Thread 509269298

itt we post things only whites can solve

>>509269298 (OP)
A. Now you're thinking in portals.

>>509269519
fpbp. btards are swarthy and brown

If any one of you fags say B im unironically tracking you down and shoving a tarantula hawk inside your cock hole

>>509269298 (OP)

I think you watched hellraisers too many times

>>509269298 (OP)
A. To put this in perspective if a doorway rapidly moves past you it does not change your movement.

>>509269298 (OP)
B doesn’t make sense no matter how hard you try

>>509269298 (OP)
wtf is that?

>>509269946
>>509269519
>>509269298 (OP)
if a doorway moves rapidly past you, your movement relative to that doorway is extremely fast. It doesn't change; it always was that. It Certainly doesnt immediately become 0 even if the door keeps moving

A, obviously. Can niggers really not solve this?

>>509270167
retard, your not moving the portal is

>>509269298 (OP)
Depends on what kind of portal it is.

>>509270040
kek zoomies

>>509269298 (OP)
One could argue that the momentum relative to the exit portal is the same as the momentum relative to the input portal. This doesn't make sense if the law of conservation of momentum holds globally though, since you could then add momentum to the universe by accelerating a portal towards and arbitrarily dense object... and in that case, we have the makings of an inertialess drive for space travel.
At the same time, depending on the relative position and velocity of the two portals, they will both be in different frames of reference, meaning that they won't necessarily agree on the speed of an object entering the entrance portal, so in that case what would the exit speed be?
In short, this question is predicated on the assumption of a universal frame of reference, which does not appear in our universe.

B would be a source of free energy since the portal has in theory no mass, it's like a open doorway passing through you, the total momentum of all atoms must not change, an so the answer must be A.

>>509271041
Here we go with this shit again, like pottery

>>509270167
How do you even become this retarded.

>What the fuck am I even looking at?
You must be at least 37 years old to post on 4chan.

>>509271223
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSMZoLjB9JE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nExImHpSFuY

>>509269298 (OP)
It's neither because portals disappear if the surface they are attached to moves.

>>509271033
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhEaw3Kuhf0

>>509269751
It's obviously b. But I'm retracting that claim due to threats.

>>509269298 (OP)
Here you go you stupid fucking retards.

https://youtube.com/shorts/X6fGicO896Q

>>509271431
correct

>>509269298 (OP)
Shiggy diggy

>>509269298 (OP)
Alright, off the top of my head, the answer depends on which reference frame momentum is conserved in. The very existence of portals implies that conservation of momentum will be broken in SOME frame.

It's probably only sensible for the portal's frame of reference to be the one that momentum is conserved in. From orange portal's frame, the cube appears to be moving, so from the blue portal's frame, it should also be moving.

So B seems correct.

>>509271633
This is the funniest thing I have ever seen. All these years after all the shit I've seen have finally love you to this moment. I'm crying. I can't breathe.

>>509271633
Lmao rofl

>>509271041
it really is just a question of how the portalmakers want to decide momentum of objects passing through- relative to the portal, or maintain momentum.

>>509269298 (OP)
You can't have moving portals tho.

>>509271775
you remind me of those normies hiding the egg behined a paper touching a mirror and wondering how the mirror ''knows'' theres an egg behined the paper

>>509269298 (OP)
It's B. Portals conserve momentum. The momentum of the cube relative to the red portal becomes the momentum of the cube relative to the blue portal, just with a different direction. If this wasn't true, nearly all of the puzzles in the game would not work.

>>509271431
That depends on the speed and movement type of the surface.

>>509271935
this would create a recursive structure, perhaps dense enough to collapse into a black hole. i'll be answering questions for 15 minutes.

There is a maximally strong argument for A, and not for B, because B is a source of infinite free energy just by using the rules of the portal.

Imagine the object is a super-heavy object, like a mountain. It's at rest relative to the most things. Relatively zero effort was spent to accellerate the zero-mass orange portal, wheras at the end, the mountain-sized object flying out of B could be harnessed to turn a crank, which lifts the portal back up for another whack at further accelleration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B19nlhbA7-E

Therefore, A can be the only answer that doesn't violate the conservation of energy, because B can be simply re-arranged into a source of infinite free energy, assuming both of the portal's apitures are 100% efficient and zero mass.

>>509269298 (OP)
It's A.
The physics of the new space apply immediately to the cube as it passes through, disregarding the relative position and velocity of the portal. The hole in the portal has no ability to accelerate the cube

>>509272276
>>509272239
>>509271775
>>509271041
wrong or not, we shall agree we're scholars amongst men, pushing the limits of human knowledge.

>>509269519
The cube goes into the center of the falling portal, it would fall back into the angled portal A.
The cube would glitch out, constantly shifting back and forth through the portal.
nigger.

>>509269298 (OP)
>>509269519
>>509269607
>>509269751
I can't tell if people are retards or just pretending to be retards.
A moving portal means a moving reference point. Imagine standing in an elevator without a door. The stationary floors move by from your reference point. This is what is happening in that picture.
Another way to think about it is to imagine what it would look like from outside the destination portal. It would appear as if a moving platform is shooting toward the portal before slamming into the wall, sending the box flying. There is no way A could happen unless the speed of the moving platform is extremely slow.

>>509272497
>american education system
nigga did you even take physics in high school?

>>509272497
GIVE ME A FUCKIN ADDRESS NOW HOE

>>509272239
But again, even my logic falls flat and can't work, because the mountain going in, can't "get out of the way" fast enough for the tail end of the mountain to pass through, and so an infinite amount of energy would need to burst into creation at the blue portal, and then the laws of physics would have to say: "ok it's through the object has to stop now".

Or said another way, if the portals are to maintain first second and third laws of conservation of energy, then the moving portal must stop and proceed very slowly when hitting the object, because every bit the portal moves through the object, a potentially infinite quantity of new energy is created to accelerate the object.

So therefore, from the physics standpoint, these portals are a violation of physics.

But the argument fails because the portals as they are, are a source of infinite free energy. Which means creating new energy is within their named field of abilities.

And so therefore B would be acceptable, A is "less wrong in regards to new energy" but leaves the thorn of "Temporal-Friction as the portal passes through"

>>509269298 (OP)
Portals don't have an effect on the things that pass through them they are basically just flat holes in spacetime

>>509271775
>so from the blue portal's frame, it should also be moving.
Orange portal is orange.
Blue portal is blue.
Orange =/= Blue

>>509271633
Fucking kek

>>509269298 (OP)
B is Chad A is Chud

>>509269298 (OP)
Clearly the red portal decelerates and stops entirely before hitting the plinth because it's not visible in the second picture, so i guess A is correct.

>>509269298 (OP)
If it was B you couldn't do this with a person or it would rip their head off.

>>509272136
No fuckface. The answer is in the game and you are quite actually retarded.

>>509272276
>>509272392
In other words the frame of the portal will impact the platform on which the cube sits motionless, and the cube will pass through the portal as a hula hoop falls around you when dropped. It will be pulled down at an angle and presumably slide and "plop". The cube is fully influenced by the new space once the portal frame and platform make contact.

>>509272239
What if the second portal is moving too? Will the mountain now suddenly fly thoguh the air because it stays statonary to the secondary portal?

C. We can’t answer due to incomplete information, your velocity, kinetic energy, and momentum are relative to your frame of reference.

Like science, its made up bs to fuck you health with vaccines

>>509269298 (OP)
Replace the cube with a person. What do b-tards think would happen if the portal mechanism instantly stopped once passed their neck?

Do they expect the momentum of the mechanism/portal to somehow apply to their head and decapitate them by wrenching their head off?

>>509269298 (OP)
This question isn't correct because portals in the naive version break conservation laws.
>portal A at 10m
>portal B at 0m
>go in B
Where did the energy difference to go up 10m came from? External energy? Your body?

There are so many questions OP's question isn't correct. It would need a physical model of the portals first.

>>509272130
Then what reference frame is momentum conserved in? It's certainly not the Earth's frame, judging by what happens when two stationary portals face in non-parallel directions.

>>509272239
Portals are already a source of free energy by teleporting things to a higher point in the gravitational energy gradient. You could have water fall on a turbine, and teleport right back above it.
I guess you could headcanon this away by saying it must require an energy expenditure to teleport something, but that's apocryphal.

>>509272818
>If I paint on side of my house blue the other side also must be blue

>>509273223
They might count that a blessing

>>509269946
I FIGURED IT OUT. Bear with me.

Both portals are zero mass, the apitures are 100% frictionless and 100% efficient, they obey the laws of physics.

Imagine the cube passing through is the size of a big mountain. As the zero-mass orange portal hits the first set of atoms, there total velocity in the universe has to be conserved, this creates a torque on the blue portal, which must move to expose a place for the mountain sized object to appear in the next place and the answer is A.

The answer cannot be B, because new momentum and velocity has appeared in the world and that new energy could turn a crank that powers the machine which again pushes the piston to move the orange portal.

Therefore if the gamedevs want to make portals godmagic and right in physics, the blue portal must feel an equal and opposite torque from the mass of the object passing through, so that the mass-velocity of all objects pre-portal match post-portal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw7iTQHGJCI&t=656

This will create a number of problems which make existing gameplay not-fun, because if there is a 90 degree rotation between the portals, then the blue portal is going to start spinning and pushing against its housing, and by passing through, you're going to experience G-forces that could kill you because the change in momentum must all add up to 0, after friction losses.

Is Newton's first law applicable here?

>>509272136
>It's B. Portals conserve momentum.
Imagine if the second portal pointed in any other direction. Each of those directions would obviously result in different momenta. Not knowing how portals work and how exactly the system balances the total momentum, it's impossible to use it as an argument.

>>509272497
if you slam a cup down on a marble, the marble doesn't go flying upward into the cup. it may jump a bit but won't smack the top of a tall glass.

those are the options here. little to no movement, or flying at the same force as the moving thing, which it isn't

>>509272239
Portals already provide infinite energy.

Have water in low area go through portal and end up at high spot. Put a turbine between. You can add infinite potential energy with free height.

>>509273355
We know how portals work. It's in the game. You are retarded.

>>509273323
Wow you typed a lot but yes A is correct

>>509273423
Please do explain how the system conserves total momentum then.

>>509272444
trips of truth

>>509269298 (OP)
The object itself isn't in motion and the area it's relocated too also isn't in motion. The anser is A.

>>509269946
A doorway doesn’t contain a brand new entrance to reality though retard

>>509269298 (OP)
It's B because motion is relativistic. Thanks, Einstein

>>509269751
The answer is B

>>509273575
Have you ever seen a doorway to a new reality rapidly move past something and change its movement you absolute consumer of nigger cock?

>>509273377
A cup doesn’t impart a wormhole like reentry into a random point in space

>>509272444
>>509273548
Brainlets

the correct answer is the cube would stick out of the portal at 45 degrees and you are all retarded

>>509273323
The laws of physics are out on this one, since having portals at different vertical orientations creates infinite gravitational potential energy.

>>509273663
Yes, you lost now

>>509273323
>The answer cannot be B, because new momentum and velocity has appeared in the world and that new energy could turn a crank that powers the machine which again pushes the piston to move the orange portal.
What if the piston, or either of surroundings of the portal end points, gained an equal but opposite amount of momentum by the cube going through it?

Any matter that passed through the in portal would immediately manifest on the other side at the out portal and would experience the new gravity in the space occupied by the out portal which means whatever matter materialized would fall back through the out portal because the in portal is moving and so the object isn't falling through the portal but rather effectively being 3D-printed in layers from the bottom up and upside-down on the other side as it "grows up" as the scenario would have us believe which is impossible and so what happens is either matter can go in two directions through in and out portals and so the matter concentrates into an infinite mass in an infinitely small space with infinite energy as it alternates falling through in and out of in or out (and there is no space for it to occupy on the in side) which would result in the amount of energy building as the distance the matter traverses would shorten each time it alternates sides and so it would probably expand and blow up and probably destroy all the fabric of reality OR if matter cannot go back through the out portal you would have new matter materialize where the old matter which materialized whatever quanta ago currently occupies the space causing two distinct sets of matter to occupy the same space which I assume would cause an explosion powerful enough to destroy the Earth AT LEAST but in reality would probably destroy Sol as well.

So in either scenario you have destroyed either the human race or the entire universe. :D

The Blue Portal has to accelerate down so that A is the correct answer, but if something is obstructing the blue portal from moving-down, then this force must cause the cube shoved into the orange portal to crash into the object which prevents the blue portal from moving.

The piston pushing on Orange portal, zero mass, 100% efficient, experiences a crash since the blue portal cannot be pushed down. The loss of momentum in the piston pushing down causes the cube to accellerate upward, making the answer A. The piston has to overcome the needs of the blue-portal housing to move, and the needs of the cube to accellerate, all else being equal, from a neutral frame of reference.

The piston must slow down to accomodate the blue portal accellerating down, and the object accellerating, so that all momentum adds up to zero.

You are looking through the blue portal.

You see cube coming towards you at high speed.

How you know the portal is on a press going down or the cube is on a lifter going up go a stationery portal?

>>509270167
Except its the doorway that moves your position stays the same.

If you are in an elevator with no floor and it moves up you obviously stay in the same position and don't go up with it.

>>509273733
There is no reason to believe that to be the case because nothing says that the portals or their surroundings have to remain in that orientation as stuff keeps going thoruhg them.

>>509273262
Ur pretty dumb for a jap. You must be a Jew living over there.

>>509273886
Your sight is irrelevant. The proposed scenario is clearly explained

>>509273809
we add a variable and call it x. we then use x to explain all the parts that are missing. do you even fucking science? the answer is clearly b+x

>>509273545
When a surface with a portal on it moves the portal disappears... Otherwise they are holes through spacetime.

>>509269298 (OP)
The answer is clearly C.

>>509273655
open up that fuckin cock hole you son of a bitch

>>509272497
>retard furry is retarded

>>509274218
The only nigger who knows

>>509271935
buy an ad
you will never have Wendy's bants

>>509274218
Only instead of being bent or broken the other pieces would still be back there

>>509271223
Kek

>>509271633
Kek

why the hell would it be b unless you are some hyper zoom zoom that never played the game? or thinks some sort of explosion happens when the piston comes down

>>509273338
This is the crux of the matter. Now the object has no momentum, but the portal does. But what is the "mass" of a portal? Given the fictional nature of portals it's not something we can test, but I could see some vector acting on the cube perpendicular to the slope. Great picture anon.

>>509273809
False Dichotomy, C is the correct answer.

The blue portal, being zero mass, has to leap out of the way with the same energetic force the piston uses to move the zero-mass orange portal, since blueportal is zero mass and the object passing through is the size of a mountain, the blue portal would simply push the table out of the way, so that the mountain can appear without velocity, and conservation of momentum is preserved. The mountain starts at rest and ends at rest relative to the neutral observer.

We can't solve the gravitational well source of infinite energy, but we can solve the momenum and velocity recovery angular momentum emergence problem.

Y'all are all dented as fuck

Pretend with me for a moment it's the platform moving and not the portal. Cube flies away. This is obvious

Normal laws of physics on either sides of the portals yeah? That means relativity can be applied to each one individually.

Mathematically, the portal moving or the platform moving are the same. Either way, the cube moves into the orange portal. It carries this same movement out of the blue portal. Cube flies away.

What if it stops halfway through? Same rules apply. Pretend it's two cubes tied together and it stops in-between them. First cube that's through flies away. Rope pulls second cube through. Both fly away.

Functionally, the second the cube makes contact with the portal, it's relative everything to the first portal is IDENTICAL to it's relative everything with the second portal.

And just to make it extra clear, if it was A, how come you can change the direction of a cube in motion by sending it through a portal set that different angles? Because the momentum is conserved though the portal, not in the world.

so many brown physicslets in this thread

>>509273692
nigga the portal is a door you fucking moron

>>509274717
the portal is speculative

>>509273886
Your on an elevator with a glass floor.
You see the ground coming at you fast.
The ground isn't moving.

>>509269298 (OP)
The answer is c) the orange portal is a fixed place in space time and the ram itself goes through the portal and the cube is not affected.

>>509274595
No you fucking retard. If I put a peach on a pedestal and toss a hula hoop over it the peach doesn't magically shoot up into the air... Id everyone here actually retarded?

>>509274892
yes. they think if a shipping container falls on them, they would magically fly to the top, because somehow the downward force of the shipping container transfers into their body and forces them up KEK

>>509274561
Tell me, in the game, what reference frame is momentum conserved in?

>>509274625
Surface with portals that eject matter should probably feel recoil, but we have no in-game evidence if this is the case.

>>509274665
Give your answer w/ explanation or gtfo.

>>509274930
Wasn't the entire point of portal to teach basic physics to retards... How the fuck is this the result?

>>509275015
idiocracy is real

>>509275015
Dunno. Maybe you should be less of a retard

>>509275069
Ya well you talk like a fag and your shits all retarded!

>>509274801
nigger

>>509274649
A for reddit shit tier effort

>>509274892
Yes, but the hula hoop doesn't warp the location of the peach. I understand the object doesn't have momentum. But the SYSTEM does. And MOMENTUM IN THE SYSTEM IS PRESERVED.

>>509269298 (OP)
>>509269298 (OP)


Neither A or B

>>509275095
I do know. You are a massive faggot.

>>509275136
Got his ass. Hey, you want to watch ouch my balls.

We're suspending disbelief that the orange portal can be moved. Assuming the orange portal is zero mass, 100% frictionless and efficient....

Then if the orange portal moves, logic dictates that the blue portal must also move in an equal and opposite way.

But now that means orange portal and blue portal have to influence each other's velocity and direction. The blue portal has to go down using the energy from the piston, so that A is the correct answer. But the object doesn't fly out, it remains at rest where it started and the blue portal smashes down through the table because the piston is strong.

The piston must feel a bump/crash resistance as the zero mass blue portal is accellerated, collides into the table, and the force from the table pushes against the piston to overcome the table which blocks the object from passing through.

The new thing is the orange portal motion, so logic dictates that the blue portal must also move, the question is in what way?

>>509275136
UPGRAYEDD

>>509274964
see
>>509274892
if a mirror you could pass through fell on you, would you start flying to the ceiling on the other end?

>>509275192
No retard it is a hole through spacetime. You have physically connected one place to another with zero distance. That's it. You can move the hole. But that's all it is. The empty doorway. The mass is outside the system and you are fucking stupid. Suck my dick you hilarious brown nigher.

>>509275272
>logic dictates that the blue portal must also move in an equal and opposite way
It must have an equal and opposite momentum...which is zero because it has no mass as per your axiom.

>>509269298 (OP)
Oh . It’s a portal question. Just pull the code and find out.

Now biotech, that’s the real challenge of our times. Try “programming” something not entirely mapped out, of inhuman design.

Tricksy….

If I put my penis in the blue portal and my mouth in front of the yellow circle, can I suck my own penis? Asking for a friend.

>>509275297
No.

>>509269298 (OP)
The answer is obviously A. The portals are not objects or doorways, they're teleporters. B makes the assumption that the portals are 2 sides of a door and that the momentum of one side is conserved in the "reference frame" of the other. If B were true then by moving the orange portal you'd be accelerating the entire universe of the blue portal. The second the orange portal starts to accelerate you would feel a change in gravity. This is not the case. They're just teleporters that conserve the momentum of anything that touches them. Now here's the real question... what do when nested portals?

>>509275433
Yes but I will feel more like sucking dick than having your dick sucked. 3/20

It's B.

At the first instant the portal touches the cube, the topmost slice of the cube will appear on the ramp.

A short time dt later and that slice must move away from the ramp by a distance vdt where v is the speed of the portal, in order to make room for the next slices.

It's obvious that the topmost slice and all subsequent slices will be moving with a speed of v out of the ramp.

>>509275459
this is how you glitch out of the universe permanently

>>509274892
The blue hula hoop is not moving.

>>509275452
right if it was done in game the cube would just float between the portals or in the op's picture the best answer is A

>>509275297
The mirror room would be moving towards you at full speed. Why would it suddenly stop?

>>509275433
No that violates its terms of service so it shuts down, probably chopping it off in the process.

>>509275459
>They're just teleporters that conserve the momentum of anything that touches them.
Momentum in what frame?

When the piston moves the orange portal, the blue portal must also move in the direction that reveals that the cube did not change momentum, velocity or accelleration.

The Blue portal has to move down, out of the way, from the force inflicted by the piston.

>>509269298 (OP)
The cube can't be accelerated on the other side because if it did then the portion that went through would instantaneously rip away from the portion that was still on the original side. Or just touching the top of the cube with the portal would suddenly launch the cube through completely.

What I want to know is, going by the game rules where it can only form on a stationary platform, how does the portal know whether the surface it forms on is moving or not?
From what perspective must it not be moving?

>>509275673
The holes are never technically moving they are absolute connection points they have no mass and everything moves around them... you are dumb.

>>509275849
>absolute connection points
sounds like fanfiction to me

>>509275840
>From what perspective must it not be moving?
It must be stationary to the local ether.

Both options are impossible, that's why there's no consensus. How you answer is just a matter of which impossibility feels more obvious to you

>>509275687
>Momentum in what frame?
It's simpler than you're thinking. The object just has vectors for velocity and acceleration. When it touches the surface of the orange portal its location coordinates get snapped to the blue portal and those vectors are preserved. The vectors of the orange portal have nothing to do with it.

>>509275687
none of the rooms move at all, you would see more of the static interior of the room as the portal goes down

>>509269298 (OP)
I don’t even understand what is supposed to be happening here

>>509275995
I mean it would it's a literal description of game physics... I'm sure most explanations sound like weird fan fiction to dumb niggers who think the world is basically steampunk magic. It's honestly not that tricky. They teach physics in highschool. Ask chat gpt if your allowed to reply to me.

>>509271128
portals would be a free energy source no matter what. Put portal top of hydroelectric dam, other portal bottom of outlet river. Free energy.

itt: b choosers defending their land from wypipo

>>509276040
bends in the spacetime curvature makes portals theoretically possible. reject this, and you reject einsteins theory of relativity, which is based.

>>509276049
These are variant between reference frames. There is no inherent objective velocity or acceleration for an object. They only carry meaning in comparison to some observer.

>>509276244
but jewstein never came up with portals or how to create one

>>509270040
I'll second this. How are A and B related to the image on the left? We have a press or steam hammer or whatever about to flatten a cube, I guess (though it appears two-dimensional) - and then…? Are we off to the side, and supposed to believe the cube would just move to the side for some reason? Or have we teleported to another location?

>>509276235
That dude actually has great form with that bow.

>>509275828
This is dependent on how fast the lift is traveling upwards and how much the person weighs.

>>509273223
This.

Imagine the cube is two heavy masses held together by a thin string. The string breaks because one object is moving and the other one is not.

B cannot be the answer:
1. The blue portal must move somehow to reveal that the cube never moved.
2. The piston pushing on orange portal must feel resistance because the blue portal can't move out of the way.
3. But now angular momentum kicks our ass because it's incompatible with the suggested kinematic model.

You can't break physics, portals are impossible okay gang?

>>509269298 (OP)
If it was B, then the atoms that first go through the portal would have instantaneous velocity, implying infinite acceleration. So the box would be torn apart atom by atom. Anyone who says B is retarded

>>509276265
You're making the assumption that portals follow the rules of physics in this world. They do not. I'm just describing how they work in the game.

A-fags doesn't have inner monologue.
A-fags doesn't know what they'd feel like if they didn't have breakfast this morning.
A-fags can't hear the chirp.

>>509276419
gooner cube?

>>509272444
>it would fall back into the angled portal A.
the post is a lie

It would be B in real world physics, but because it's a magical video game it would be A.
Think of it this way: imagine a person was standing under the moving portal. At the bottom, it had a brake mechanism to quickly decelerate the portal to 0. The portal slams down at 1000mph and decelerates to 0 in a millisecond. The brake system is located right at the person's neck.
If the answer was B, their head would be ripped off because it would be pulled on so hard that it would rip off the person's body and fly off. That doesn't work for video game logic, you would instead just need their head sitting there fine no matter how fast the portal moved.

>>509269298 (OP)
It’s B

>>509276056
>none of the rooms move at all
They absolutely would be. That's what passing through a mirror would even mean.

>>509276191
It's not at all "absolute connection points", its connection points within the frame of the Earth, which is by no means "absolute". This whole earth frame concept seems to be what's holding many people ITT back.

>>509276544
No, I am going off of what happens in game, which exhibits what I described.

>>509269298 (OP)
Has to be A.

>>509269298 (OP)
https://youtu.be/ao1qVi5Qp3Y?si=6HwiKxShakPgoF7z
Proof it’s B

>>509276352
So we're just supposed to assume it's going through a portal? Even though it doesn't look like a portal at all? Get someone who can fucking draw, and then this might actually be a meaningful test.

>>509276548
>object with velocity of 0
>first line of atoms now have velocity of 1
>this happened in 0 seconds
>acceleration is infinite
You’re retarded

>>509276225
That depends on how the portals themselves are maintained. In theory there would be an energy cost to allow matter to traverse through them safely. If you tried that, maintaining the portal would probably require more energy to displace the water, than what energy could be generated by said water running the dam.

something like this, I presume?

>>509276703
obvously b. i don't know why people are having so much difficulty with this.

>>509276610
It would still be B in game, because the game has momentum be conserved in the frame of reference of the portal.
Try to prove that it doesn't handle momentum that way.

>>509276669
No it isn't you fucking retard. Show me the point in the game where the universe effects the portal... I'm fucking waiting

>>509276610
You don’t need to go really fast then stop. If the velocity is 0 for an atom, then it speeds up to 1 in 0 seconds, the acceleration is infinite. In the case of B, any atoms that go through the portal in this manner would be instantly gone.

>>509276734
The first line of atoms would be forced to move out of the way at the rate of arriving new lines of atoms. The faster the portal moves the faster the atoms must move out of the way. That's why it's B.

>>509276797
He should come out head first, and he comes out rather too fast.

>>509276703
>I rewrote the code and it did what I coded it to do
Wow great input thanks

>>509276797
Fucking kek... People in this thread actually argue this

>>509269298 (OP)
>solving a fictional physics questions
How about asking what color unicorn shit is while we're at it.

>>509276922
fair but I didn't make nor would I know how to. it would be funnier head first by about 37% too.

>>509276888
The rate of acceleration is infinite if the momentum of the falling portal is transferred to the object. Do you understand what that means?

We're going to settle this once and for all and see what the portal developers coded in. We'll just set the portals as normal and then place our objects, now all we have to do is move the orange portal int

>>509276548
>goyim cant argue with my beam.ng animation
the portal has 0 mass

Assuming there’s normal this-universe space on the blue portal side and the item has mass it will be passing out of the blue portal with speed and that inertia will be maintained.
This is not like a door passing by you, this is like a flying house flying into you and you happen to pass through the door. Relative to the inside of the house you would be flying. It’s B

>>509276734
>velocity relative to portal is 1
>portal passes over it
>velocity is still 1

>>509276870
I'm not talking about things larger than the earth, I'm talking about the reference frames of different moving objects within the room, which are distinct from the earth's (or room's, if you'd rather call it that) frame. Reference frames for objects, the room, and the portal are absolutely handled differently from each other.

>>509276979
Nigger alert. The difference is you have been given all of the parameters to create a conclusion. All hypotheticals are gay because the only ones I come up with are nigger rape fantasies... That's you.

>>509277063
beam.ng /= portal

>>509277109
Yes and I'm calling you stupid for thinking the size of the reference frame changes anything.

>>509277014
A moving portal would encounter resistance dependant on the mass it is moving, and slow down as it transferred its energy to the matter. It wouldn't be infinite free energy.

>>509277286
False. I think you could get a rhythm going

>>509277117
The question is not solvable because it relies on a physically impossible and thus imaginary bases. hence retards argue about it endlessly

>>509277373
No you just literally admitted you lack abstract reasoning... Crazy flex but ok.

>>509277163
It's not the size, its the mere fact that it is a different reference frame.

>>509277286
This misses the point entirely. The portals should me moving towards the fag. Regardless which is moving, he dies either way.

>>509277373
I disagree. Enough information is provided in game to confidently make a conclusion.

>>509269996
>devil's advocate
the portal moving 50 mph towards the cube could have the same effect as a cube moving 50 mph towards a portal. like a wall moving towards a car or a car moving towards a wall at the same speed. both will result in a totaled car/launched cube, but since this is fake science fiction physics, A is the correct answer desu

i cant remember who, but someone did make a custom map of a portal moving towards a cube and the result was A

>>509277373
>im too dum to answer with all the necessary info provided so its imaginary

>>509277373
We also both know you literally just googled abstract reasoning you actual fucking retard. You should feel bad.

>>509277194
That's bananas.

The object can move into a immobilized orange portal and all is well.

But if the orange portal is pushed into you and the blue portal is bolted down, then the orange portal bashes into the table to make space for the cube that does not move. The piston smashes against the table to push blue portal out of the way, so that A becomes correct. The blue portal must move the entire width of the cube and the piston must feel that resistance force.

>>509277456
You are truly to stupid to realize the the question to begin with in ambiguous and doesn't define how the teleportation works, leaving midwits to fill in that part with their own headcanon and then argue about it. sense teleportation doesn't exist you can pretend it works all sorts of ways atomically.

>>509269298 (OP)
The platforms are going to collide so the cube is gonna shoot off the portal. B

>>509277286
But if you were moving fast enough that’s what would happen
Point is you can’t move a boner that fast according to physics

>>509277524
No it isn't that's the entire fucking point you are actually retarded

>>509277109
>relative velocity of the portal
So the entire universe on the blue side of the portal has a velocity relative to the orange side? Besides that nonsense, relative velocity doesn’t mean anything in this context. An objects relative velocity doesn’t infer momentum. Velocity is not conserved - momentum is conserved. What is the momentum of the portal? How are you calculating it? What is the mass of a portal?

>>509277571
It's a fucking video game. We know exactly how it works. It's literal code. I'm sorry your nigger brain can't grasp what we are talking about but we actually live in different worlds.

>>509269298 (OP)
>>509269519
I guessed A, too. I'm Indian. I don't really care to win your appraisal about solving dumb shit online.

I'm content living in my 2 million dollar home with a wife and 2 kids.

Also, most of my econ graduation class was either Indian, Arab or Chinese/Taiwanese. My white roommate was a white econ major that went on academic probation and ended up switching from econ major to econ minor and political science major.

Whites are less likely to be able to solve this puzzle, statistically speaking.

The blue portal moves by the width of the cube to get out of the way so that the cube never accellerates, and the orange portal must feel a resistance proportional to how much energy you need to get the blue portal to move down and to the left.

Retard thread?
Retard thread.

>>509277698
Every post is dumber and dumber, why are people arguing physics or relativity if they are talking about a virtual world that is completely controllable by the programing code.

>>509277791
Not 5 because it's helium... Truck question

The portal moving is also moving all of the air molecules on its way down.
Where are they going?

>>509277815
Your entire argument is hypotheticals shouldn't exist? Want to clarify or are you actually this stupid?

>>509277791
2

>>509277873
Portal moving a mile across open field fast.
Now mile column of air has to go through portal fast.
You would feel a lot of air coming out of the blue portal with force.

>>509277933
lol you are such a dumb mother fucker. There is such thing as a bad hypothetical you retard.

>>509277965
Its 3, i tested with science

>>509278018
No. The portal works in both directions.

>>509278033
You’re literally hypothetically retarded

>>509278033
Absolutely. But your point seems to be arguing hypotheticals is pointless because they aren't real. Which would be a nigger tier retarded thing to think. I'm sure I misunderstood. Please explain.

>>509277967
Lol. There is no lift because the air is at normal speeds. Its not the wheels that generate lift but the plane moving through the fluid of particles that generate lift. Generate winds at speed and watch it begin to lift.

>>509269996
Portals don't either, so if they were real I wouldn't be sure if B was right or wrong until I tested it. Obviously with other tests I could figure it out.

>>509273355
That makes no sense retard. You can point the blue portal any direction you want. The momentum is just directed as if the two portals were back to back. That is what portals do, effectively remove the space between the two.

>>509278056
3 would only work if the fluid was more viscous than water. A heavy oil would fill 3 because the fluid would stay to the outter walls of the pipe. Water would fall off the edge because of the angle of the pipe leading to 3.
>certified 9th dropout retard.

I will now prove that momentum is conserved from the portal's perspective:
Consider portal A, facing upwards, and portal B facing to the right
>Cube enters portal A at zero degrees from its normal axis and leaves portal B at zero degrees from its normal axis.
>From the portal's perspective this makes sense, as it behaves like a hula hoop passing over it.
>From an outside stationary observer, this 90 degree turn is a discontinuity in momentum.
>If momentum was conserved in the viewer's frame, the room's frame, or some abstract universal third thing, we would expect the cube to keep moving downwards after emerging from portal B, but this does not happen.

>>509277628
Can you lay out your reasoning or some proof of how what I said isn't true?

>>509277648
I did not say velocity OF the portal, but the cube's perspective of the velocity of everything else.

>So the entire universe on the blue side of the portal has a velocity relative to the orange side?
When you walk, the universe has a velocity relative to you.
>An objects relative velocity doesn’t infer momentum.
It absolutely does, if mass is considered constant.

>>509278279
Simulate or dilate

>>509278129
No the point is the bases of the hypothetical is a undefined fantasy that allows people to imagine different outcomes. Thus it's a bad hypothetical question designed for people to argue pointless over their own imagined perceptions. for instance the planes hypothetical >>509277967 is completely grounded in a plausible scenario and has a definite answer and is a good hypothetical.

>>509278136
Nigga the engines will lift it once they reach full speed

>>509278064
Air would either enter or if it is blocked from entering it would like a normal flat disc.

>>509278346
No enough thrust on engine alone. Needs momentum.

>>509278334
Nope you just proved you are fucking retarded again... It's a closed system we know everything about. There is an objectively right answer. Actually hilarious that you think you are making cogent arguments

>>509273504
A is less incorrect than B.

The correct answer is C. The orange portal crashes into the blue portal and the blue portal must leap out of the way to reveal a cube that does not move.

This raises a new problem, does a zero mass portal have momentum?

>>509277373
They hated him because he spoke the truth. Arguing about the "real" physics of imaginary portals, the basic concept of which defies and utterly confounds the application of real physics in the first place, is midwit nonsense. There isn't a "real" answer that can be derived from real-world facts - the answer is in fact derived from however you arbitrarily decide that the fantastical imaginary thing should work in the first place, and people only argue about it because they're unable to understand and articulate their own favored precepts sufficiently to differentiate them from the equally-poorly-defined precepts of others.

>>509278373
No retard. Hole in space. If I remove a bunch of air in front of something and replace it with the same amount of air behind what do you think happens?

>>509277791
Only 6 has a path between the kettle and the cup. All the others have lines blocking the liquid.

>>509278474
>closed system we know everything about.
what makes you a midwit is that you are to stupid to realize that is only true in your own. mind

>>509278488
physics is imaginary itself its just a way of measuring and quantifying the real world and you are just spewing reddit babble

>>509278469
The engines create the momentum

>>509269519
>>509269751
It's A. because the moving portal is essentially moving an entire space around itself. If you move space around a cube, the cube won't move the space does. The moving space won't magically transfer momentum to the cube, why would it?

>>509269298 (OP)
neither because the block continues to be supported by the platform even when 99% engulfed by the orange portal

>>509278292
In this situation, you’re arguing that the entire universe has a relative velocity to the entire universe. But relative velocity, again, is irrelevant. Relative velocity is not transferable. Relative velocity is not conserved. Relative velocity is literally just the velocity of two objects being compared. A door could be flying 100 mph down at me, but I don’t inherit its momentum when it crashes against a wall as I go through it. And this is true if it’s a house on the other side of the doorway. And it’d be true if it was a whole universe on the other side of the doorway.

>>509278488
We are given a set of rules, and we are debating what is consistent with those rules. I don't see what the issue is here.

>>509278576
It's not the real world it's a fucking video game you absolute faggot. We know every possible outcome because it is encoded. It is literally a solved problem. If you aren't trolling I'm legitimately impressed at how black you are

>>509278610
lmao says the guy defending one of the most reddit physics questions in history

>>509278614
Read the question again lol... the floor is keeping the jet stationary. No wind is being applied to the wings.

>>509278680
People argue about the questions real world application not the video game code you idiot.

>>509278346
kek

>>509278758
Lol kek we are done here. Thanks for playing

>>509269298 (OP)
B because momentum carries, you dumb idiot benchos son of basterd bitsh

>>509278482
The energy needs to be transferred to the cube after the platforms collide. The upper platform seems to be designed to retract inside the red sleeve part, but i think that's just to distract. We don't know if the upper platform would stop the instant it makes contact with the lower one, or crash full force against the lower platform without stopping, in which case the upper platform retracting wouldn't matter, the energy depicted as black lines would transfer to the cube and it would fly.

>>509278758
No wait I'm still having fun with how dumb you are... So it's not a real world so you can't argue the physics but you are correct because your interpretation of the fake physics is most gooder? Did I catch that?

>>509278921
I don't argue fake physics with people, that is the entire point of my post.

>>509278657
>I don't see what the issue is here.
the fact we don't actually have the set of rules?

>>509278812
Anon accidentally revealed his Jewish/Indian because he can't answer the problem right lol

>>509278989
what is fake about a portal having no mass retard

Imagine the piston stops half way through, the un-transported half of the cube is going to get sucked in at the same velocity as the piston before, which means A is the correct answer since the portal should not introduce new motion.

But then what if the blue-portal is bolted down? Then the orange portal cannot move into the cube, but the cube can be moved into the portal.

Maybe there's a buffer where it's like pushing on a rubber, the piston creates a force which is repulsed by the table, and this forces the cube to accellerate, which is allowed, and creates the momentum needed for B to be correct and that energy comes from the piston.

There's a shuddering when the portal moves into an object, because the portal must bounce off the blue portal to create the friction which causes the cube to move.

>>509278622
But why would space suddenly decide to create a solid cube inside of itself?

>>509272497
Why didn’t Buster Keaton go flying upwards? The ground was rising so fast from the point of view of the window.

>>509278989
So you admit you have literally nothing of interest to say? Are we back to where we started? Can't you just be fine with being a nigger and go away? Some of us were enjoying interesting hypotheticals until you made it all about you like a common darkie

>>509278812
Consult the gif.

>>509278655
>Relative velocity is not conserved.
It is though. For mass invariant systems, velocity directly indicates momentum. Momentum is said in game to be conserved, like they literally say that out loud. They don't say in what frame it is conserved, but the gameplay makes that clear.
>A door could be flying 100 mph down at me, but I don’t inherit its momentum when it crashes against a wall as I go through it.
From the perspective of the door, you and the wall have momentum. From your perspective, the door imparts momentum onto the wall when it crashes, so the wall gains momentum. From the wall's perspective, and subsequently the door's, you very much do gain momentum.

>>509279071
We do. We are told and shown that momentum is conserved, as well as which frames it is and isn't conserved in, which is enough to solve the problem.

>>509279158
Was trying to help you rise above your retarded reddit pop sci midwit arguments but seems you want to wallow in your filth, good bye

>>509279188
It's funny because this is actually the explanation and the retards here will ignore you because they are black and admitted they lack complex reasoning

>>509269298 (OP)
pretty funny how smart the guys picking A think they are.
>B is intuitive but look how smart I am.
All motion is relative. B is correct

Both portals have to move together. If you move one, the other has to move in the opposite way.

>>509279124
Quantum mechanics causing fluctuations or something like that idk bro.

>>509272136
Imagine you were the cube, standing stationary. In order for your claim to be true the portal would kill you. The top of your body would be gaining momentum from nothing while your feet are still planted on the ground. It would turn you into atomic paste. It has to be A because that is the only method that maintains integrity of the object in question. You could never be half in and half out of a portal in your world.

Although to be fair in the real world a portal could never be fixed to a moving object, so it’s a pointless discussion.

>>509279231
ok, tell me if portals have mass then

>>509278860
A is a better answer than B. Dropping a Hoola Hoop over a rock doesn't launch it into space.

After the portals are lit, to move one portal is to also move the other one. So an object with no motion passing through is revealed to have no motion, because the blue portal moves out of the way to reveal that the cube does not move as it passes through.

We did it 4chan, it's perfect.

>>509269751
The answer is B because because of Noether's theorem
Conservation of momentum exists because of translational symmetry and there's no difference if the portal moves toward the cube or the cube moves toward the portal.

>>509279262
Nigger. You are dumb. And gay. And wrong. I don't care what you think. Id be interested if you had something of value. But if your just going to be a nigger go away. You took an interesting topic and managed to do the entire scizo sadness circle. You went from sure you were correct to just mad crashing out because you know you are wrong. You are crashing bandicout and honestly I'm worried

>>509279146
>>509279188
>>509279264
Not an equivalent situation because, in the perspective of the viewer, both the input and output "portal" are in the same reference frame as each other.

Isn't this just Newtonian physics? Obviously A since you don't magically increase velocity of the cube. This isn't a race thing but rather a visualization and understanding of physics thing.

>>509279517
Like the only force acting on the cube at all times is gravity. Idk man I'm Chinese and not white

>>509279506
If I throw a hulahoop at you what happens... Besides you picking it up and dancing like a faggot?

>>509279407
The set up is more complex than throwing a hoola hop over a rock. The kinetic energy of the upper platform needs to go somewhere after colliding. I guess the only correct answer is both, A and B due to lack of data. Depending on how much energy there is it could be one or the other. But judging by how the movement is being depicted i just went for B, since it seems like it's gonna slam the lower platform with enough force to make the cube jump. Still no data though.

>>509274649
You’re dented! The platform slows down fast enough to stop and not carry any of the plinth in it. When the cube is out, neither portal is moving and the cube is affected purely by gravity as the mass of the portal and piston are now subject to an opposite force strong enough to stop the whole setup. The answer is A.

>>509279606
Is singapore a good country to establish a company at? Low taxes?

>>509279478
lmao just read the thread and look how many people are using physics to defend their answers A or B, both sides arguing endlessly unable to come to a real conclusion, everything I said is 100% True.

>>509279400
There is not enough information to tell this, and it doesn't make a difference on the outcome either way.

>>509279613
Once again, both sides of the hoop are in the same reference frame in this situation, so its not analogous to the original puzzle.

>>509279231
>momentum = relative velocity
Thats retarded and wrong. At what point do I gain momentum? Before or after I pass through the door? If momentum is related to relative velocity, then I instantaneously gain momentum by merit of an object having relative velocity with me. And all objects in the universe have a relative velocity to me, because it’s just the comparison of velocity between two objects.

You’re confusing two completely unrelated physics terms. Probably because you didn’t finish high school.

>>509279231
if they dont get it after this theres no point in explaining further

>>509279673
Yes. According to the kikes, Singapore is one of the easiest places to start a business. Why?

>>509279630
The platform collides into the platform you retard. What’s the cube have to do with it?

>>509279738
Idk I have nothing to live for except for my tech skills so I was thinking to just kikemax and freelance from singapore or some other tax heaven if I could setup a business there.

>>509279699
It doesn't matter how far you separate them it's just a doorway. Unless there is water or a massive pressure difference it doesn't matter.

>>509279699
>There is not enough information to tell this
So you are aware we do not have all the variables? good.
>it doesn't make a difference on the outcome either way.
a variable does not have an outcome on an equation? lol reflect on why you are a retard and stop posting faggot.

>>509279442
muh juwesh theorems

>>509279697
Kek just because half of people are wrong doesn't make the other half less right. Consensus is for retards. Like you

>>509279630
>The kinetic energy of the upper platform needs to go somewhere after colliding
There exist such a thing as conversion of energy where by momentum becomes heat and noise. Idk tho since I'm not white

>>509279274
>motion
Do you mean velocity or momentum? Motion isn’t relevant.

>>509269298 (OP)
Wait, this is a portal problem?? I always thought this was a manufacturing test, and the right part was showing how the smashed piece would go down a conveyer belt. Never made sense to me why it would suddenly take flight. What color does this make me, bros?

>>509280037
white

>>509279943
You will always be a midwit because you still don't understand that you are right in your own mind because you have determined fantasy physics to be a certain way while another person has done the same in a different way

>>509279965
I think maybe it's a misunderstandjng of what motion is that's causing the confusion. Motion is just energy and since no energy is transferred to the cube in a way that lets it defy gravity, A is the only answer. Someone send the pic to Chatgpt.

>>509279719
Momentum does not equal relative velocity, but it is proportional to it. Since every other factor is invariant in this case, momentum is directly known when velocity is known.
Momentum is literally defined as mass times velocity, and mass certainly isn't changing.

>At what point do I gain momentum?
From which perspective? The door's? You always had it. The wall's? When the door pushed on it. An outsider observer? You never had or get any.

>>509279869
>It doesn't matter how far you separate them it's just a doorway.
Different reference frames are not defined by distance, but by whether or not there is relative velocity between the two objects.

>>509279871
That variable is not a factor in this equation. Why should the portal mass be important?

>>509279264
You fucking retard. In the gif, both the input and output “portals” are moving in same direction at the same speed. It’s not equivalent at all

>>509269298 (OP)
A or B depends on the press's velocity, which we don't know.

>>509280071
Kek nope. Again. They are fantasy physics but have real testable consistent parameters. Meaning there is a correct answer. You're just crashing out

>>509280119
It doesn't matter how fast you move a hole you stupid faggot... It doesn't effect the things that go through it.

>>509271041
I think it has to be relative. I wonder about a portal that were stationary in space relative to some non-geosynchronous frame, eg Earths surface is moving 1000 kph relative to it. So the cube shoots out the other side. Except, from the perspective of me standing next to the cube, the cube is stationary and the portal speeds toward it at 1000 kph, same as the OP question basically.

Further, consider the cube exiting the portal. The leading edge appears and some time later the lagging edge, at which point the leading edge and all associated mass has moved an inch or whatever. So the leading edge must move as it exits the portal, with some momentum. How fast the leading edge moves that inch would presumably be down to the relative speed of the portal to the cube. So yea I actually think B is correct.

>>509280149
We absolutely know its velocity, it’s zero since there is no part of the thin platform sticking out of the blue portal. That piston would act as a rivet setter if it collided.

>>509280154
they are only testable in the game which some people deem incorrect. If the only point is to argue about what would happen in the game why is anyone making an argument when you could just show a clip from the game, why would people be talking about physics at all.

>>509280065
Outta sight.

You know people on /v/ only say B to troll and cause a funny thread, but theres actual fucking void brains on /pol/ saying its B unironically, holy fucking shit

>>509280279
Because this specific scenario doesn't happen in game.... Brrere

>>509280079
People here wrongly think that relative velocity has anything to do with momentum. There is nothing conserved or transferred for relative velocity. It’s literally just comparing the velocity of two objects. If B is correct, and relative velocity is somehow transferred, then B is NOT correct. Because the relative velocities are completely different than what is shown by merit of the cube being on an orbiting planet flying through space and the portals having different a vector orientation. The relative velocity is NOT merely the velocity of the platform coming down, but the comparison of the universe on each side of the door.

We did it 4chan, we got wilma, shaggy scoob and the gang together and we figured out the mystery of the Christmas caper.

>>509279818
The energy of the impact transfers into the cube. If it's enough it'll be B, if it's not it'll be A.

>>509280341
So then it's not testable is it?

>>509279517
It's just a scenario used to bait midwits into posting retarded responses while raging at each other. The equivalent of asking what would happen if you could travel into a black hole without be ripped apart, or travel faster than the speed of light.

>>509280386
No that's the point of us discussing the hypothetical based on the evidence presented in game ...

>>509280352
B and C look frighteningly similar to those of us who can envision the apple

>>509280262
>>509280262
Then how did the cube move at all?
Think relatively. Imagine the thin platform pushing the cube up through the portal. If it was going fast (high velocity) then it would launch the cube faster than gravity can accelerate it down. Slow (low velocity) then it will plop. The reason the cube keeps moving at all is because it has still velocity from the thin platform, which has stopped.
Now think back to the original frame of reference. You will see how the cube is being moved, meaning it has to have velocity. From the cube's perspective, it has velocity.

>>509280109
>momentum is proportional to relative velocity
Momentum is mass times acceleration. Relative velocity is velocity X - velocity Y. How are they related? The observation point is irrelevant.

You’re just confusing terms that you don’t understand the definitions of.

>>509280359
What impact? The portal is a HOLE. If I drop a bell on your head nothing happens to you if the bell is big enough to fit you. The piston is basically a circular shear and because there is no part of the plinth sticking out, the piston must stop before or on contact.

>>509280210
You god damn mongoloid, what don’t you get about this? ITS NOT EQUIVALENT TO A HOLE. With a hole, both sides will be moving at the same velocity and vector, and of fucking course it won’t effect the velocity of whatever is passing through it, the reference frame is the same for both sides. But now, take the perspective of the non-moving portal in the OP. You watch as a cube comes flying up at 10m/s. You can’t tell if the ground is pushing the cube up or if the portal is being pushed down. Either way, to the exiting portals reference point, the cube is moving at 10 m/s. Are you expecting me to believe your dumb monkey brain thinks that the cube would just stop for no fucking reason??? The outcome will be the same whether it’s the cube or portal moving

I think I'll change my answer to B.

>think of the portal-transition as gradual and not flip-flop (the parts of the cube go through the portal, the cube won't pop from one portal to another like in the game instantaneously)
>every "chunk" of the transitioned cube gets accelerated by the portal's momentum
>every "chunk" "pulls" all the molecules linked to it
>the cube accelerates

>>509280498
The amount of energy imparted by a slowing piston is what causes the plop, it doesn’t just slide

>>509280359
Brown hands typed this

>>509279188
>>509279146
wrong gif

>>509280523
Nigger the cube is resting on a platform that's gonna get slammed by another platform. If the piston stops before contact then the cube doesn't fucking move at all, and if it slams the platform where the cube is resting the cube will shoot through the portal after absorbing the energy of the impact, if it's enough.

>>509280394
Kekk

>>509280551
>still talking about relative velocity
Relative velocity is not conserved, transferred, nor does it have any energy. To send the cube flying through the blue portal, it requires energy. Where does the energy come from?

>>509280551
So you haven't played the game. That's fine. Just say that

>>509280561
>the portals momentum
What’s the mass of the portal? And when does it transfer its momentum to the cube and which parts of the cube and when?

>>509280394
Makes sense. We need a new war.

WHAT GAME IS THIS
- stupid person

>>509280467
A is right in that the cube remains at rest. B is right in that the portal and the cube leave each others presence.

But C is maximally right because the piston can go back and forth as much as it wants and the cube is not "sucked in" as suggested wrongly by B, and A is wrong in that the empty-space was not transported, for that empty space to be transported it must appear between the cube and the blue portal which makes A and B wrong.

C is right. The portals are entangled and if you move one, the other must move in an equal and opposite way.

>>509280574
We don't even know how the piston moves. Is it accelerating? Is it moving at a high or slow velocity?
Energy doesn't even matter here unless you want to figure it out, which you can't, because we don't have those details.
All we know is that the cube will move relative to its surroundings. How fast the piston goes will determine how fast this is in velocity and how high of an arch it will make vs gravity.
It's high school physics dude

>>509280279
We are not really talking about physics, but more about what is logically consistent with the set of rules defined as the in-game rules with the addendum of portals being allowed to have velocity relative to the earth. It just so happens that this game simulates several realistic physical phenomena. Any good argument does not draw from any axioms not given in-game, apart from our addendum.

You are the biggest fucking midwit I have seen in a long time.

>>509280329
Then show how what I said is logically inconsistent.

>>509280347
Again, momentum is velocity times a constant, that constant being mass. This means that velocity DIRECTLY determines momentum for such a mass invariant system.

Velocity is conserved for whichever systems momentum and mass are conserved. Mass are conserved for all systems present, yet momentum is on conserved from the portal's reference frame, meaning that velocity is conserved only from the portal's reference frame.

>>509280511
>Momentum is mass times acceleration.
That's force you're thinking of. Take 30 seconds to google it.
You know what, here you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force

And you were saying I didn't understand the terms I was using, lol.

>>509280618
this isnt the same scenario anon

>>509280772
This thread will die soon, make a new one and I'll respond faggot.

>>509280653
>resting on an upside down piston
Doublenigger the thing is glued down and B is impossible

>>509280551
When an airplane flies past you, you don’t gain momentum because someone looked out the window at you. If what you think to be true was reality, then the cube would be sprayed out at an atomic level as the portal passed over it. The first atoms that interacted with the portal would be accelerated at 10m/s while the base is still stationary and they would come flying out like a fire hose.

>>509280880
>When an airplane flies past you, you don’t gain momentum because someone looked out the window at you
kek

>>509280826
It must be accelerating faster than gravity to push the cube and slow to zero so it doesn’t shear the plinth and put any of it through. Else the cube is glued on and B is impossible anyway.

>>509280838
>drops hoola hoop on a ball sitting on the ground
>ball doesnt suddenly fly up into space for no reason
WOW THAT WAS SO HARD TO FIGURE OUT NIGGER

>>509280880
From the passenger's reference frame, you do indeed have quite a bit of momentum as they fly by.

>>509280987
This level of retardation must be on purpose kek.

>>509280826
>the floor has momentum when I’m falling towards it
lol okay

>>509280987
This is like the fourth time I've said this, but both sides of the hoop being in the same reference frame makes that NOT an analogous situation.

>>509280838
>>509280722

lmao you both are acting very smart saying this a totally solvable question and yet have different answers.

>>509269298 (OP)
Has to be B. The speed in which the object is going through the input portal has to be the speed in which the object passes through the exit portal as well, only the orientation of the vectors is changing. If this is not the case then the integrity of the object isn't getting maintained. You HAVE to be 50% of the way through portal B by the time you are covered by 50% of portal A, otherwise part of you doesn't exist. You cannot slowly appear through portal B while portal A is move fast because you have to exist somewhere.

>>509281069
english

>>509269298 (OP)
Nigger

>>509281069
What happens to the cube if the piston stops half way down it?

>>509280854
Except from the reference point of the exiting portal, it is. That’s why this discussion is so fucking retarded

>>509281142
all of this is correct but doesnt meen anything about taking off of the ground or not

>>509281188
hes going to say half the ''force'' is transferred to it lmao

>>509281188
The cube gets accelerated half the amount it would be if it moved completely through it.

>>509281188
The upper half of the cube, which now has a velocity, pulls the back half with it.

>>509281309
Can you give me a good reason why it would not be?

>>509279894
when a simple integral generates every previously known law of physics, it works
she also taught nazis, one of the good ones

>>509280838
>cube enters portal at relative velocity of 1
>cube atoms in new system now have a different relative velocity to cube atoms in old system
>this happens instantaneously
>this implies an acceleration of infinity
Do the math

Your premise implies that the entire universe has a relative velocity to the entire universe. The cube has a relative velocity to itself. It’s retarded

>>509281288
in the psy thing the ground is moving and in op picrel the ceiling is moving technically could be both idk

>>509281392
>The upper half of the cube, which now has a velocity, pulls the back half with it.
You don't have to do this in your head if you think it just transitions through the portals in planck-sized chunks, continuously. Every atom pulls the atoms around it.

>>509281103
Yes and I'm correct and he's a retard and you're a retard for not knowing that. How the fuck do people not understand most people are dumb

>>509280858
Just say “I’m retarded” and move on with your life

>>509280854
Yes it is. After going to the portal, the reference frame of the movement changes.
Buster Keaton stays in the space before portal, he's just peeking through it.

>>509281482
That's not an argument.

>>509281392
im not going to defend your position for you nigger

>>509281479
you're are correct in your own mind because you created a personal framework for the vague question and answered it, you still don't understand that, and that makes you a midwit

>>509281468
>every atom pulls the atoms around it
That pulling has force. In situation B, the acceleration is infinite. So the cube would cease to be a cube

>>509281524
An argument against what? You didn’t have any points you stupid nigger faggot retard

>>509281591
Why would it be infinite? The transition is gradual. In the game it's instantaneous though obviously, the cube pops from one side to another.

The energy of the impact of both platforms should by far exceed the gravity of the slope. The fucking cube should jump at the moment of impact.

>>509281063
At least you're trying to think, that's the best anyone can do

>>509281655
I said someone make a new thread.

>>509281392
So the infinite instantaneous acceleration conveniently neglects to completely disintegrate the cube at an atomic level?

>>509281440
Yes, acceleration is infinite. This is a consequence of portals being (presumably) an infinitely thin gateway.

We also have no reason to assume that this cube is compressible or deformable, which is also impossible, but not a part of the logical system we are dealing with here.

>the entire universe has a relative velocity to the entire universe
This is an unavoidable consequence of a gateway's output being in a different reference frame from its input.

Again, impossible situations, but they all stem from the impossible cause of portals existing in the first place. If that is to be treated as an axiom, then my arguments are consistent.

>The cube has a relative velocity to itself.
This is not the case, because nothing is transported through the cube's own reference frame.

>>509281659
If relative velocity is transferred, that means the atoms that first enter through the portal instantaneously have a velocity in the new spaced based on the relative velocity of the portal. The instantaneous nature of this implies an infinite acceleration. The atoms move in 0 seconds. Do the math on what happens to an object with infinite acceleration

>>509281794
I agree if the boundary truly is 2D

>>509281752
>Yes, acceleration is infinite. This is a consequence of portals being (presumably) an infinitely thin gateway.
>We also have no reason to assume that this cube is compressible or deformable, which is also impossible, but not a part of the logical system we are dealing with here.

wow wow wow look at all these head cannon assumption to answer a unsolvable fantasy question, exactly what I said would happen

>>509281468
>>509281711
You are applying atomic theory to a situation that quickly becomes much more absurd if that is assumed to apply.

Is the cube treated as an indestructible object, if so, it flies. If not, it breaks and the top flies.

>>509281547
I literally asked you to defend your own position.

>>509281591
There is no acceleration besides gravity after passing through portal B. The cube in respects to the input portal is moving at a constant velocity, the cube in respects to the output portal would have equal velocity but in another direction. Acceleration is also a change in direction but in respect to portals the object isn't changing direction it is merely changing its reference frame entirely.

>>509276572
Clearly a shulker box

>>509281752
If the entire universe has a relative velocity to itself, this means that the cube has a relative velocity to itself. If relative velocity is conserved, and the entire universe has a relative velocity to itself, then everything would be instantly undone the moment a portal is created due to the conservation of relative velocity.

>>509281451
That’s what I’m trying to say. It doesn’t matter which situation it is, because from the exit’s perspective both look the exact same.

>>509270167
You're brown.

>>509281907
I'm only doing that to come to a conclusion what would be the most logical outcome in the video game where the boundary is 2D and the cube pops from one side to another in an instant.

>>509281590
The difference is I will answer every question you have and tell you why you are a dumb faggot.. try it

>>509281992
ok, if I throw a base ball at the entry portal at 1000 miles per hour and half way into the entry portal begins to also move a 1000 miles per hour, why happens to the person who grabs the baseball at the exit portal?

>>509281907
alright fair enough, here is my position in pic related, do you need me to elaborate further?

>>509281941
The acceleration is relative to the portal B exit reference point. The cube has no momentum. As it passed through the portal, it has momentum instantly. Infinite acceleration

>>509282102
Are we talking instantaneous action or is there a moment of acceleration?

>>509281851
It is a fantasy question, but it is not unsolvable. Fiction situations can still be logically consistent. You should be looking at this as a logic puzzle, and not a physics puzzle.

I was not making headcanons with those two statements, I was simply stating that those factors that other people's arguments relied on cannot be assumed to be true.

It's still possible to consider both scenarios where one assumption was or wasn't true, as I did here: >>509281907

>>509281956
>If the entire universe has a relative velocity to itself, this means that the cube has a relative velocity to itself.
Alright, I can see how that is true, but that does not discount my main arguments. Portals naturally imply infinite recursion, the most simple example being placing one above the other and falling infinitely.

>>509281980
Well within that video game I think atomic theory can be safely discounted and the cube can be treated as infinitely rigid.

>>509282179
the entry portal intently starts to move at the same speed as the base ball once it is half way in

>>509282126
So a concession it is then. Glad to see you're on the side of B now!

>>509282258
Where is the catcher at this moment?

Dropping a cube through a portal on the ground is equivalent to dropping a portal onto a cube at least in respect to the exit portal. The only things that matter are the relative speed of the cube and portal which gets its frame of reference transformed to the exit portal. The velocity gets preserved but the frame of reference shifts which effectively changes the direction of velocity to match the orientation of the exit portal.

>>509282313
in front of the exit porta

is this a videogoyim thread?
i didnt know whites still played those
i thought we were all doing the other thing

>>509282330
Pink mist. Next

>>509282358
so the ball will just sit hovering in the exit portal until some one touches it and the instantly explode?