Which way white man?

bfags = retarded

not this shit again

these threads are always 99% people who don't even comprehend what the question being asked of them is, they frankly probably can't even visualize it, yet they randomly pick a side that "feels" "smarter" and latch onto it as a way of boosting their ego to feel like they actually have a say in what they perceive to be an intellectual discussion

Imagine if instead of a portal there was simply a big, hollow hole in the moving surface. Just like how the hole passing by the cube doesnt transfer its speed to it, the portal will not transfer the surface's speed to the cube.

>standing in an enclosed room, only hole out is a portal on the floor
>other portal is on a piston that slams down
Your "frame of reference" would imply that the whole room is falling down. B fags would have you believe you get thrown into the air from metres away because the portal transferred the velocity to inside the room

B

has to be A because there is no force being acted on you, if a house with a open door fell on you you dont go shooting through the house, you just stand there, if the platform you were standing on was flying up then your inertia would transfer.
This shit isnt hard to understand.

>>716218774 (OP)
Imagine if the screwed down table that the cube was on was small enough to to go through the portal, and the piston slams into the ground. When the piston stops, what happens to the cube on the other side resting on the table?

>>716222396
>there is no force being acted on you
Apply this to stationary portals and realize that they still change your velocity or potential energy.

>>716218774 (OP)
B is the right answer as the only thing relevant here is the relative velocity between object and portal.

Games that implement portals usually don't do it that way though - each object has specific velocity relative to universal center so if it's [0 0 0] the cube will plop down as shown in A.

>>716218774 (OP)
It should normally be B, but Cave Johnson forced his engineers to make it A instead.

>>716218774 (OP)
okay but what happens if you do this??

>>716228754
The portals are wormhles. It is reasonable to assume that they reqire energy, and that moving them also requires energy. It is also reasonable to assume that the energy required to move them is in some way proportional to the difficulty posed by material in the way. What I'm saying is that even though the portals would not be affected by traditional Newtonian physics, movng them together woul make the cube crush against itself, which should in some way affect the platforms' ability to move closer together. If the hydraulics are strong enough, or if htere is no such counterforce, the cube would crush itself, possibly explosivly, until whatever remains of it would fit between whatever small gaps remain between the portals. If there is no such gap, big old explosion, possibly nucear fuson of the composing materials.

>>716227959
Most games that implement portals don't have them move within the game's default reference frame. Meaning A and B end up having the same outcome.

Even Portal 2 which had moving portals only implemented them in a really barebones way because it was only for one laser redirection puzzle and even disables cubes passing through the portal.

Games that actually do implement moving portals properly end up doing B because you very quickly realise it has to work that way.