This is the real answer

File: 1491570668521.gif (338KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 500x281px

>>377312813
Portals can't be put on moving surfaces is the ACTUAL answer.

>>377312974
I agree, except for that time in Portal 2 where you actually put a portal on a moving surface.

>>377312974
the earth is a moving surface.

File: portal cut.jpg (169KB, 806x1994px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 806x1994px

Samurai Sword vs Portal edge??

>>377312813
You can't just decide that one portal is more important than the other. The blue portal is still standing still. Also, I can't imagine a doorway that you can pass if both it and you are standing still.

>>377313112
This is an argument against A, right?

>>377313393
>I can't imagine a doorway that you can pass if both it and you are standing still.
make the door move.

i'm so sick of these threads

>>377313571
It's not moving, though. And neither are you. Now come through. Go on.

>>377313393
they are two sides to the same portal not 2 portals. Fundamentally they work like a door or window, you go in one side and come out the other, but a portal can separate the two ends, and moving one of the ends is moving the entire portal.

>>377313628
Then dont read them

>>377313678
HHUUUUURRRRTT

>>377313560
which one is that?
stationary thing go in, speedy thing come out is the frame of reference argument.
frame of reference imparting energy implies that everything that has gone through the portal has memory of it's previous """universal""" position and is thus affected by any movement their entry portal makes. going through the entry portal again would double this effect.

>>377313904
>they are two sides to the same portal not 2 portals.
One side of which is moving and one of which isn't.

I am actually imagining it like a door or window, and any way I envision it, it ends up looking like B.

>>377313963
I'm still not sure which one you're trying to argue against. A is the one that requires the cube to have a memory of its "universal" position but B is the one that works with frames of reference. The whole concept of several frames of reference seems to me mutually exclusive with a universal frame of reference.

File: 1382136011235.jpg (26KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x300px

>portal moves at 10m/s
>cube comes out of the second portal at 10m/s
>cube stops once the first portal stops moving
You can not argue for A without assuming the existence of a universal frame of reference. If you want to argue for that, you'll have to prove Einstein wrong first. B is the only plausible answer, and even that's debatable since portals don't really adhere to physics.

Realistically, the only answer that matters is this one >>377313678

>>377313676
the door is moving.

>>377314180
what is A? there's no A anywhere.

>>377314217
>Realistically, the only answer that matters is this one
Nope that one is made to favor b

>>377314229
Go stand next to it. You'll see it stays right where it is.

Look, this is pointless. You can't just arbitrarily decide that one side of the portal takes on the qualities of the other one and not the other way around. The reality is that portals create two frames of reference that are both true at the same time. The portal is moving AND not moving. It is moving relative to the Earth, to the cube, to itself, even. However, it is also standing still relative to all those things.

>>377314338
A is plop
B is whoosh

>>377314385
>made to favor B
It's made in the game engine, which is the only place portals can exist. Also why it's the only one that matters.

>>377313996
You look up and see a window on the ceiling, through this window you can see a room. Suddenly the ceiling begins collapsing towards you, the room through the window is getting closer. The windo eventually falls around you. Do you think you are going to go flying into the room? or is the room going to "crash" around you?

You look down, there is a window at your feet, through this window you see a room. Suddenly the floor of this room is getting closer, like its ceiling is collapsing. You are going down towards the floor so nothing will fly up out of the window.

this is the key, the orange portal is falling around the cube, its like this scene from buster keaton https://youtu.be/FN2SKWSOdGM?t=37 except on the other side of the house facade is a different system entirely because portals entrance and exits dont have to be adjacent.

>>377314502
it's an argument against B.
B whooshes by magically transferring the speed of the portal to the speed of the object.

>>377314536
Ok then could you remake it and prove A (the only real answer) wrong

Protip

Okay, imagine a cube next to a portal. You're looking at the cube through the portal. The portal on your end beings to move. Now you will also see the cube move, but it is also standing still.

Now, imagine the cube is halfway through the portal. The portal is moving. You will see the cube move. Half of it is standing still. Half of it is moving on your end, though it appears to stand still on the other end.

Finally, imagine the cube is entirely through and keeping pace with the moving portal. It is moving in its entirety, but on the other end of the portal, someone would see it remaining still.

When you're dealing with portals, moving and standing still are relative concepts.

>>377314701
Right, then you simply misunderstand because you were actually arguing against A.

>>377314385
How the hell does it favor B? They don't go anywhere when the portal hits them, which is what happens in A.

Someone actually emailed one of the debs from portal and even he acknowledge its A (but he wanted to be b bcus portal r magic lmao)

>>377314673
You really don't need so many words to say "it's like a hula hoop" three times when you should already know I fundamentally disagree with that concept.

The crucial thing here is indeed that on the other side is an entirely different system where everything is different, including the speed of the cube.

>>377312974
Evwrything is always moving relatively speaking.

>>377314842
how?

File: 1479389012913.jpg (25KB, 719x719px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 719x719px

Show me the cube would stop moving after exiting the portal without describing an absolute reference frame.

>>377315006
Because that's the one that requires a universal frame of reference in which the cube can remember its "objective" speed as it goes through the stationary portal at a stationary speed.

>>377312974
Valve should've never broken their own canon. But they did, and now we have to live with the shitposting.

>>377314846
Because the one who made it fucked with the portals to troll people

Look if you dont understand momentum its ok physics can be hard but dobt try to act like you know it better to actually understand it

>>377315087
oh so you misunderstand.
i was arguing against B which effectively requires 2 universes and for the object to have knowledge of it's previous universes "speed".

>>377315076
The cube never starts moving. Everything else moves around it. At no point does the cube gain kinetic energy.

>>377315298
>fucked with the portals to troll people
Proof? Also you just keep shitposting without actually refuting my statement that it can't be A if you consider inertial reference frames.

why is this meme suddenly back?
don't tell me that I stayed on 4chan for 1 generation to long so everything loops now

File: 1494731636371.png (180KB, 370x544px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 370x544px

>>377315349
So are you ignoring an important reference frame (the portal's), or are you trying to say the cube is motionless on some kind of objective absolute frame of reference?

>>377315439
>inertial reference frames.
But the cube is not moving theres no momentum portals cant transder energy like that
Even if you consider b its not really moving at all its just the gravity

>>377315671
If I throw a fishtank full of goldfish at a wall of course the fish are going to move with it dumbass.

>>377315871
Should've just gone with a food analogy. Maybe it would've almost made sense.

File: 1354673341886.png (102KB, 200x298px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 200x298px

>>377315848
>its not really moving at all its just the gravity
Holy fuck

>>377315671
the earth spins, the air spins with it.

>>377314971
Then it should be that portals can't move relative to each other -- if they are both on surfaces moving at the same speed and same direction then it would be okay.

>>377316089
That has nothing to do with the system.

>>377316036
Im rite n u kno it :^)

File: _F6t-1CyEEA.jpg (43KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 480x480px

>>377316215
moon

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

649KB, 700x4989px

It's neither A nor B; it's a paradox. Anyone who argues for one or the other is only looking at one point of reference.

>>377316260
the portal moves, the universe moves with it.

File: 1468965893599.jpg (201KB, 385x389px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 385x389px

These threads are all the same. A bunch of retards shitposting with other retards that don't understand reference frames.

>>377316504
What's your point? For the cube to stop along with the portal, it would have some "memory" of a universal position; this would imply a universal frame of reference.

File: riddle.jpg (33KB, 636x424px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 636x424px

>>377315329
>>377315087
so which of them is

File: movement.png (5KB, 565x317px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 565x317px

>>377314701
it's an argument against A.
A magically stops because the orange portal stops behind it.

File: what happens now.png (9KB, 1152x648px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 1152x648px

Would the cube jump up? No it wouldn't, a slanted surface doesn't change anything, stop being dumb as shit

File: 1488232253849.gif (2MB, 269x203px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 269x203px

>>377313678
Ah yes, finally someone made it.

>>377316842
>>377316862
B requires memory of it's previous universe so that it can convert the speed of the entry portal to it's launching momentum throughout it's exit.
A only moves in the exit for as long as it has physical contact, there is no memory.

>>377317242
You completely changed the problem so that portals are moving with the same velocity. At that point they just act like normal.

>>377317512
put the orange portal on the ground then, what's that gonna change?

>>377315848
Portals do actually transfer energy, though. Stick something halfway through a portal. Move the portal. Does the object move with it? Congratulations, the portal has transferred energy.

If the object doesn't move then it snaps in half which also requires energy.

>>377317726
Everything. It's a different problem.

File: 1495124990865.png (4KB, 1152x648px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 1152x648px

>>377317242

File: proven.png (12KB, 900x431px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 900x431px

Here.

Now stop posting these threads

>>377317728
>Does the object move with it?
no, the universe has.

File: still movement.png (2KB, 565x317px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 565x317px

>>377317242
How does it come out of the orange portal when it has no movement then?

>>377316842
>a universal frame of reference.
So?

File: portals.jpg (88KB, 600x675px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 600x675px

>>377314949
Im saying it 3 times because clearly you dont know what it means, if you did you would not disagree. All a portal does is bend space so that 2 surfaces behave like the same surface. It does not break conservation of momentum laws. You learn how to work with multiple systems and reference changes in first year physics courses.

>>377316495
B actually works if you consider both points of reference. A tries to argue there's one, objective point of reference.

If we ignore gravity and wind resistance and have the cube floating in space as the portal engulfs it and moves on, you would see that the cube subjectively maintains its position as long as the portal keeps moving.

>>377316862
A

>>377318056
>So?
This is the average intelligence here I suppose. A universal reference frame does not exist. If you think it does, you're going to have to disprove Einstein's work first.

>>377318036
there's a solid surface under it, it's not gonna fall in the air in reverse gravity for no reason is it?

>>377317489
>previous universe
wtf are you talking faggot

>>377316862
>>377317489
Completely backwards. A requires the cube to remember that it's supposed to be standing still after it conveniently forgot long enough to exit the portal. B only argues that the cube maintains its speed relative to the portal, which it already had from the portal's point of view.

>>377318025
Stop using an absolute reference frame.

>>377318025
That takes infinitely more energy than just moving the object. You've only made it worse.

>>377317728
Ok but.that doesnt meant they can make tge cube fly

>>377318390
>after it conveniently forgot long enough to exit the portal.
the cube never moves though. exiting a portal does not impart speed.

>>377318489
wtf do you think a portal is?

>>377318105
>Im saying it 3 times because clearly you dont know what it means, if you did you would not disagree.
I disagree precisely because I understand the full implications.

The bottom example of your pic. It shows one "reality" being dropped on the other. However, this is functionally identical to the bottom reality being shoved into the one on top. The real point is that the cube moves from the bottom reality to the top one, and therefore has to obey the rules of the top one. There, the portal is stationary and the cube is moving. Doesn't matter what it was before because the cube has left that reality behind.

File: 1374939196878.jpg (25KB, 400x371px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 400x371px

>>377318683
How can we say the cube never moves without assuming an absolute reference frame, retard?

>>377318683
>the cube never moves though
Then it does not exit the portal.

>>377312813
ya omentum and velocity have no bearing on what is considered force unless theres a outside force like gravity this only works if its in a weightless situation

>>377314754

Thinking about this, I would imagine the cube would start moving even before it was completely through the moving portal. There would be an emergent "force" experienced due to the reference frame shifting.

>>377315671
From the moving portal's frame of reference, the cube moves through it at whatever speed the portal is moving. Once the moving portal becomes motionless, so does the cube, from its perspective.

>>377318842
youre not making any sense.
the cube never moves because the cube never moves except in magical B rules where you magically make the cube move because FRAME OF REFERENCE MAKES THING FAST like how youre going the speed of light right now relative to the light emanating from your computer screen.

>>377318926
well yeah the more accurate phrasing would be that the portal exits the cube.

>>377317976
this chickenscratch is your supposed answer to the question? jesus christ,

>>377312813
You're ignoring reference frames. This is the math you need to do to compare the two.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_transformation

>>377315349
you don't know what kinetic energy is, don't use it in an argument
kinetic energy is relative my ignorant friend

>>377316862
the absolute reference frame in this case is the platform the cube is standing on.

Basically, what this guy says. >>377318105

>>377318546
Yes it does, because it means that a moving portal functions more or less like the door to a vehicle, just a vehicle with its own internal laws of physics. Nothing on the outside affects it, but nothing inside it affects the outside. If you want to know what happens to something that comes out of the portal, look at what's happening from the perspective of the portal it comes out of, not whatever the "actual" situation is according to its internal rules of physics.

This is all a simplification of course because there is no "internal" and "external" and in reality it's all the same space but it functions identically.

>>377319242
What, no. Speed is relative, energy is not.

>>377318772
A hula hoop.

File: 1402392508391.jpg (26KB, 232x232px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 232x232px

>>377319284
meant to reply to this cracka.>>377318842

>>377319143
You don't understand physics enough to argue this. An absolute frame of reference is a reference frame that would appear at rest to every observer in the universe. The only way that the cube could be seen as motionless form the portal's point of view is if you assumed this absolute reference frame existed, and that the cube was motionless on it.

>>377318282
Depending on the speed it wil continue its movement upwards.

>>377318994
That's what I thought for a long time as well, but I've since come around to the perspective that as the cube exchanges one frame of reference for the other, its previous stationariness takes on the aspect of movement and it will behave as if it was already in motion. It will only experience acceleration if the portal speeds up before the cube is entirely true.

File: IMG_20170511_003206.jpg (15KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x434px

The portal doesn't apply any force or pressure to the cube.
Thus with no momentum all it does is slide off the slope due to gravity.

Portals do not add or remove any acceleration.

>>377319143
>well yeah the more accurate phrasing would be that the portal exits the cube.
No. Just no.

>>377319284
An absolute reference frame does not exist.

>>377318182
Two interesting (and relevant) features were found about CMBR (The cosmic microwave background):
it comes from every direction (consequently it is universal, i.e. can be seen from anywhere), and it is very consistent in intensity from every direction (termed isotropic). This means that anyone, anywhere, can measure their speed relative to the local knowledge of the universe. Furthermore, this effective reference frame can be used to measure velocity irrespective of the expansion of the universe, if one considers certain interpretations about comoving reference frames. Although this is very different to a universal reference frame of an aether, it is certainly, in one sense, a universal reference frame. Tick one to Lorentz


Btw einstein was a juice hack who stole his work

>>377319417
If you're on a train and you shove someone in front of you, you don't shove them with the force of the train. It's relative.

>>377313628
considering how long these have been around and how much they gained popularity recently, it's probably huge influx of new users

>>377319775
The cube has to push away the air on the other side of the portal, so it has to have force to exit the portal.

>>377319727
>entirely true.
*through

Bloody hell since when did I start typing in homophones

>>377319947
That's speed. I'm talking energy.

>>377319892
>Although this is very different to a universal reference frame of an aether
What's the point of copy-pasting stuff you don't understand when it argues against your point?

>>377319625
>the portals point of view
whoa what?
the portal doesnt have a point of view.
the portal isn't actually moving because the portal has no actual physical manifestation, its just bending the universe. the only thing moving in the scenario is the piston wall thing.

>>377318390
>. B only argues that the cube maintains its speed relative to the portal,
What speed you retard the cube HAS NO SPEED

>>377320005
The cube is stationary and not being pressed towards anything. It's relative floor just changes orientation due to the slant of the slope.

There is no pressure caused by the moving portal because the other side is stationary.

>>377320054
Yeah, you don't impart any more energy than you would if you weren't on a train and you shoved someone.

>>377320283
>>377318036

>>377320217
As I said. Relative to the portal. Which it necessarily must have or it would not be able to pass the portal.

Now, because the portal is stationary, and because there must be relative movement between portal and cube, the only way the cube is going to pass through is if it is moving.

Which is really no surprise because any thought experiment that involves chucking something through a moving portal shows that the portal's movement does in fact transfer to the object in question.

>>377320073
It doesnt argue againts my point
A universal frame of reference could be argued in this hypotetical scenario after all portals doesnt exist :^)

the cube doesn't instantly appear on the other side with energy transferred, it's held still by the original side

>>377320552
You mean the other side still affects it like >>377313112

>>377320541
If you want to start making up physics then there's no point to the argument. Just go do it in the game since those are the objective fictional physics you should be using.

>>377320676
it would affect it but it's being held back by the original side

>>377320509
The floor of the cube becomes solid pressed against the slope. That's how it's pushed out.

But it does not add pressure because there is no acceleration or force added to the cube. It's literally just a hole. Make an O with your fingers and drop a object through. If it's not touching it will just fall straight down. The hole doesn't add anything

>>377319332
No it doesnt portals are simple windows they can't do anything beyond moving 1 thing to another place
They are like wormholes

>>377320726
>If you want to start making up physics
You are doing the same dont like act like you arent

>>377320843
They are not simple windows. They are very complex windows. But if you like you can replace "door" with "window" in my post. And then maybe begin arguing against it.

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

17KB, 504x282px

>>377320776
>PEOPLE STILL USE THE FUCKING HOOP ARGUMENT

>look into the blue portal, you see a cube coming towards you, exiting, and continuing with the same speed

>look into the orange portal, you see a room falling on top of a cube, and the cube stays still obviously

really activates those almonds don't it

File: 1378845266065.gif (998KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

998KB, 500x281px

Like the Monty Hall problem, these threads are full of people that love to argue their point, but don't actually understand how things work. In this case, people try to argue without understanding inertial reference frames.

>>377321028
Actually, if the orange portal were to continue moving downwards and the cube was able to ignore gravity and wind resistance, then, looking into the orange portal, for the cube to remain "still" it would have to be shooting out the other side.

File: portals2.jpg (615KB, 4800x2700px) Image search: [Google]

615KB, 4800x2700px

>>377318838
OK so lets simplify it, remove the angle factor.

The rules in both systems are the same.
Now replace the portal with just a hole.

If we use the reference point of the hole, the ball has velocity, but does not go flying when the platform stops, the same applies with the portals, because they are holes. The ball will be affected by the new gravity and behave accordingly but will not gain momentum.

Using the blue portal room as the system you have to treat the orange portal room as one solid object as it is not moving in the universal reference.

>>377321021
If it's straight like that then the cube wouldn't go anywhere as the portals would sit on top of each other and the cube is still on the ground. Right?

>>377320512
>As I said. Relative to the portal. Which it necessarily must have or it would not be able to pass the portal
Yes but b implies that the cube ends up flying away and no matter how much energy the portal could tranfer its imposdible for the cube to to do that

>there is literally no force acting on the cube
>but it somehow receives the energy of the falling portal

>>377321296
you can clearly see the cube having an upwards movement outside of the top portal, and we havent established that the cube is somehow glued to the ground.

File: IMG_20170518_144502~01.jpg (4MB, 3878x2610px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3878x2610px

The only force being applied to the cube is gravity. Here I added a platform that also goes through since people seem to be confused what happens with the floor.

>>377321692
1. It has to have force to push away the air after the portal
2. a MB photo of a ms paint picture with 5 colors, seriously?

>>377322057
Air pressure isn't added or taken away since portals dont add anything.

Fuck you I'm at work and had to sneaky take a pic because I can't draw with my finger.

>>377312813
neither is possible because moving portals that do not move relative to each other cause a paradox of movement that at the very least current physics can't comprehend at the worst is completely impossible to exist.

>>377322247
so you're saying the air the portal displaces conveniently stops existing?

Just a reminder if you willingly argue about this shit you are a loser type of geek

A is right because what we percieve as momentum is actually the cube to expanding outwards

Momentum relative to the blue portal doesn't mean anything because it's a separate system from the orange portal. If you actually played the game you'd know portal speed has no affect on anything, it's chell's input velocity relative to the surroundings that determines her output properties.

>>377322506
It doesnt disappate any air. It's not adding or taking anything away. It's literally like a open window.

The air pressure is equal on both sides even if one portal is moving.

File: expand.png (23KB, 565x317px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 565x317px

>>377323008
like this?

>>377313336
If we assume portals are literally a 2d plane that is infinitely thin and that the oval of a portal is a sufficiently stable shape then a portal edge is the sharpest thing possible.

>>377323467
so would you say that a stationary window has just as much air passing through it as a moving one? because that's what you're arguing

>>377324223
Yes. The area surrounding the window would have pressure, but the hole itself would also have none.

The pressure isn't added into the hole because it is a fucking hole.

What if these threads and other 'ambiguous problem' threads are just sociologists trying to understand how radicalization happens?

>>377324543
i'm not talking about pressure, i'm talking about volume of air
would a moving window have a higher volume of air passing through it than a stationary one?

>>377324723
The air isn't moving through the portal though because the destination is stationary.

>>377324607
wouldn't surprise me

though monty hall and gold/silver coins have actual answers

the 50% to crit thing I haven't seen in ages, but that one is actually worded poorly and is open to multiple correct interpretations

>>377324842
so we're back to
>>377322506

>>377325313
It's not displacing anything. That's not how portals work. It just realigns orientation.

>>377312974
The actual answer is that portals break the laws of physics as we know it so either answer will lead to contradictions and this discussion is autistic.

File: thinking with portals.png (160KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1024x1024px

>>377312813

what you fags are failing to understand is conservation of momentum

the box isnt moving, and the crusher plate doesnt add any moment to it since there is no resistance going through a portal

the box would never do anything more than slide down the ramp after the crusher descends on it, even if you COULD put portals on moving surfaces

>>377328605
I understand conservation of momentum, that's why I argue the cube keeps momentum relative to the portal it exits.

>>377327176
As usual A fags are retarded

>>377329190
The system is both portals though since they are connected, the platform the cube rests on, the piston, the slanted surface with the portal, its all one connected object. Only the cube is separate, theres no way for it to fly through the air as it never moves, nothing is ever acting on it other than the change in gravitational direction.

It is the second room that is moving, because it is the piston that is moving.

>>377330471
Al movement is relative, it doesn't matter if the cube moves or the room moves. It doesn't matter if the portal is slammed on the cube or the cube is slammed on the portal.

>>377330759
Just like in real life right :^)

doorframe falls on you and you just go flying, gotta be careful

File: 1495124727949.jpg (54KB, 444x424px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 444x424px

>>377330471
>It is the second room that is moving, because it is the piston that is moving.
I go hard on this. The cube is experiencing G-forces relative to the speed of the portal as it goes through.

>>377313678
What happens here is actually correct. The air around the portal moves freely, not with the solid surface. Think if a car zoomed by, there would only be a slight force of air.

>>377329865
>not being an ABfag

>>377333696
>Bfags in charge of understanding the situation and making proper analogies

>>377334545
>this coming from fucking Afags
DUDE HULA HOOPS LMAO

>>377331541
>using the hoops argument
I'm arguing with trolls, aren't I?

>>377332940
>not being an A-Zfag

>>377337092
What's Z?

>>377337417
There's no helping you if you can't even understand Z, let alone W or F or L, etc.

>>377313678
Looks like it's fucking settled then. It was about time to teach those fucking retards.

>inb4 merely pretending

>>377337563
I'm new to the fag life. I don't know much except vanilla A and B.

File: ITSB.png (203KB, 1714x788px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1714x788px

AFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH

File: 20161206_132023.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Portal os like door
Imagine a door flies towards you while you are standing still.
Do you suddenly start flying when the door has passed you?

>>377337664
>he doesn't even know Бfags, Ѫfags, Θfags, ᚠfags, አfags, ﺍfags, ܒfags, בfags, or Ωfags
How?

File: write1.png (338KB, 622x628px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 622x628px

>>377313112
Why does the box fall off unprovoked in panel 4?
What even is the argument here?

>>377338151
it was moved to a different position.

>>377337768
depends how fast is door.

File: 20160221_171732.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>377338548
The door is flying.
It must be very fast.

>>377338829
then you will also be made to fly because frame of reference.

>>377337672
>thinking afags can read

its pointless senpai

>>377328605
>conservation of momentum

portals completely break thermodynamics and causality and everything else by existing

portals literally create infinite energy for free

don't worry about a bit of extra energy nigga

>>377337672
>im not a physicist
>I would program it to work like B
wow amazing he solved it by just deciding which one his uneducated Brain thought made sense incredible

fucking Brainlets

>people are actually trying to apply the known laws of physics onto an event that actively breaks every law of physics that we know
>and those people are calling each other retarded and autistic
>for over 8 years now

How do you guys not get tiered of this pointless shitposting?

>>377339831
>afags on damage control

>>377339831
>it's another i can't find a flaw in his logic episode

>>377313678
Goddamn. Finally its over. Going to be sweet smell of butthurt when this spreads.

>>377339871
But isnt life just one big pointless shitpost

The Answer is none. Portals aren't real. Deal with it

>>377337672
>another Bfag mentioning relativity without knowing how the fuck it works
>another Bfag not understanding that each portal is actually a side of the same portal.
>another Bfag not understanding that portals are 4 dimensional windows
>another Bfag completely self defining the mechanics of a portal so that his mental gymnastics make sense
>somehow this is the right answer because it is 5 paragraphs in image format

>>377340683
>Afags are retarded and ignore what the FUCKING CODER OF PORTAL says
wew

>>377312813
Why the fuck do these shitty threads keep getting made is the real fucking question?
There's been one up constantly for what feels like a week, before that they were just occasional.

>when afags get btfo'd by basic logic, basic physics, advanced physics, in game, by the coder of the game, in analogy and in every scenario conceivable
B-B-BUT MUH HULA HOOPS

File: 1473722227222.jpg (119KB, 392x462px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 392x462px

SPEEDY THING GOES IN
SPEEDY THING COMES OUT.

ITS THAT SIMPLE.

>drop hula hoop so you go through it
>fly upwards at 9.8m/s
woah

>>377341324
But the cube is inert

>>377313678
YESSS
BFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH!!!

>>377316495
I don't get the first argument.
so If I have a camera and move it, does person who is staring at the monitor experiencing paradox?

File: portal movement.png (46KB, 888x424px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 888x424px

explain this.

>>377341519
>enter hula hoop
>compress into the size of an atom and therefore a black hole
woah

>>377342059
Just the cube going a little down in orange due to aerodynamics but barely noticeable.

Are these threads just full of /sci/ fags?

>>377342291
I'm from /d/

>>377341949
the difference is the world inside the monitor is fabricated
the world you see inside the portal is real

>>377342291
/sci/ fags would start throwing their credentials at around fifth post.

>>377342464
but effect is the same, you are seeing something from the eyes of a different object.

>>377342059
Bfags Btfo

>>377342583
a monitor is not a portal to the reality a camera shoots
the cube is actually moving towards you (and not moving towards you) because it's a real object that exists in the universe
nothing on the monitor is actually moving, it's a series of color combinations made to look like something

>>377342939
But it's not actually moving towards you, portal is moving toward object. We call that, perspective.

>>377342939
Whoever made that image is an idiot because the moving wall is for some reason ignored. The moving wall is adding energy to the system, so the system as a whole evens out if you, you know, don't randomly ignore pieces of it.

>>377340780
Its out of their hands bro

>>377342476
135iq/Afag/Cornell

>>377335549
see
>>377334545

Just a reminder if you choose A you're probably religious/republican

>>377343751
A hero here, atheist/socialist.

>>377343908
Level of education?

>>377343665
>135
Aren't you embarassed?

>>377343979
Elementary school dropout (left to start my business).

>>377344028
Nah, its good enough for me

No force is exerted on the cube whatsoever in the original "plop vs launch" argument. The blue portal is simply placed over the cube, enveloping it just enough enough to pop out the other side. The speed is irrelevant since the a pillar never touches the cube. If the cube and blue portal switched spots so that the full force of the pillar would physically propel the cube through the portal, the answer is B. But since that isn't the case, it's A.

The big difference between a hula hoop and portals is with the hula hoop both sides are moving at the same speed and direction.

Please understand I'm telling you the answer is B out of love, not spite.

>>377318842
>How can we say the cube never moves without assuming an absolute reference frame, retard?

>Hurr me throwing a baseball is the same as me using a baseball to push the universe

Bfags have fallen for the Jewish lies.

>>377312813
It completely depends on your reference frame. Because portals break our existing logic on how frames work and interact it allows a situation to be created where there are multiple answers depending on the frame you use.

>>377312813
Regardless of "portal physics", there would have to be outward velocity when coming out of the portal because the alternative is that the box is crushed into two dimensional plate when it exits.

>>377346881
If you're standing on a pillar and another pillar comes to squash you but there's a hole in it that you can fit into once the 2 pillars connect it's not going to send you flying

There is no universal reference frame
Moving towards portal=portal moving towards you
If it was A, then actual hoola hoop portals would instead of just act like a regular hoolahoop would make you stick to the side of it while still moving.

How the cube enters the portal is irrelevant, how the cube gets from one portal to another is irrelevant.

The only thing that matters is that the cube imparts energy on itself, that part of the cube coming through the exit portal has to push the part of the cube already though out of the way.

This would result in the cube moving away from the exit portal at the same speed as it went into the entry portal, regardless of whether the cube or the portal was moving.

>>377313678
why did he launch the cube then launch himself
why didnt he launch 2 cubes or 2 of himself

>>377348035
cause then it would be harder to use as an argument cause its even more false

>>377315943
Holy shit, I'm gonna write this down somewhere.

File: 1372796520371.jpg (170KB, 499x670px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 499x670px

>>377316862

IT'S B AND IM TIRED OF EXPLAINING IT

>>377313678
I mean anyone who actually played the game knows that movement gets transferred at the portal exit.
Nice end to this retarded debate though.

>>377337768
>Afags still making comparisons to doors
The entire door is moving, in the scenario one portal is not moving. It's as simple as that.

I have posted this before, wish I had saved it for easy posting, but;

I posit that if moving portals created momentum, then it becomes impossible to move portals through space occupied by matter.

As soon as a layer of cube reaches the exit node of the portal, it has momentum and speed. It should attempt to pull the rest of the cube out. Simultaneously, the rest of the cube has resting inertia, and which would resist the pull. Should the momentum of the exit node portion of the cube exceed this resistance, it will begin pulling the rest of the cube through the portal, increasing its speed, but if that were to happen, then the moving entrance node would push the cube down as it moves down. Thus the only option being a net remaining in place at the original location.

Then realize that what is creating this impossible distortion of momentum is the portal itself, and that the cube must be resisting passing through the portal entirely.

Q.E.D.

Also, to address the "Ship enters stationary entrance portal with a backwards moving exit node":

Ship (with some momentum) begins to enter portal. Portion of ship on exit node of portal is suddenly slower than the rest of the ship. This loss of speed ripples towards the side on the entrance node, reducing the speed of entry, which in turn reduces the speed of exit in a negative feed back loop that only ends when the ship isn't moving fast enough to enter the portal (i.e. complete standstill, or, if the entrance is moving instead of the exit, moving at the exact speed of the entrance)

>>377340683
I could simply swap B for A and almost all of these points still apply. The most important one is:

>another Afag completely self defining the mechanics of a portal so that his mental gymnastics make sense

My argument is based around things that are outside of the portal where portal physics don't apply. Afags make assumptions and define special mechanics to prevent basic physics from taking place in the space away from the portal with no way to back anything up. Sometimes the best answer when you don't know how things work is the most obvious. An object in motion will stay in motion.

>>377349813

Anyone who has played the game knows that momentum that an object already had is maintained between the two nodes of a portal. What is portrayed in the video is normally impossible in the game.

>>377350397
Sure. :)

>>377342059
as previusly said the only ting that is gonna affect the cube is air resistance. but lets say it is in a vacume you could send the orange portal away with the speed of light nothing would happen cause only grafity is affecting the cube

>>377313112
I was an A fag after I saw that. I'ts gotta be b

>>377351224

Glad we could agree. :)

File: Tilt your screen back.png (18KB, 480x323px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x323px

>mfw this thread appears again

I was gunna go to bed but now I have to argue on the internet purely as Devil's advocate

>>377350387
>>377350134
Not him but both break laws of physics, and we are left with "which breaks the least" but I see where A comes from, as they, like you said, try to explain it without giving the portal any special functions beyond the obvious connection of 2 surfaces. This is the easiest to understand explanation of the A side in this thread.
>>377318105
>>377321287

Meanwhile B, while correct about conservation of momentum, have no way of explaining how the cube suddenly gains velocity. If it is B, this is the most correct description of it.
>>377350247

>>377352229
Pretty much this famalam.

>>377313112
how does this make any sense, when it gets moved it is resting on a different system, the cube physically changes systems here and further pushing of the platform would not have an effect on the cube.

>>377328605
>Conservation of momentum
Portals break this

>>377352229
>try to explain it without giving the portal any special functions beyond the obvious connection of 2 surfaces.

Like you say, a portal only connects two surface. It does not do anything to the space outside of the portal. Therefor any object that is not in the portal will obey classical mechanics. A cube is a continuum and not a point mass. You can look at only the leading section of the cube, block out the rest and pretend there isn't even a portal in the problem as far as that section is concerned. I do not need to explain how it started moving to be able to say that it will continue to move since it is out of the portal and basic physics apply.

I will agree with you that the cube may simply not be able to go through the portal and would end up infinitely thin when it tries to come out into itself. However, my argument for B is based on the problem description, which shows the cube on the other side. To argue otherwise, you will need give the portal special functions such as warping the space and time outside of the portal.

The only force acting on the box is gravity, simple as that.

File: RotationPortal.png (17KB, 969x818px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 969x818px

I think we can do better

>>377312974
Frames of reference

>>377354276
A. The tilt as it starts to go in balances out with the opposite tilt as it finishes going through.

Lets get to the real hard physics questions
If I throw something into the air will it just keep going forever or will it come back down?

File: 1495141486977.gif (2MB, 270x188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 270x188px

>>377354276
The exit is the only thing that matters with these kinds of portals. You can say they aren't a wormhole all you want but they function exactly like a wormhole does.

Despite what the game says, how something enters a portal has absolutely no effect on that object or the portal, as you can see through demonstration in the game. All physics that could be applied to a hole in a wall are applied here in every single way.

If you shoot a ball into a hole on a moving platform, will the object change directions once it moves through that hole unimpeded? No.
From the objects point of view when going through a portal it is maintaining the same exact direction, momentum, and speed. Portals do not have any effect on the object which enters them whatsoever except changing where they exit when they enter.

>arguing about if a massless object transfers force.

Kek.

>>377354276
A

B if it hit the portal at an angle

>>377352879
Portals break the link between conservation of momentum and conservation of energy. CoE is broken by portals which is why they can never exist.

>>377354276
I think it would be 2 since the parts of the ball on either side would affect the exit angle in different ways which would unlikely result in a straight exit but it all depends on the numbers and values. The certain thing that would happen is that even if the ball wasn't spinning before would start spinning as it enters.

File: 1396507275216.jpg (70KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 330x319px

>>377312813
>doorway analogy