hoop.

B fag detected

>>377046579
>simple fact is, by physics we know and have observed, it is A
Show us your real life experiments with portals, oh wise one.

>>377046707
>If we say that the house window frame is dropping at 50mph, then use everything on the in-side of the window as the frame of reference, now we have Buster Keaton moving towards the window frame at 50mph. Yet when Buster Keaton emerges through the window frame at 50mph, he doesn't go rocketing off the ground even though we're using the in-side of the window as our frame of reference.
Dipshit, the inside and outside of the window in the Buster Keaton house drop ARE THE SAME POINT OF REFERENCE. It's all the same window, all moving at the same speed, all stopping at the same time, etc.
With the portal, you have a moving entrance, and a nonmoving exit. It is not a similar situation in the slightest.

>>377044842
>as long as the blue portal is moving towards and around it because the whole universe moves around the box therefore the box is moving
I can't stop reading it and laughing

File: 1491314555417.jpg (185KB, 920x960px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 920x960px

>>377046759
It's still A though.
You can't create energy out of nothing. It's physically impossible.

Fucking B fags, overthinking simple things

>>377042923
but the ping pong ball is buoyant anon

>>377046225
The cube is coming out of the portal, yes?
If the portal comes down faster the cube comes out faster, yes?
If an object is moving fast enough it can beat the force of gravity, yes?
So...
If the cube is coming out fast enough why would it stop?
Whats stopping all that momentum?
Nothing, except gravity.
And if its moving fast enough it will keep moving.
Remember an object at rest tends to stay at rest, an object in motion tends to stay in motion, unless acted upon by another force..
Instead of a cube lets do a knife.
If you put your hand above the exit portal wouldn't you're hand get cut off by the knife?
Something is moving the knife.
Also pressing Enter twice is considered Reddit now so stop that.

>>377047167
If it was physically impossible, the portals wouldn't work at all.

>>377038275
Actually.. in this case, it would be A.

The mechanism would push water upward and around it, and the portal would create a but of an air bubble.. like if you pushed down a cup upside down. The difference being that errant water has a place to go, which would then be affected by the gravity and trickle out of the other portal.

>>377047167
Portals aren't real for this exact reason. Otherwise you put a portal on the ceiling, a portal on the floor, and free energy is yours forever.

>bfags time and time again give simple logical explanations following our understanding of physics
>afags just spam the same fucking analogy refuted a million times already

>>377045617
>muh relativity
I wish /v/ existed in Einstein's day so these kinds of arguments could be presented to him.

>>377047179
I fail to see how this affects anything I've said. Unless the ping pong ball is lighter than air, it, and the string it is attached to, contributes to the weight of the left side.

>>377047439
>>377047340
>>377047167
Unless it takes energy to create a portal.
Then technically portals could exist.

I always looked at portals as light.
Light moves millions of mph faster than we ever could. Yet when it touches us we aren't blasted out of orbit.
Same with moving portals

>>377047562
>i see 1 = 2
>therefore 1 + 1 = 4
Genius.

>>377047159
Explain the difference between exclusively you moving and everything else except you moving

>>377047167
Even objects at rest have potential energy you dumbass. The portal would simply convert it as the obect displaces matter on the other end at the same rate it is being engulfed.

>>377046707
I've never seen anybody take so much time to be objectively wrong about concepts so simple.
Not arguing for B, just saying, look at this post. It's amazing.

MUH HULA HOOPS

HULA HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPS

>>377047110
>Dipshit, the inside and outside of the window in the Buster Keaton house drop ARE THE SAME POINT OF REFERENCE
No, you're showing you don't understand points of reference. We're using the opposite side of the window frame as our point of reference here, and in doing so, Buster Keaton is moving towards this point at 50mph. The point is a constant that you as an observer set to be your "0". In the house drop we set this point to be, say, ten feet behind the falling house wall. This point is always ten feet behind the house wall from its upright positions to its fallen position. Using this point as our point of reference, now this point is "stationary" and as the wall falls it is Buster Keaton who is moving at 50mph through the window towards this point ten feet on the in-side of the window.

>With the portal, you have a moving entrance, and a nonmoving exit. It is not a similar situation in the slightest.
This is irrelevant for two reasons already accounted for in the post you responded to. 1) The point of reference in the house drop is the non-moving exit. It is the constant. The window frame is not both portals, it is the portal on the piston. 2) Energies make this a moot point as well.

>>377040169
and still object entering a moving portal will exit a still portal with momentum, since it is partially in motion as soon as it leaves the aperture of the still portal. At first the resting mass of the majority of the cube will keep the cube still as a whole, but as soon as a sizable portion of the cube has passed the portal the momentum will pull the rest of the cube in even faster than the moving portal accelerates it on its own, and the cube will rotate forward towards the ground out of the still portal.

>>377047702
Not an argument.

>>377047361
>The mechanism would push water upward and around it, and the portal would create a but of an air bubble. like if you pushed down a cup upside down.
See: >>377042240

Also, if the water were pushed up and around the portal, then the weight of that displaced water would push water through the portal, even if that portal were stationary.
Think of leaks in deep sea vehicles and shit.

>enlightened bfags attempts to explain simple physics to afags
>afags having minds too simple just keep muttering hula hoop and doorways

>>377038275
I thought you couldn't put the portals on moving objects

>>377042906
it's filled with holes

>>377047961
You couldn't until that one part in 2.

>>377038275
this is a false equivalency, but of course stupid people like Bfags would think it's valid.

>>377045085
youre fucking retarded if the edges of the portal intersected with any part of you youd be fucking DEAD

>>377048125
>afags talking about fucking false equivalence when their only argument is fucking hula hoops

>>377047961
In fact, OP is a big faggot, trying to force this shit.
Still, it's common sense that in a hypotetic scenario, A would be the right answer.

>>377047526
Honestly, a lot of the debates between famous physicists were just as "who the fuck knows" as this, and the only ones that were solved were ones they eventually found a way to prove experimentally. I mean, Einstein argued with Bohr about quantum mechanics til they day he fucking died, and to this day our best guess is that Eintstein was probably wrong but we still don't really know. We don't even know if it's possible to know.

>>377048187
Yeah, but I got to fuck myself and suck my own dick.
100% worth it.

>>377047784
>The point of reference in the house drop is the non-moving exit.
There is no non-moving exit in the house drop you dumb nigger.

New to the thread, how is the hula hoop analogy wrong? I assume portals are just like linked space.

So then what happens if a moving platform with a box on it slams up into a stationary portal, with the other end moving downwards proportional to the speed of the box?

>>377044860
this doesn make sense
why? the orange portal wouldnt be showing any sort of "white wall" since the blue portal would one allow view of the black surface the cube was sitting on

clearly this image was designed to stimulate "le discussion"

CASE
CLOSED

>>377048409
A will say v
B will say 2v

>>377048363
Because a hoola hoop is simultaneously the entrance and exit.
The exit portal doesn't move but the entrance portal does.

>>377048419
are you retarded?

>>377044096
This is the most pragmatic and objective answer. That said, B is the closest we can get to not violating fundamental laws of physics. A is just for armchair physicists who feel and don't think.

>>377038275
How would the water particles gain momentum needed to produce the B effect? There's nothing pushing the water upward towards the blue portal. The speed of the platform doesn't change this either.

>>377048543
Sooo.. does that mean the moving portal is constantly breaking the fabric of space-time but all you guys care about is a fucking box?

>>377038275
Holy shit that's brilliant

Afags BTFO

>>377044376
B FAGS BTFO

File: mysterybox.png (522KB, 768x576px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 768x576px

>>377048078
>one part
Which "one" do you mean? Putting a portal on a moving panel to have a laser cut tubes, or putting a portal on the moon?

Really though, you'd be hard pressed to fire any two portals and have them be moving at the same speed and angle and shit on a spinning and orbiting planet. Portals with higher elevation would move faster. Portals closer to the equator would move faster.

>>377048757
>does /v/ only care abut the box
You tell me.

>>377040314
>Portals don't have mass
Whoa, where the fuck is an assumption that huge coming from? Portals need to have an absolute shitload of mass and/or energy to work. How did nobody reply to this post?

>>377048331
Yes, the point of reference is the non-moving exit, you still don't seem to understand the concept of the point of reference.

Your other problem is you're still thinking of it in terms of entrances and exits, which are completely irrelevant. The question is a question of points moving relative to one another, and that is all. The portals facilitate the interaction of the points, and that is all. If we take the point on the platform as the frame of reference, the the point ten feet above it being brought towards it by the piston is traveling towards it at 50mph. If we take the point ten feet above as the point of reference, then the point on the platform is moving towards it at 50mph. This is because these are relative velocities that cut both ways. In this example, the point ten feet above is ten feet through the portal, in the house drop, the point is ten feet behind the window frame.

The relative velocities of the two points are irrelevant to the motion of an object at either point unless some energy is being exerted on the object.

>>377048978
Because it's so obviously wrong to anyone who played the game that it's not worth responding to. Good job taking the bait.

>>377042241
>There is no evidence to suggest the physics of Portals are any different to traditional doors.
Except for the part where its two halves are in different frames of reference.

>>377047784
>The point of reference in the house drop is the non-moving exit.

Except it can't be. Even if to look at it from the point of view of the frame while it's dropping, the frame has to match the velocity of Buster after he passes through, meaning it has to accelerate to match. It's pretty clear there's a change in velocity by the dust thrown up as the frame slams into the ground.

File: 1407525039656.jpg (57KB, 343x317px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 343x317px

>>377048945

>>377041057
>Gif shows both options
>Majority of replies say "this is correct"

um okay

>>377039413
guess what? the cube does not have any force transferred to it at all. So its momentum didn't change at all. All that changed was the space

>>377044572
>the momentum
What momentum? The guy was standing still.

>>377049319
gif is in A's favor m8

>>377049336
You are retarded.

A fags are thinking in terms of force
B fags are thinking terms of reference frames.

In the real world they go hand in hand perfectly, portal breaks those, so it's literally impossible to say.

>>377049319
Nah, the original question had the piston with the blue portal slamming on the cube on both hipotheses, he's saying that the only way for the cube to shoot out would be if the platform with the cube shot into the one with the portal.

>>377047048
Yes, every Bfag argument ever.

File: laulsuli.png (40KB, 126x155px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 126x155px

>>377038275
Liquid=/=solid
Liquid have a volume retard and the portal isn't 100% of the surface, there will be a pressure, is B now but in the original still A

>>377049319
B in that image happens in the game all the time and just feels like it makes sense, so no one has any real problem with it.
A in that image, and in the traditional problem being discussed here, shows a box both moving and non-moving while a portal passes over it, which is highly problematic.

>>377049319
This is the average level of intelligence of posters in these threads.

>>377048363
Both sides of the hula hoop move at the same speed no matter what, not with portals.

>>377049426
Guess what? Portals don't modify your momentum or acceleration at all

File: portal science.png (9KB, 700x519px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 700x519px

explain

>>377048936
Always the box.

>>377049416
>>377049426

>>377049514
I think it B because of the laws of fucking momentum. Forget reference.
Its moving as it leaves the exit portal.
Whats stopping it?

>>377049749
?

And yet it moves.

>>377049692
>cubes changes position in space over time at the exit as the portal passes over it
>no momentum or acceleration
k

I think the primary difference between Afags and Bfags is that Bfags understand the argument Afags make but simply disagree, but every Afags seems to misunderstand the argument for B.

File: cube.png (37KB, 681x954px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 681x954px

Answer this
http://www.strawpoll.me/12974277

>>377049826
Because they are scalar quantities

Never played Portal, do things you send in there accelerate when they go out the other end? If they stay at constant speed/decelerate at the constant rate in the vertical plane then I wold lean towards A

>>377049756
It isn't moving, only the space around it is moving.

My only hope is that Valve will address this in the next installment. Would be pretty funny.

>>377049241
>Except it can't be
Except it is. Once it becomes the point of reference, it is necessarily "non-moving" in the equation because that is what your point of reference is. But I think you're stuck on the "exit" as a crucial term when it's only a distracting term from the actual substance of the problem. See here >>377049025

Essentially, the points distract from the actual problem, which is the motion of an object, plain and simple. The question poses two possible points of reference, and then places an object between those two points. The question then asks about the motion of the object. The set-up essentially makes it a trick question, because the first part of the question about the two points and their relative motion is ONLY relevant to the object between them if those two points are somehow imparting kinetic energy upon the object.

In this scenario that is not happening, so the actual answer to the motion of the cube ignores the motion of the portals entirely and comes down to the kinetic energy of the cube, which is still 0. Everything else is a fluffy cloud obfuscating the core issue, which is energy, not relative velocities or momentum since those are relative.

>>377038275

2 different case of studies here in the first, the portal has no frame around it (the piston base is the same are as the portal) which CANT BE DETERMINED SINCE THE PORTAL BORDERS ARE SINGULARITIES

the second case is the one where the piston is at least slightly wider than the portal and pressure is applied to the surface of water, since this happens and the pressure is bigger than 1 atm. the water would be pushed away by the piston, now, it has 2 possible ways of being moved, both around the piston (like submerging anything solid with a solid face) or moving inside (like pushing a cylinder)since both inside and outside the cylinder the pressure is 1 atm too, the water would distribute equally being pushed

The question of wether A or B happens then, is resolved by how much pressure the border of the piston is doing on the water wich requires you to know the following:

-Area of the piston outside the portal
-Speed of the piston

if the are is minuscule or the piston is moving slowly, the water will just start pouring uneventfully like case A, if the area is big or the piston is being trusted, the water will move outwards like B

>>377050039
Why on earth would it increase speed? It is literally hula hoops in this image. Even Bfags would agree.

File: portal physics.jpg (36KB, 620x365px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 620x365px

>>377038275
A would be correct of the portal opening (the size of the portal) was large, whereas B would be correct if the portal was smaller. this is all assuming that a portal functions the same way as a tube connecting two openings.

>>377050232
A Valve employee stated that they believe B. is possible.

What a fucking joke.

>>377050167
The game's imaginary physic is kinda irrelevant at this point because the presented argument already broke it.

>>377038309
Is sucking your own dick gay? Considering every time you masturbate you basically jerk off a guy but it's you so it doesn't count.

>>377050324
Stop pulling shit out of your ass without a source.

>>377050297
>Even Bfags would agree.
how is it different from >>377041057 ?

>>377050324
BUT
HULA
HOOPS
HULA
FUCKING
HOOPS
I CANT SAY ANYTHING THAT ISNT FUCKING HULA HOOP OR DOORWAY

>>377050286
all of this assuming the portal has 0 width and can't apply pressure

>>377050375
Does it matter if you're the only one who sees it and knows what you did?

>>377042923
But the displaced water on the right side is generating a downward force on the system, which is greater than the weight of the ping pong ball. Thus, it drops to the right.

>>377044096
I think the next step is realising that we're only concerned with what happens from the frame of reference of the exit. The frame of reference of the stationary cube, that is the frame of reference which would allow A to occur, ceases to apply the moment the opportunity arises for either A or B to occur, while at the same time, the frame of reference that allows B to occur beings to apply.

>>377050432
Because the entrance is moving while the exit isn't.
What is so hard to comprehend about this.

The piston surface itself isn't hitting the box, the portal is. Would a moving portal transfer force like a solid object?

>>377050432
Is that image one portal is moving while another isn't, which is the crux of Bfag's argument. In >>377050039 both portals are moving in the same direction at the same rate.

>>377050583
>>377050623
this just leads me to believe that the air in the cabin would continually move through the portals until it speeds up and causes an explosion.

>>377050594
No, otherwise it would have modified your speed

>>377050545
>But the displaced water on the right side is generating a downward force on the system
There's displaced water on both sides.
Do you think the water being displaced by steel rather than air filled plastic somehow makes the water heavier? Explain.

>mfw the more I think about it the more B makes sense

>>377050251
>Once it becomes the point of reference, it is necessarily "non-moving" in the equation because that is what your point of reference is.

Except the frame changes velocity you dipshit. Even if you assume the bizarre perspective that the frame's falling velocity is the stationary frame of reference, the frame STOPS FALLING. From the established frame of reference, the wall would accelerate to match Buster's velocity just as Buster finishes passing through.

Answer is simple:

Portals don't exist, they don't respect thermodynamics, they are a flawed concept to begin with

>>377050715
Both sides of the portal are at an equilibrium, so I don't see why air would be rushing through them.

>>377050886
>Portals don't exist
Heresy.

>>377050251
Man, talk about obfuscating. You write a lot of words but you can't refute this simple logic:

You can't enter or exit a portal without relative movement. If either you or the portal is stationary, the other must move.

>>377050830
>Even if you assume the bizarre perspective that the frame's falling velocity is the stationary frame of reference
The exit portal in the portal problem is not falling, you dumb nigger.

File: 1433340081160.gif (828KB, 200x189px) Image search: [Google]

828KB, 200x189px

>>377048945

>>377049545
Oh wait, I see, someone did modify it.

Well it's wrong then.

>>377050886
unless it takes energy to make portals work.
I mean it would probably take the energy of a few suns to move a object the size of a human through space and time. Even if it was just a few inches.
I would imagine most of the excess energy would turn into thermal radiation.

>>377050830
>Except the frame changes velocity you dipshit.
No, whatever your point of reference, its velocity is always zero. That is the nature of the reference point, as I explained.

>Buster's velocity
Is irrelevant as to whether or not Buster is going to go shooting off the ground. I explained this as well. Buster can have a relative velocity of 10000000mph and it's not going to send him rocketing into space unless that velocity is being granted by an exertion of energy upon him.

>>377051009
>You can't enter or exit a portal without relative movement. If either you or the portal is stationary, the other must move.
This is addressed in both posts. It's not refuted, it's accounted for. It is a principal which contributed to the conclusion of both posts. Please read before responding.

File: 1494305464093.png (1MB, 1192x1078px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1192x1078px

ITT: dumb A-fag brainlets can't understand that
1. the entrance portal moves at a relative speed v to the cube, giving the cube momentum of m*v
2. momentum is preserved across portals, thus, when the cube is move across the portal, it remains with m*v momentum, thus translating to speed relative to the exit portal of v

File: 1477230457029.jpg (649KB, 700x4989px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 700x4989px

This kills the thread.

>>377051169
>This is addressed in both posts.
It really isn't, sorry.

Please explain in simple terms how you can stand still and move through a door that is also standing still.

>>377051169
>No, whatever your point of reference, its velocity is always zero.

Exactly, so the wall would accelerate to match Buster.

>>377051328
portals don't apply any force to objects AT ALL. The only thing it changes is space.

A portal is a magical teleportation gate that connects two points in space as if they were one. You can't apply real physics to it.

>>377051169
>Buster can have a relative velocity of 10000000mph and it's not going to send him rocketing into space unless that velocity is being granted by an exertion of energy upon him.
Yeh but get this

If he's moving into the portal at 10000000mph because the portal is falling at 10000000mph

And he is moving out of the portal at 10000000mph because he moved into it at 10000000mph

And the exit portal is NOT going at 10000000mph but rather at 0 mph

How fast is Buster going when he exits the portal?

>>377051328
>x moves therefore y that is in no way, shape or form attacked to x gains momentum

>>377050723
Portals don't even changes the 'image' at the end too. Thus it doesn't even modify light speed. All portals do is change space.

File: fuck.png (6KB, 587x448px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 587x448px

>>377050921
I'm not sure what the guy you're replying to is talking about, but in a situation like in this shitty doodle I just made, I don't see why air wouldn't continually accelerate until it starts fucking shit up, due to gravity and nothing to stop it.
There's only a terminal velocity due to air resistance, but in this case, you have a continually accelerating column of air in an almost entirely closed system until the glass breaks.

one thing that concerns me is what the fuck are the portal's borders made of? Surely you can't touch them, or you'd be hurt.

>>377051454
But if you think about it

Portals can't even be real if they stand still for very similar reasons

>>377051454
Why is the 9gag image right?

>>377051485
>It really isn't, sorry.
It really is. In fact it is core to the logic of everything I've said.

>Please explain in simple terms how you can stand still and move through a door that is also standing still.
No-where is this suggested. Please jut read the posts.

>>377051487
No, the wall is independent of Buster, and the wall's acceleration only exists if you set Buster as the point of reference. All of which is 100% irrelevant as to whether or not Buster is going to go shooting off the ground.

>>377051690
>How fast is Buster going when he exits the portal?
Depends on your point of reference, and that's completely irrelevant to whether or not he's going to shoot off in the air on the other side since it's a relative velocity.

Everything having to do with relative velocity and momentum are purely red herrings.

>>377051550
>momentum conservation based explanation results in B, newton's 2nd law based explanation results in A
>portals are stated to conserve momentum
>portals are not stated to adhere to newton's 2nd law

>>377052012
>No-where is this suggested.
You said you'd addressed it.

You type a lot of words but you don't really seem to say much.

In my mind if portals were actually real they would be so hot you couldn't stand near them with out melting.
The amount of energy it would take to power a portal would have to be that of a few stars if not more.

File: 1491713999878m.jpg (59KB, 1024x577px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1024x577px

>muh momentum
>muh relativity

Holy shit btards are so fucking dumb.

The blue portal isn't touching the cube in anyway. It can't transfer and momentum or kinetic energy BECAUSE IT DOESN'T TOUCH THE CUBE

>>377052012
>>Please explain in simple terms how you can stand still and move through a door that is also standing still.
>No-where is this suggested. Please jut read the posts.
It's suggested in the portal problem, wherein an objects moves through a "door" without moving.
See also: >>377051454

>>377052012
>the wall is independent of Buster, and the wall's acceleration only exists if you set Buster as the point of reference.

So then why in the visual example does the wall stop at Buster's feet? If the wall did not change velocity, it would continue into the ground forever, not stop. Regardless of frame of reference, the wall must change velocity.

When in doubt, ask /g/

>>377045050
Bfag mad as fuck.

>>377052262
The portal actually represents the threshold into a new frame of reference. The idea that it's just a door is a misconception. It also stops gravity.

>>377052639
>It also stops gravity.
Except it doesn't.

File: portal physics 2.png (8KB, 1108x550px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1108x550px

i just thought of something, a portal functions the same as a hoop, then we can assume that lowering a hoop onto an object on the floor, then it will have the same result as lowering a portal on an object. Pic related

>>377052247
>You said you'd addressed it.
No, maybe you should read back and see what I said was addressed. Reading is not your forte.

>>377052270
>It's suggested in the portal problem, wherein an objects moves through a "door" without moving.
No, the portal problem does not propose this, this would be a misunderstanding of the factors involved and I'm not basing my analyses on misunderstanding of the problem but instead the problem itself. The example of moving through a door while you and the door are standing still is nothing to do with the portal scenario because we have two points of reference and one is moving relative to the other in some way.

All of which is completely 100% immaterial to the motion of an object that happens to be between these two points as has been laid out several times now.

>>377052283
>So then why in the visual example does the wall stop at Buster's feet?
Because there's ground there.

>Regardless of frame of reference, the wall must change velocity.
No, because, as has been explained a few times now, if your reference point it ten feet behind the wall, then that velocity is always 0 from the time the wall starts teetering over to the time it slams onto the ground and becomes still, from the reference point of Buster.

And you're still delving into a moot point of relative velocities.

>>377052768
It doesn't function the same as a hoop.

>>377052721
Gravity only takes hold once you move through. Otherwise you'd be able to float under a portal because the gravity through the portal and the gravity of the Earth below you cancel each other out.

>>377050375
If sucking my own dick is gay why would I want to be straight?

File: trolphisicz.png (16KB, 761x469px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 761x469px

Relativistic physics says its A.

PERIOD

>>377052768
fuck i cant English today, if a portal functions the same way as a hoop does, then we can assume that lowering a hoop onto an object on the floor will have the same result as lowering a portal on an object.

>>377052768
>a portal functions the same as a hoop
For the millionth fucking time, no.

>>377052942
why not? i never check out these threads so i would like an explanation.

>>377052870
You've really haven't thought this through have you?

>>377053031
because the the hoop is both exit and entrance at the same exact time. The entrance portal is moving while the exit isn't.

File: 5f860b59-999b-46dd-8fd5-274c510edd09.png (219KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1080x1920px

>>377041057

>>377052814
>if your reference point it ten feet behind the wall, then that velocity is always 0 from the time the wall starts teetering over to the time it slams onto the ground

That's not how points of reference work. By that logic, Buster changes velocity twice with no forces acting on him. First as the wall begins to fall over and next as the wall slams into the ground. What is causing Buster to change velocity?

File: fucking-with-my-head.png (23KB, 757x790px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 757x790px

I used to think A, but now I don't undertstand how this would go down.

>>377053151
this is objectively correct
how can A-fags recover

Porn when?

>>377051454
you can use a moving portal. just load the SDK and try it yourself. they're not "premade" at all, it's just a pain in the ass to enter one because collisions sucks.
in fact they suck so much that you can't simulate the scenario because of how the game handles collision and portals. basically it makes a zone around a portal that will make it so items that fall near it won't collide with anything and then it starts teleporting the object. however, when your portal moves that zone lags behind so when an object touch a portal it won't teleport but get pushed away. the closest thing you can use it garry's mod's portal gun but it is completely different (and the result it gives is B btw)

>>377053321

Air gets compressed

>>377053175
>That's not how points of reference work
Yes, it is.

>By that logic, Buster changes velocity twice with no forces acting on him.
That's correct, because relative velocity has no intrinsic association with forces or energy here. His velocity relative to the point of reference of the wall is 0, then accelerates to 50mph, then becomes 0 again.

>What is causing Buster to change velocity?
His motion relative to our point of reference.

And you're still delving into a moot point of relative velocities. Unless you'd like to make an argument that will see Buster shooting off the ground then there's nothing left to be said here.

>>377052814
>No, maybe you should read back and see what I said was addressed.
Yeah, the part where either the cube or the portal must move. You said you'd addressed it and yet when I ask you to explain a cube that isn't moving going through a portal that isn't moving, you say it's irrelevant, when it's the same thing. But I'm bad at reading?

You have a lot to say about red herrings and obfuscating but I don't think I've ever seen a more circumlocutory style than yours. I think you misunderstand it but frankly it's hard to be sure.

I guess this is what Afags must feel like all the time.

>>377053145
ah ok, but in regards to the moving entrance portal moving while the object is stationary, shouldn't it not matter since the main thing we are trying to find is the momentum of the object traveling through the portal to determine the path it will take after exiting the exit portal?

>>377053114
No, I have. Have you?

>>377053151
but in your fucking scenario the piston (which gives the energy) go through the portal.

i think the Bfags don't understand that portals don't give any cinetic energy at all, just infinite potential energy.

>sit right in front of the portal, looking at the cube inside it
>the cube suddenly comes with full force towards you
>it's okay, it's not actually moving
>it's just the illusion of moving
>bursts out of the portal
>knocks you off your socks
>probably launches you back and smashes you on the wall
>but then it just stops and plops down
>that's right, it looks like it's moving but it isn't
>it's just an illusion
>it has no kinetic energy
>it's just like a hula hoop
>it has no energy
>drift into the cold embrace of death as a cube with zero speed managed to break every bone in your body

>>377049336
>All that changed was the space
which means the object's density is changing as it goes through the portal.

>>377053557
>Yeah, the part where either the cube or the portal must move.
Addressed. In the portal example we have the cube point and another point on the other side of the portal moving relative to one another facilitated by the portal on the piston.

>I ask you to explain a cube that isn't moving going through a portal that isn't moving, you say it's irrelevant, when it's the same thing
It's not the same thing, see >>377052814

In the portal example we have two proposed points of reference. From either one, the other is moving relative to it.

This has been explained many times. Just read.

>>377044572
>being so retard

>>377038275
liquids don't interact with portals.

File: 1492234746099.png (12KB, 243x243px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 243x243px

>>377050375
>is masturbation gay

>>377053737
It's not moving, the space around it is.

>>377053606
Ill just say what I said earlier
>>377047274

>>377053507
>relative velocity has no intrinsic association with forces or energy here

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you claiming this Buster Keaton example can't be described with Newtonian physics? Are you insane?

>>377053321
Which way would the air flow through the portals?
Well, the portal side of the door is a weak vacuum when it's being closed, so the air would probably move through the wall portal out through to the lower pressure of the door portal.

>>377054050
alright that makes sense, thanks for clarifying

>>377043059
Gravity

File: 1445374321017.gif (1MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x300px

>>377039945
>what is gravity?

>>377053902
Yeah, I think I can see how you think you've addressed it. We're getting close to the problem.

Okay, yeah, so you've got relative movement. That's great. That's what I like to hear. The problem is that if one point of reference is the cube, and the other is on the other side of the portal, then your two points of reference are both stationary with regards to the Earth, and yet they are moving relative to each other. Likewise, when the cube exits, it moves relative to the Earth because it moves relative to a point of reference that does not move relative to the Earth.

>>377054483
More than just that, while the portal passes over the cube, the cube is moving relative to itself, which makes no sense.

File: solution.png (77KB, 1728x1296px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1728x1296px

>>377051454

>>377038275
It's B, and A is a specific case of B.

>>377049756
>people bringing up laws of thermodynamics and conservation of momentum
You can disprove both without ever leaving the first law of motion. They both violate it, just at different parts.

B violates "an object at rest stays at rest" because no force is acting on the cube. The portal isn't a force, it's just a hole.

A violates "an object in motion stays in motion" because at least >99.99% of the cube has to be in motion to leave the orange portal and maintain its shape, but then it just stops as the final <0.01% comes through. If no part of the cube was ever in motion, it would come out on the other side as an atom-thin square pancake.

>>377054892
I want to let you know I've been saved by immunity cat but that requires me to reply anyway

>>377055076
You do know that immunity cat is corrupted don't you?

>>377050039
In this example you have both portals moving with the same velocities. The entire predicament relies on the portals moving independently from one another. You just proved to everyone here that you either don't have a basic grasp of the situation or you're a troll.

>>377047274
>The cube is coming out of the portal, yes?

No, that's where Bfags fail to understand how portals theoretically work.

The portal is displacing the space around where the inert cube is sitting. The cube's spatial location changes without the cube itself gaining any force of of momentum, so there's no reason for the cube to go flying off.

>>377055073
So basically B doesn't violate the first law in any way A doesn't, and A violates it twice.

>>377054892
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

>>377055250
Nobody understands how portals theoretically work, anon. They're completely fictional and haven't been explored within the fiction at that depth.

Also, displacement directly implies movement.

>>377055250
>The portal is displacing the space around where the inert cube is sitting.
Ah, yes.

Like a hula hoop.