Thread 718831725

How is B even possible?

I'm convinced people who believe in B don't put any thought into how it would make sense because they struggle with visualizing or structuring the situation in their head and just go on "vibes", like "idk man feels right"
Like that tilted water bottle test that people fail because drawing the water climb up the glass "feels right" as opposed to logically thinking and imagining that it'd be parallel to the ground

>>718831807
this is proven with how they argue
A fags understand portals are holes in reality, so the argument is
>thing go through hole doesn't go zoom really fast
B fags either use a drawing where some A fag gets hurt, or repeat
>SPEEDY THING GO IN SPEEDY THING COME OUT SPEEDY THING GO IN SPEEDY THING COME OUT SPEEDY THING GO IN SPEEDY THING COME OUT SPEEDY THING GO IN SPEEDY THING COME OUT
without knowing what it means or why it doesn't translate to
>still thing go in to speedy hole, still thing jump really far?

they would be crushed or stretched

I have no idea what B is even supposed to be because the drawing is so shit. It looks like the guy in the chair is flying up because the wind from the movement is pushing him but that's so retarded it can't possibly have been the intention.

>>718831903
have you tried lurking more, anon?

i have yet to see a compelling B argument that isn't just some comic with a guy gets impaled or has a dildo shoved up his ass or something because the artist couldn't visualize the scenario in their head and thought A says that things stop moving when they go through a portal

>>718831725 (OP)
It's A, but the argument for B is that the frame of observation under the theory of relativity would mean that accelerating into the doorway, and the doorway accelerating into you are indistinguishable for the purposes of determining the outcome, therefore the outcome would need to be consistent over both variations.
What they fail to understand is that it's not two objects approaching each other, it's spacetime itself being contorted in a manner that displaces the object in question, so it would result in A.

>>718831725 (OP)
Why did the door in example B stop moving?

>>718831903
Nice self report, retard

>>718831807
>>718831883
It's literally the other way around. B requires you to visualise what actually happens and realise that the cube is moving when it comes out. A clings to rules of thumb regarding momentum without being able to adapt them to a situation they've never encountered. This is especially obvious from the fact that their only refutation of B is the same strawman shown in the OP, in endless variations, whereas B is able to refute A easily with multiple different examples that require you to actually think about what's happening.

>>718832157
Anon, nobody ever said the cube will stop moving, A people say it won't gain momentum
It keeps moving because the hole it's going through is moving, and yes it'll move faster if the hole is moving faster because it's going faster relative TO the hole
But it won't shoot out at mach speed just cause the hole sped up

>>718831980
The argument is that motion is relative, the cube is in motion relative to the portal and therefore the Earth, and depending on your frame of reference B is already what's shown in the game. Speedy thing in, speedy thing out. Afriends rely on "objective, universal momentum" which is a misconception of how momentum works, and inevitably leads to inconsistencies if you try to apply it to moving portals in other scenarios.

>>718832224
No, anon, A says the cube doesn't move "because it has no momentum"
B says exactly what you say A is
And your version of B is a strawman

There's nothing more to discuss that hasn't been discussed to death. Unless the cube is moving, it doesn't suddenly have momentum going through what is essentially a hole in the wall. You lost. Get over it.

I have never seen an Afag argue in good faith while Bchads always represents the model as it's described.

>>718832027
>What they fail to understand is that it's not two objects approaching each other, it's spacetime itself being contorted in a manner that displaces the object in question, so it would result in A.
Meaningless technobabble. This is just assuming A and then handwaving the explanation with some plausible-sounding jargon. Nothing about portals suggests this to be the case except that you want it to be A.

>>718832286
so this is what we moved to? Bfags implying they actually believe A all along but still call it B because they slowly realized it's the correct option but still gonna save face?

>>718832507
KEK

>>718832441
So this is what we've moved to? Afags implying they actually believe B all along but still call it A?
You acknowledge the dildo is moving. Now let's imagine it goes all the way through. Why would it stop?
Afags can't answer this which us why they tend not to admit it moves in the first place and instead bend into pretzels to try to describe motion without making it seem like motion.

>>718831725 (OP)
Is this bait or do Afags really think this is an accurate representation of the situation?

>>718832590
It would stop because it has no momentum
You shove a dildo through a glory hole, when it gets to the end does it drop on the floor, or keep flying?
>It will if I toss it-
Ah, but that's added momentum that wasn't there before

>>718832636
Impossible to tell because if any of them are genuine they're still just as disingenuous as the trolls

>>718832664
>It would stop because it has no momentum
Literally contradicting yourself. If it *stops*, it had to have been in motion before, and you are describing a change in momentum.
So this is the part where, indeed, you either start to deny it moves altogether, and we get to "the dildo can't penetrate me because it's not moving and has no momentum" or you recognise that it does move and follow that to the only logical conclusion left, B

>>718832406
>Meaningless technobabble
Just because you don't understand what was said doesn't mean it has no meaning.

>This is just assuming A
I'm "assuming" A as everything we know about the portal technology states that it functions as a direct window across space time between two points. Because of this fact, any interaction the portal has with an object should be considered on the basis of the object being thrown, moved, placed through essentially a window, or door.
If this is the case, then we should operate on the assumption that an object that is encapsulated by the portal would function the same way, hence the constant "hoop" examples you see (this is the wrong way to perceive what is happening, but I digress).

>Nothing about portals suggests this to be the case except that you want it to be A.
Have you played portal? The portals obviously act as intersected space time.

>>718832329
The cube will move depending on the position of the exit portal because the cube is subject to gravity, and if that exit position is in the ceiling for example the cube will accelerate like any falling object but it will not be launched like a cannonball because nothing is launching it.

Think about it for a moment. If you followed the extreme velocity argument having portals open would accelerate the air passing through, causing insanely strong streams of air like an industrial fan or something.

>>718832659
wind resistance

>>718832830
>Just because you don't understand what was said doesn't mean it has no meaning.
But you don't even understand what you're saying.
>Because of this fact, any interaction the portal has with an object should be considered on the basis of the object being thrown, moved, placed through essentially a window, or door.
Which, combined with moving portals, implies B. Something that comes out of a hole won't just stop. Even if, from a different perspective, it could have been said to be "stationary". It isn't, relative to the hole (window/doorway/hula hoop/whatever)

>>718832659
water (in the air) resistance

>>718832868
>If you followed the extreme velocity argument having portals open would accelerate the air passing through, causing insanely strong streams of air like an industrial fan or something.
And why wouldn't that happen, if you moved the portal through the air at high speeds? Where else would the air go? B only states the air would come out as quickly as it entered. So yes, if you've got one portal on front of a train, someone on the other side will feel a blast of wind as if he was standing in the open on a train. What else could happen?

>>718832824
>we get to "the dildo can't penetrate me because it's not moving and has no momentum"
>NOOO BUT THAT'S A STRAWMAN I NEVER SAID THAT
>proceeds to say it

>>718832998
this would work. only problem is your arms are too weak.

>>718831725 (OP)
B occurs if that small amount of space that consists of the doorframe was actually a very long tunnel that transferred you across any discrete distance at [infinitely-fast-tunnel-speed], the idea is that if that tunnel is moving towards you then you actually traverse that tunnel at [infinitely-fast-tunnel-speed] + [tunnel-moving-toward-you-speed] and that without that magical transporation tunnel regulating your transition speed back to [tunnel-moving-toward-you-speed] when you exit, you'll keep the extra.

I still think it's A.

>>718833076
You said it was a strawman. I said that if you say the dildo is moving then it implies B. You say it moves but then stops, which makes no sense, and does logically lead to the dildo having no penetrative power. You're unable to follow the logic

>>718831725 (OP)
>this pic
The doorway is effectively the entrance and exit portals back to back, moving together with zero relative movement between them. The expected result is A.
>original
The entrance portal is moving, the exit portal is fixed. Any object that enters the portal must inherit velocity equal to this relative movement between the two portals (or else encountering the portal threshold would be like hitting a wall). The expected result is B.

>>718832027
>What they fail to understand is that it's not two objects approaching each other, it's spacetime itself being contorted in a manner that displaces the object in question
Bingo.
B is only true in a universe in which objects moving through spacetime arbitrarily gain or lose momentum at arbitrary points in spacetime—complete nonsense.

>>718833029
piss would fall straight down and not at an arch

The cube wasn’t moving before => the cube isn’t moving after due to conservation of momentum. Learn physics retards
>inb4 how can it fall????!!!!! :O
Due to gravity. It was acting on the cube before but didn’t have any effect because the cube was on a horizontal surface which was pushing back on the cube with an equal and opposite force, but did after because the surface was on an incline

>>718831725 (OP)
in the case of B, theoretically, if given enough momentum, the portal falling onto the tree should be able to rip the tree from the ground

>>718833141
B occurs because from the PoV of the other end it's you moving toward the portal not the other way around. The problem arises from treating the two portals as one object in two places.

>>718833208
I think B faggots don't think of portals as wormholes somehow despite it being the most reasonable explanation of them.

>>718833318
Was the falling portal moving towards the cube?

After many long years of observing these threads, I've come to the conclusion on how peoples views are formed.

It's Common Sense vs Education.

The A-fag follows common sense. "Neither the person nor the destination are moving, thus there is no movement. It's like a hola hoop passing around your body." That is the beginning and the end of it to the A-fag.

The B-fag has been taught in relativity, a basic education in physics. "All things are moving - in spin, in orbit, hurling through the galaxy, by how much doesn't matter - only the relative movement between the person and the destination. Whether you are moving quickly toward it or it is moving quickly toward you is the same." Because it's a physical phenomenon, the principles persist through all manner of other examples that no longer work with A, like the person is on a train, or flying through space at 1000m/s and the approaching portal is moving 990m/s, and so forth.

Understanding relativity takes an education, not a basic common sense understanding of movement, so without that, the two sides can never agree.

>>718833075
Yes, but you're moving the entrance portal through air. Air is obviously going to be pushed by more air. But a cube resting on the floor will not be pushed by anything if the entrance portal slams down on it from above, the floor is too wide to enter the portal and force the cube out of its way regardless of the speed.

>>718833318
portals dont preserve momentum relative to the environment, though

>>718833395
Wouldn't hopping through a portal be lethal if you unavoidably exited with the force of earth's rotation or the drift of the galaxy etc.?

If B was true it would rip the object apart at the atomic level, because the moment it starts to cross the portal the top atoms would rip loose while the rest is still stationary.

Hey Bfags.

What if the portal stops moving halfway into absorbing the cube?

>>718831807
I think B-elievers think the portal sends air through the portal so the air will push you as it violently enters this new area like a balloon type shit.
So the faster the portal moves the more air will be forced through the small opening = sends you flying

>>718833395
Go back to school, you obviously didn't learn enough

>>718833642
Yes, that's why you aren't expected to go through a moving portal because if it's going too fast it will spaghettify you.

I personally think that even if one is an A-fag, it can still be worked out that the object must move.

Premise
>If a stack of cardboard boxes were flush against the exit portal, the person entering would smack into them and send the boxes flying.
Everyone agrees to this, A and B, no exceptions.

Thus, everyone agrees
>Objects in the destination can be moved by an object entering it, even if the object entering it "doesn't have momentum."
If you're a B-fag, that's innate, and if you're an A-fag, it's specifically "only if directly displaced by the entering object."

Now to the A-fags, take a snapshot in time when the person is halfway through the portal. The front half of his body is part of the destination. It is a proverbial stack of cardboard boxes flush against the portal. The back half of his body has to push the front half forward to make room for itself to enter, adding momentum to it. When 99% of the body is through, the last 1% still has to push the rest forward to make room. Even if you assume there is no innate momentum, just like how a stack of cardboard boxes must be moved by arrival, so must the molecules already arrived be moved by the arriving molecules.

This is a different take from how a B-fag understands why it happens, but it's the same result regardless.

>>718833395
What if I'm thoroughly educated in physics and relativity and think it's still A?

>>718833495
In portal 2 you visit the moon and don't instantly get flung off into space at 2000mph so the process of traveling to a new location updates your relative motion in the universe to the surface at that new location. This is primarily why B is disproven in the game.

>>718833395
If your "education" conflicts with common sense of observable reality, you might need to re-evaluate your theorems.

>>718833642
It wouldn't, because under B's model what matters is the relative entrance and exit velocity into and out of the portal. Which will be the same. You are not being ripped apart by sudden acceleration, compressed by sudden deceleration, or made subject to torque or sheer.

>>718833495
If you're an A-fag, yes, because you care about absolute movement (presumed to be none in A, but played around with with other examples), but B only cares about the relative motion between the body and the portal, nothing else.

>>718831725 (OP)
melanin levels

>>718833824
If you were thoroughly educated in physics you'd understand this whole debate is pointless because portals as depicted in Portal have no basis in reality.

>>718833897
>>718833734

>>718833897
So what would happen if the portal stops around your neck? According to B your head would accelerate, but your body would remain still.

>>718833371
Yes the portal was moving. The cube wasn’t.
>>718833425
Portals have no definite properties because they aren’t real, they’re fictional creations. According to Portal the game, portals do preserve momentum.

Maybe there’s your answer. Which one it is depends on the fictional world you’re in and the laws of physics it follows. Maybe one fictional world has portals which, due to “quantum tunnelling” or some crap, the portal causes acceleration in the cube. We won’t know for certain until we invent portals in the real world.

B is true.
Source: Me
I refuse to elaborate further
/thread

>>718833991
So object A can move towards object B without object B moving towards object A?

>>718833808
Anon... you just glued a plank of plywood to the hula hoop and said that the act of me bashing you over the head with it repetitively as i try to pass you through the hula hoop is evidence that I'm imparting force upon you to pass through the hula hoop faster.

>>718833947
Portals have fictional rules and we're arguing fictional physics.

>>718833991
Portals ingame preserve momentum of the object itself in relation to the portal, but do not preserve momentum in relation between the surfaces of both portals. You visit the moon with a portal and do not preserve relative momentum of the moon vs the earth.

>>718833734
The part that enters the portal pulls the rest of the cube along with it through the portal.

>>718833395
>i think it's B therefore that makes me smart and educated
piss your pants smart boy

>>718833829
Untrue. "Cold" is something that only exists in common sense. You must be taught "There is no such thing as cold, only less heat." Nothing can generate cold, only move heat away. You can't make things get colder and colder forever, like you can make things hotter and hotter forever. There's a minimum which is just no heat. Without an education, that understanding is completely foreign to common sense.

>>718833395
>should I rely on common sense to conclude what happens in a fictional scenario based on the premise of a vudeo game universe that has absolutely no relation to real world laws of physics?
>nah, I'm going to apply muh big brain real world education of physics to explain how something that breaks laws of physics work
Peak midwit moment.

>>718833824
>What if I'm thoroughly educated in physics and relativity and think it's still A?
You'd be correct, in this case.

As this particular picture is purposely made out to have case B make no sense while what it paints as case A is actually case B in disguise.

The depiction of case A in the OP is one where the relative entrance and exit velocities are the same as the gate passes over you while you sit still in the chair. Because the gate models both the entrance and exit of the portal, BOTH ends move with the same velocity, which means if you enter it at N mph, you exit it at N mph, relative to the gate - i.e. the entrance and exit to the portal.

This is actually the traditional case B: conservation of force.

If case A in this picture would ACTUALLY depict the principles of the traditional case A, then the stick figure sitting in the chair would be dragged backwards with the gate. You would lose your relative velocity compared to the entrance when going out the exit, meaning if you enter at N mph, you would exit at 0 mph and would 'stick to the back' of the gate which is continuing to move.

>>718834032
Correct

>>718834069
lmao

>>718834057
>you just glued a plank of plywood to the hula hoop
That's a total misrepresentation, completely disingenuous.

>>718833642
Best post in the thread so far

>>718834137
Anon all the theorising in the world isn't worth shit if it doesn't result in consistently replicable results. Why do you think the replication crisis is a thing? You'd understand this if you were actually even the slightest bit educated instead of being a LARPing dropout.

>>718834158
Thank you for your elaboration.

>>718834267
Motion relativity doesn't suffer a replication crisis. Taking this stance against it isn't doing you any favors when insulting others.

>>718833261
why do you think that?
The blue portal is angled. The vector of the piss at the moment of entering the orange portal is nearly perpendicular. When it exits the orange portal, that piss will be accelerated via gravity, but its initial velocity would have it flying mostly perpendicular to the orange portal.

and so it would infact work like that anons pic depicts.

>>718834282
You’re welcome anon :D

>>718831725 (OP)
looking at picrel, i honestly think that the chair could move *A BIT* purely because of air movement/pressure/whatever tf idk physics that well

When the cube goes through the portal, the difference in gravity will pull it through the portal, giving it momentum.

The portal moves and you enter it, then by alternating the frame of reference you're moving through it. All frames of reference with zero acceleration are in a state of constant rectilinear motion (straight-line motion) with respect to one another, as by newtons first law. but then you're exiting the portal with momentum you didn't receive from anything, which is impossible due to conservation laws. therefore the whole premise is invalid by contradiction. Now if you wanna say "duh it's a game thought experiment stop applying real physics to it" then what the fuck is this conversation about? you're just speculating what the game engine physics will permit at that point. in which case it's a coin toss because both scenarios violate a fundamental law lmao. fuck it I'll say B is less invalid because violating inertial frames is more absurd than momentum from an intuitive standpoint.

>>718833395
>B-fag has been taught in relativity
LOL they watched a youtube video about it a few years ago since then they've just kept repeating the word relativity over and over again.

>>718834153
>A is actually B

what the fuck stop it right now this is not an allowed answer for this question you are ruining the game.

>>718831883
>B fags either use a drawing where some A fag gets hurt, or repeat
Bchads are intelligent enough to understand that drawing their opponent as a basedjak and themselves as chad will always be the highest level argument one can make.

>>718834560
You're taught relativity in high school physics.If your only introduction to it was youtube, then sorry about your disability, and sorry for laughing.

>>718832329
>No, anon, A says the cube doesn't move "because it has no momentum"
No it doesn't you're too stupid to even understand the two positions.

>>718834730
>Stationary thing get a hola hoop thrown around it. It remains stationary.

As a B-fag, I do find an ironic humor in the fact that game coding does in fact only track object momentum in game units to be preserved by the portal, which is 0 at rest. A is the technical answer if created within the game, since a stationary object has 0m/s in game units. The game's model also presumes that the Earth has an absolute momentum of 0 itself, and the Moon is also stationary (0m/s in game units), conferring no momentum to the player standing on it.

I'm a B only in the case of premise of the question, not the game coding.

>>718835130
>A is the technical answer if created within the game
Stationary objects cannot pass through a portal, which you can verify within the game.

>>718835243
Amusing. The 0 movement of the object must fuck with the formula, meaning 0 movement through the portal.

>>718834805
except there's also scripting on the portals to cause very subtle pushout collision. B fags mistake this as evidence things would shot out the other side if the portal is moving. but in reality this is just a bit of code so objects don't get stuck in portals and jitter.
Portals are not programed like B in the game. they are A.

>>718835358
Pretty sure the entire argument is based on real physics, because in game the entire discussion is irrelevant, since portals disappear on moving surfaces.

>>718835015
both are wrong.
the object is not moving at all relative to the portal. so it would just fall out.

>>718833208
>They STILL don't understand frames of reference
Somebody post the gif of the lab within a platform within a moving city and the scientist that's standing still from one frame of reference and moving from another

>>718831725 (OP)
>original scenario depicts one portal moving and one portal being stationary
>this "clever analogue" depicts both sides moving at the same time
>this somehow disproves the original B arguments
I wonder how an A-fag would feel if he didn't have breakfast this morning.

>>718835504
>human being is physical touching the car
>the cube isnt' physical touching the portal

bfags changing the problem to suit their solution

again

>>718831807
In reality it would be B because of the shockwave from the portal hitting the ground

>>718835504
Not even remotely similar retard. The portal is heading towards you without any sideway movement

>>718835571
>the object is not moving at all relative to the portal
So how does it pass the portal?

>>718835015
This is good but to avoid strawmanning the A position, you need to reflect the truck velocity according to the rotation of the portals like you do with normal stationary portals. So the box would still fly impossibly through the block, but diagonally up and to the right instead of straight right.

>>718835571
>the object is not moving at all relative to the portal.
What are you talking about? The portal is moving quickly to it, meaning it has significant relative movement with the portal. Relative movement is:
>Whether I am moving 5m/s toward a stationary object or an object is moving 5m/s toward a stationary me, our relative movement is 5m/s to each other in both cases.

>>718835571
anon the object is moving because it's in a truck

>>718832224
I would never get that close to a dildo regardless of what's going on so you're wrong.

The cube is not moving at all relative to the BLUE portal though.

>>718835649
>>718835656
physically touch grass (without actually "moving" your arm)

>>718832027
Spacetime doesn't real. So that makes it B.

>>718835841
>bfag changes the problem to suit their solution
>again again

>>718835883
When your theory falls apart the second you change one variable, it's not a very good theory.

>>718835820
Assuming you are >>718835571 and you're talking about >>718835015, the cube still has significant relative movement to the blue portal because the cube is in a fast moving truck and the blue portal is not.

>>718835883
>90 IQlet can't answer a hypothetical and abstract its observations to the problem at hand
I'm sorry for your parents

>>718835949
>haha your answer is wrong when i change how the problem works

wow man you sure are smart

>>718835841
see >>718833642

>>718835883
>A falls apart with examination
>B is consistent through examination
lol

>>718833642
>>718836010
Do your limbs rip off when you're pushing in the chest by a hand?

>How would you have felt if you didn't have breakfast yesterday?
>Afags: But I did have breakfast. I don't understand the question.

Why can't bfags argue honestly?

>>718836129
>when you're pushing in the chest by a hand?
wut?

>>718836171
>he said, in a thread whose OP presents a completely different scenario to what is conventionally argued

>>718835620
This has nothing to do with frames of reference. A portal/wormhole is a topological feature of spacetime; nothing moves relative to it.

>>718831883
Imagine a cube which is only 3 atoms thick
>First layer goes through the portal
>Second layer goes through the portal, pushing the first layer out of the way
>3rd layer comes through the portal, pushing the second
At what speed is the cube being pushed out of the portal? At the same speed the piston is moving
Afags are retarded, there is no scenario where it is A. The only possible scenario other than B is that the second layer phases into the first layer and causes nuclear fusion, or a black hole or some shit.

>>718833642
Try drawing a picture of two frames if you want to understand why that doesn't happen. People post this argument in every thread, but no one has ever been willing to do this because they don't actually believe their own argument.

>>718836378
>"Topological feature of spacetime"
It can have movement relative to other "topological features of spacetime", which enter it at different relative speeds, and exit it at the same relative speeds.

>>718836378
It absolutely does, though, whether that be an object moving through a wormhole or that be the wormhole (and its associated spacetime) moving itself.

>>718833642
That depends on the strength of the object and speed of the piston

>>718833172
>The doorway is effectively the entrance and exit portals back to back, moving together with zero relative movement between them. The expected result is A.
Yes, that's how the game that this entire meme is based on operates

>>718836219
pushed*
An obvious typo. Are you seriously going to act that dull? Should I shoot back
>wut
What?

>>718836478
>It can have movement relative to other "topological features of spacetime",
No it can't, spacetime doesn't "move"; it's the substrate on/in which movement occurs.
Look at the wormhole depicted here >>718833208
If object 1 were to remain stationary, and wormhole (b) were to pass over it (from right to left), why should 1 gain or lose any momentum? Now extend that question to ANY point in spacetime; because wormhole (b) is ultimately just like any other point in spacetime. This has nothing to do with frames of reference.

>>718836651
In that case, how would it dispace the molecules of air already present at the exit portal? Could it be impacting a magical force on them?

>>718836651
Wouldn't the logical conclusion of that be that a black hole would form as each part of object 1 is transported into the same point of space as the wormhole moves across it? A is still impossible.

>>718836651
>why should 1 gain or lose any momentum?
Relative to...?

>>718836807
Because the portal is moving over it, stupid

>>718836395
>At what speed is the cube being pushed out of the portal?
You mean "at what speed is the hole reducing the distance between two points to zero"

Folding space doesn't give objects momentum, as far as I'm aware

A fags BTFO!

>>718836917
It doesn't matter. The question is why object 1 should gain or lose any momentum just by virtue of existing at an arbitrary point in spacetime.

>>718837048
so how does it displace away the air? There used to be air where the cube now is

>>718837113
I am not an A fag but this is a different situation tho.

>>718837149
Perhaps you should look up what strong and weak forces are

>>718831883
I find it's
A
>portals are holes in reality so the two planes are connected, there's no in or out it's just the universe folding on itself
B
>the portals are just flat planes don't think too hard about that, just look at it from the side so you see it "coming out" and don't think of it as a constant connection, nothing exists before it's seen on my side of the portal.

B fags = special relativity
A fags = general relativity
This is the impression I've got from the debate over the years

>>718836395
>At what speed is the cube being pushed out of the portal?
at the same speed the atoms are moving - zero,

>>718836157
>Bfags: I read somewhere the answer is "cold".

>>718836651
Questions for you. If someone stacked two very light, empty cardboard boxes in front of the exit portal,
>Do you think the boxes move when the cube comes through?
>If no, what happens?
>If yes, what force moved them?
>What is the source of that force
>What happens to that force if there are no boxes?

>>718837442
the boxes get shifted slightly because the cube doesn't get sent out at mach3. maybe they topple over if the cube is big enough.

>>718835960
I'm going with mars.

>>718837113
this would make sense if the platform with the box was moving in the original, but it wasn't you fucking dumbass

>>718837537
>If yes, what force moved them?
>What is the source of that force?
>What happens to that force if there are no boxes?

>>718837048
That is the first step of what he is saying. If the folded space does not give momentum and cause things to move, then the thing will not move. The next step is that if the thing does not move, the folded space will reduce the distance between two points of the material, which creates a force that will push the material out of the portal. It would be the material itself that causes the momentum. For some reason when people say that the cube doesn't move in A, they just accept that the cube actually will move and then stop rather than that it actually simply won't move.

>>718837442
The cube falls from the portal due to gravity and lightly nudges the boxes.
Are A fags really this dumb?

>>718837442
Does the entrance portal look the same as in the usual question?

>>718834057
the problem with arguing fictional physics here is that there are scenarios where B is right and scenarios where A is right because the concept itself is a paradox in how our universe works (as we know it) and requires additional math on the order of relativity (not relativity itself) to explain and reconcile the paradox problem.

I try to say this every time I see one of these threads but nobody listens. The entire question is a trick question.

Nobody here is good enough with math to answer and solve these problems with portals/wormholes, and it may not even be solvable.

Intuitively, there probably needs to be some kind of energy transfer and time dilation involved, but that's the extend of what I want to bother about with this problem.

>>718831883
B mostly boils down to misrepresenting A scenarios, attributing what should be A conclusions to B and attempting to bait out a description of movement because the second that is mentioned it's treated as a concession that a force is being applied to the cube to cause motion

I have no horse in this race but these threads crack me up everytime. Thanks niggas

Question for Bfags, if the piston were to stop suddenly, would the cube jump up from its platform as it's perceived momentum carries it upwards?

>>718831725 (OP)
C is possible in Nortubel

>>718837652
I think you meant B fags anon

>>718837968
The cube falls over the lip of the portal due to gravity and lightly touches the boxes.

>>718835015
>>718835454
Examples like these just kill A completely and never get any responses except the random guy who doesn't understand it.
We even know for a fact that B is the canon answer to these because that's what we seen in the moon scene.
>>718837739
In what scenario is A right while B leads to a paradox?

>>718831725 (OP)
depends in the portal field can absorb kinetic energy and/or/if it transfers it when it touches something. in the portal universe, this is answered

>>718833104
any lift generated by the magnets is negated by your body pushing against the sheet

>>718838093
>that's what we seen in the moon scene
No it am aint

>>718838093
Those examples only "kill" A because they misrepresent the position

>>718837902
The mass on the exit side would have its entrance velocity, which pulls on the rest to follow. This would distribute the total momentum to a fraction of the entrance velocity. Whether that's enough to lift or not depends on the entrance speed and mass divisions.

>>718838179
It is though. The portal changes Chell's speed as she goes through the portal.

>>718833806
portals are always moving thanks to the earth's rotation b-fag

>>718838091
So
>No, the boxes don't move.
>What happens is the cube only enters 2 inches into the portal and hard stops the 10m/s piston arm once the cube lightly touches the boxes.
?

>>718838220
What's the position and how is it misrepresented?

>>718838220
Feel free to correct them.

>>718835015
The cube would give the classic A *plop*
>>718835454
This supposed B is what A states with a stupid justification about frames of reference tacked on to try to turn it around

>>718838363
>The cube would give the classic A *plop*
Why?

>>718838326
>>No, the boxes don't move.
No? The cube falls from the lip of the portal due to gravity and lightly touches the boxes, slightly moving them

>>718835758
if the piston is affixed to the truck, the box just plops out the other side
if the piston is falling perpendicular to the ground, then the box's inertial will pre-empt it from making out the other side of the portal, then it will start spinning and hit one of the edges of the portal at the van very hard (which depends on whether it's rotated 180°)

Stationary object upon entering moving portal behaves as if everything beyond the portal has momentum. If object entering the portal has no momentum, the immediate problem is all the air entering the portal forming a wall.

>>718838345
That portals are wormholes whose "movement" is entirely illusory

>>718838415
I don't understand what you're saying. Draw it, or rephrase it significantly.

Afags are flat earthers, their "model" doesn't work otherwise.

>>718838389
For the same reason that it would in the original scenario. Putting the whole thing into the back of a truck changes nothing.

>>718838491
How does this change the scenario? What is the actual A answer and why?

>>718838493
Imagine a cube balancing on a 2-dimensional window frame before two empty boxes. Then imagine gravity pulling the box to the ground, tumbling out of the window, and lightly nudging the boxes.
This really isn't difficult to understand.

>>718838574
State the reason.

>>718838649
See >>718836651

>>718838171
donald trump is still your president you fucking cuck

Afags voted trump and are why consoles went up in price and videogames cost $80 (they voted for FASCIST tariffs)

>>718831725 (OP)
Didn't somebody reconstruct the A/B issue in the actual game with a custom map?

>>718838654
>Imagine a cube balancing
This is where you lose me. The piston's portal envelops the cube, slamming down on the platform at 10 meters per second. Upon being enveloped, what happens to the cube? You don't think it appears outside the blue portal at the same rate it was enveloped? You think it's sitting in another dimension, nuzzling the lip of the blue portal waiting for gravity to pull it out the blue portal? I'm not being antagonistic, I legitimately have no idea what you're trying to convey.

>>718835841
from the spike frame of reference the spike is stationary and has no momentum
From the spike's POV the dude is traveling very fast into it. The spike would see the dude getting closer and closer trough the portal

From the dude's frame of reference the spike is getting closer and closer trough the portal, so from his POV the spike is moving towards him despite having no momentum

That's because the orange portal is doing the motion for both of them. The spike and the dude are stationary, but their distance is not. They can collide at the exact same speed the portal is moving, despite being both stationary
See this as if there were no portals, the two of them are stationary, and the space between them is magically disappearing

>>718838824
Yes. The piston's portal hits the cube and stops, not allowing the cube to go through at all, as >>718835243 said.

>>718838491
>"movement" is entirely illusory
How does the illusionary movement work and why do you believe it. You will continue to have people misrepresent it if you don't explain how and why it works. Simply describing an outcome doesn't hold any more weight than the images you want to show don't make sense.

>>718838824
Yeah.

>>718838692
The piston is coming down on a stationary object. Zooming out to add in a truck is no different than taking the original image and zooming out to show that they're on Earth which is moving. As far as the interaction with the portal is concerned that cube is sitting still and being enveloped from above.
To get some sideways momentum when the cube exits it would need to instead be on top of the truck driving underneath the lowering pillar to begin with.

>>718833368
Sure, say, if you have a wormhole curved space where one end is moving (i.e. one portal), you enter as a static object in a moving space and exit as a (???) object in a stationary space. It's Afags that imply a change to the relative movements without a cause.

>>718838979
Why the fuck is this even an argument then?

>>718838970
Illusory movement gets explained with simple analogies every thread and it is always dismissed as schizo babble

>>718831725 (OP)
>Afags still desperately in denial after all these years
I'm pretty sure this is all some elaborate ruse and people are just pretenind to be retarded

>>718838853
Yes, there is necessarily a point in time at which the the cube has *just* made it out of the portal and is in effect "balancing"; this is the point at which it has been enveloped. This isn't an abstraction; it's just imperceptible.

>>718838970
see >>718836651

>>718839062
because Atards are clearly incapable of accepting obvious realities

>>718838701
So according to this, A states that objects don't gain or lose any momentum as they enter a portal. That's exactly what the two images show.
Why would the box in the truck stop moving if A is true?
If it doesn't, how is the illustration a misrepresentation?

>>718838996
So the velocity of the cube relative to the falling portal is 0?

>>718839062
Because the game doesn't work on real physics.

>B fags STILL don't know what a wormhole is
It's dire out there

>>718839213
So how does that create illusionary movement and what are the rules for it?

>>718839272
literally a completely different concept.

>>718839265
holy cope
you could recreate portals irl, PROVE that Afags are deluded retards and they would still make stupid mspaint drawings trying to disparage Bgods

>>718839265
Portals aren't real lol.

>>718839343
>umm, the portals are magic!
B fags do magic while A gods choose to do science

>>718839351
There exists one example of such disparaging ms drawings from the A side

That is at it's core a Bfag thing

>>718839164
>a point in time at which the the cube has *just* made it out of the portal
But in this example, only 2 inches of the cube can leave the portal before they touch the boxes. The whole cube cannot make it through without touching those light, easily moved boxes in its way.

When the cube touches it boxes, it is only 6% enveloped, and only 6% emerged through. Now the remaining 94% of the cube is trying to come through at the 10m/s the piston is falling, but the boxes are in the way. What happens? Are the boxes not moved when the piston envelops the next inch? Do the boxes not get pushed away at 10m/s by the cube coming through?

>>718839343
two points in space connected to each other
the objects on either side have no momentum
Only the physical space between them decreases

>>718839265
And what exactly real physics has to do with a video game scenario?

Axisters don't realise that if space is moving around you, it's the same thing as you moving, it doesn't matter if the box has zero momentum when the portal lands on it, as the portal (and thus the space the box is moving into) is imposing it's own momentum onto the box
It's so fucking basic a child could understand it, but Ajeets still can't get it through their fucking thick skulls

>>718839238
>Why would the box in the truck stop moving
It's not moving relative to the wormhole. You have to stop thinking a wormhole is a "thing"

>>718831725 (OP)
Afags believe in a simulation world in which objects are discrete entities. For example, you have a "cube" entity with isolated properties like a "speed vector" like you would have in a video game. Afags see the cube entity as having its property speed vector as 0 when it's in its resting position, and it not being altered by crossing the portal.
Bchads understand a more precise model of reality and physics, and are capable of identifying the underlying effects of mass, momentum, velocity, energy and apply them accurately to the presented scenario.
One could say the Afag is akin to a bot, while the Bchad is a being of human ingenuity and knowledge.

>>718839534
That pic misrepresents B, which also believes the cube won't move.

>>718835015
You can test this in real life:
Pass a hoola hoop over a box on a moving truck. What happens to the box?

>>718839534
What's the unit for change of distance over time?

>>718839495
The boxes respond as they would if they were pushed into the one coming from the portal as for all intents and purposes they were

What happens if you enter the portal instead?

>>718839640
what if the platform stops halfway trough the cube? Is it getting thrown off with half the speed? What would even be the speed at which the cube is launched? What energy would it have? Where would it come from?

>>718839640
>That pic misrepresents B
No it doesn't. The cube is already moving according to B fags

>>718833029
Probably the most reasonable response to this portal argument shit that's been going on for nearly two decades

>>718839701
>what if the platform stops halfway trough the cube?
see >>718838224

>>718839674
both objects are stationary relative to their frame of reference, therefore both have 0 speed

>>718839698
The head has momentum that is locked to the momentum of the portal it is poking through, flipping whether the entrance or exit is stationary alters the scenario but I don't expect you to grasp that

>>718839548
>It's not moving relative to the wormhole
So the portal DOES change how the cube moves, contrary to what the cited post states? Ok.

But if it's relative motion that matters, why doesn't the relative vertical motion have an impact as well?

>>718839793
They are not stationary relative to each other though.
>Only the physical space between them decreases
Your words.

>>718839680
I understand what your are saying, I think. I just don't agree with your final conclusion.

>>718839796
Both the platform and the person are stationary.

A = autists
B = bullies (they know they're wrong but still argue to piss people off)

ok but what if it's just a solid wall?

>>718839701
>Where would it come from?
Answering this specifically, from the piston arm flinging a universe around it, which due to relativity is the same thing as saying flinging it into a universe.

>>718839836
No? Again, you're still conceptualizing portals/wormholes as objects

>>718831725 (OP)
It's C, infinite acceleration/deceleration at the event horizon causes you to explode or compress into a singularity on contact

>>718839895
The moving orange portal is effectively bringing all of the blue side with it on it's "backside" until the space right outside of the blue portal is occupying the same space as the cube. The sturdier object will displace the other. If instead of very light boxes you had literally unmovable boxes then the cube would have the break through the platform instead of passing through the portal.

Even an Aject should be able to understand this

>>718839796
If the head has momentum, it would pull the rest of the body through the portal.

>>718840091
Nothing about my post implies this.
The cube was moving in the truck
If if isn't moving when it leaves, it's momentum has changed. That contradicts what the cited post says.

>>718831980
>A says that things stop moving when they go through a portal
A doesn't say that. Ingame anyhting falling trough a portal doesn't suddenly stop moving after all.
A says, the act of moving a portal past an object does not impart additional momentum to the object.

>>718840207
No. I know I said I don't expect you to grasp the difference but holy shit. I can't simplify it enough for you.

>>718832507
Always great

>>718832507
Yes, that's how it would work

>>718838264
THEY'RE NOT MOVING RELATIVE TO EACH OTHER YOU DUMB FUCKING NIGGER

>people still taking Afag bait
It's honestly impressive

The hoola hoop test forever btfo'd B fags.
Slam a hoola hoop down over a cube—stationary, moving, whatever—it doesn't gain momentum. QED

>>718840570
now imagine the hula hoop had the entire universe behind it

>>718840625
Normal, everyday hoola hoops already have the entire universe behind them.

>>718840219
>The cube was moving in the truck
Not in any way that matters
There is always going to be another degree of zoom out that will add a new manner of motion that apparently now change how the objects leave the portal

>>718840625
Done.
Now what?

Reminder that if you need to change the question to try and bullshit an answer then you are admitting defeat.
>>718835454
>>718835015
>>718833331
>>718832224
>>718840205
>>718839920

>>718840653
Yes but it's in the same configuration as it is normally
>>718840671
Any momentum on the hula hoop would be transferred to the cube instead

>>718840625
Now you imagine that a portal is placed on each side of a piece of cardboard to make it into a hula hoop

>>718840739
>Any momentum on the hula hoop would be transferred to the cube instead
How?

>>718831725 (OP)
What would happen is if portal 1 moves, portal 2 would also move and detach from the surface it's on, forcing it to close.

>>718839062
moving portals arent in the game, so the game wasn't coded with this scenario in mind so we can't say the result is definitely accurate
it's still B though

>no difference between throwing the cube into the portal vs. the portal moving
>somehow this leads to different results
A schizos keep losing

>>718840739
>Yes but it's in the same configuration as it is normally
Same with portals/wormholes. Both sides of the portal are continuous, smooth spacetime

>>718840739
>Any momentum on the hula hoop would be transferred to the cube instead
Why would that be true? Be specific.

>>718838878
If the space is disappearing, where does the air between the dude and the exit portal go?

>>718840809
Yes they are.
In both games.

>>718840809
>moving portals arent in the game,
They are in Portal 2. You use them to cut some pipes with lazers.

>>718840764
>portal is *on* the hoop
wat?

>>718840570
This.
We can literally test all these crazy scenarios like >>718835015
B loses every time

>>718840805
If the space around you is moving at x speed it's effectively the same thing as you moving at that speed, even if you had zero momentum before entering that space

>>718840896
No, the portal is just like a hoop. Slam a hoop down over a cube and nothing happens.

>>718840965
It's effectively the same if I need to measure an impact
Your logic suggests that a tablecloth being ripped from under a dining set is effectively the same as the dining set going flying the opposite direction so that should happen

>>718840663
>Not in any way that matters
What are the ways that matters?
It can't simply be absolute movement because then the cube is being moved on the horisontal plane by the truck.
It can't simply be relative movement either because then the cube is moving relatively to the portal on the vertical plane as it's being enveloped.
>There is always going to be another degree of zoom out that will add a new manner of motion that apparently now change how the objects leave the portal
Not according to B because the B position is that it is exclusively the relative difference in motion between portal and object that matters.
But yeah, any amount of movement other than object and portal (such as the planet moving) does completely fuck with A. I'd consider that a major flaw.

I'm sure everyone's still pretending to argue after all this time just for the meme. In reality we all agree what the correct result is, right?

>>718833829
if your education didn't contradict your previous "common sense" you really didn't learn anything.

>>718841507
Most of us yeah
Everyone that understands an object moving through a portal and a portal moving over an object are not equal

>>718833974
you'd feel a pulling motion on your neck based on the weight of your head x the speed the portal was moving before it stopped, and yes if that force ends up great enough it would rip your head off or break your neck, although that would require the portal to have been moving pretty fucking fast.

What force?

>>718840482
>neither a nor b has a brain to begin with

>>718833395
>The B-fag has been taught in relativity
Nope. The B-fags still don't understand what spacetime is.

>>718841668
The one that it looks like there must be
I can see with my eyeballs that there should be force so you know...

>>718841731
>Sir, the hula-hoop buffonery doesn't work anymore
>Quick, invent a new buzzword
>...
>...
>SPACETIME

>>718836651
>i'm floating is space
>suddenly a planet passes near me
>i'm accelerated towards it even though nothing is touching me
gravity is bent spacetime btw.

Suppose you accelerate one portal in atmosphere.
With B it's obvious, there qill be wind coming from the exot portal
What will happen according to B?

>>718831725 (OP)
>>718832507
This is an inaccurate representation because both sides of the house are moving, wheras in the question only one of the portals is moving. For your drawing to be accurate only one half of the house can be moving and the other half must be motionless.

>>718841779
>>Sir, the hula-hoop buffonery doesn't work anymore
Never happened.
>>invent
On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies was published in 1905.

>>718841842
>i'm in spacetime point a
>i move to spacetime point b
>i gain momentum just by virtue of moving to spacetime point b
b fags believe in booster strips embedded in the fabric of reality

how are you fuckers too god damned stupid to realize what "frame of reference" and "paradox" means after over a decade. Jesus Christ.

>>718837442
teleportation, dummy.

>>718832027
/thread

I asked grok, guys "Which outcome is more likely in reality in "The portal paradox", A or B?"
Option B ("whoosh") is more likely in the context of applying real-world physics principles to the Portal Paradox. It respects the relativity of reference frames and momentum conservation, producing consistent results in theoretical simulations. Option A ("plop") leads to physical inconsistencies, such as violating momentum conservation or trapping objects in portals. However, since portals are fictional, the true outcome depends on the assumed rules of portal behavior, and debates persist due to the paradox’s reliance on untestable physics.

Atards, your response? Your "theories"" rely on breaking the laws of physics?

>>718842329
>pajeet AI slop picks B
B bros, we lost

>>718842427
grok is literally programmed to be based, Atrannies in shambles

>>718839398
yes, portals obviously aren't wormholes as they don't display any of the characteristics of wormholes and, for example, are flat instead of spheric. they indeed are a magic thought experiment like the laplace or maxwell's demons

>>718842461
>we are the based saar

>>718841906
And have you read it?

all of this autism made me think
if there was a piston pushing a yellow portal, would the blue portal suck air in (A) or push it out (B) or no wind would be created (Not Pictured C)?
im mainly concerned with the negative air pressure created by the piston

>>718842329
Any ai you can freely interact with doesn't have the ability to apply critical thinking. Grok gave you that answer because it's the answer most consistent with whatever information it was able to pull from the internet. Even if it was pulling information based on the most accurate mathematical/quantum physics papers humanity has regarding the the proven function of portals, it wouldn't be able to give you an answer because the ai can't invent or discover new information without a human providing it. And humanity definitely can't prove how portals definitively work, otherwise we wouldn't need this debate. A is still the most likely answer

>>718842573
if you're an Afag(clinically retarded) you would believe that even if you put a portal at the bottom of the mariana trench, water wouldn't even seep through the portal because it has no momentum

>>718842779
Do you see ignorance as a point of pride or something?

>>718842017
>move
thank you for agreeing, we can conclude that b is right

>>718842880
No, I'm not an Atroon

>>718842779
there is no momentum
the air is completely still
but because the piston is pushing the still air some of it makes into the portal making positive air pressure on the blue side while behind the piston there is negative air pressure not being filled by the missing air which is why im wondering if its either A, B or C

>>718842886
>>718837874
hmmmmm

>>718838363
>This supposed B is what A states
Its not.
A in the original supposes that portals can't add any sort of movement to the stationary cube so its plops down. The relative velocity of the portals don't matter because they are "like hula hoops". In this example the person is moving much slower than the train, gets no movement imparted on them by the portal so is still moving much slower than the train once they pass through and gets hit by the back of the train.
B in the original says that despite the cube being stationary, because the portal it travels through is not stationary it gets imparted movement relative to the portal, thus gets flung. In this example it gets imparted the movement of the train car so doesn't get flung to the back of the train.
Though it should be noted that the portals dont technically provide any momentum, its more that you are moving into a different frame of reference. Like if you are stationary and got teleported into a universe that was travelling downwards at 100mph then you would effectively be travelling 100mph upwards in that new universe just because of the difference.

>>718842757
If A is the most likely answer, why can't anyone describe how A works in a consistent way that would provide material for the LLM to pull from and think A is the correct answer? There is obviously no logic to its answer, but simply being able to get an answer from its available text actually does give it some credibility. Even as a human, I don't know how A is supposed to work since no one who defends A is willing ever willing to explain beyond simple describing what happens or throwing out a random buzz word that changes every thread.

>>718842573
My sensibilities tell me there wouldn't be a perceivable difference unless there was huge difference between the air pressures where portal A and B are. The physcial material of the piston pushing air around itself wouldn't be near significant enough. If portal A was on earth, and portal B was in the vacuum of space, air on earth would rush through A and out B by the mechanics of air pressure. The portals themselves wouldn't causing it to happen, they're just making a doorway

>>718838224
>entrance
>exit
But stuff from one side of the portal can affect the other side, as proven by the moon portal, so that velocity exists the moment the piston begins.

>>718833824
You people will just say whatever without regard for what words mean, won't you? Matching the relative speed of the portal resulting in a change relative to your previous environment IS what B is. The fact that you're not flying off the Moon at 2000 mph is because you're now moving with the Moon at 2000 mph more than you were back in Earth

>>718840716
If your solution can't be applied to other scenarios consistently then it wasn't a valid solution.

>>718831725 (OP)
It just makes sense.

>>718831725 (OP)
but what if you stand by the stationary portal and stick your hand through while the other portal is moving?

>>718837558
MAD

>>718843208
The reason why the cube gets flung in B is because the entry and exist portals are moving at different speeds. In B if both portals are moving at the same speed like this then the cube wouldn't be flung.

>>718834763
They literally say that tho

You don't understand either A or B

>>718843208
I have no rebuttal for this and will defend B to the death from now on.

>>718843324
Did you even look at the webm?

Assuming A is true the box comes out with a velocity of 0.
So you could put a piece of paper on the portal (on the other end) and the box wouldn't pass through the portal, because it doesn't have momentum.

>>718843231
You feel the sensation of fondling Einstein's ballsack.

>>718843394
Yes but in the webm the two portals are on different sides of the same object moving so it shouldnt be flung.

>>718843497
But it was flung.

it's literally just simple maths, instead of inserting an object into the entry portal at speed, you're moving the entry portal at that speed, the outcome is the same, relative to the exit portal, the object is moving
Afags are retarted

>>718843068
>If A is the most likely answer, why can't anyone describe how A works in a consistent way that would provide material for the LLM to pull from and think A is the correct answer?
Because people with a working brain (people who believe A) know they cannot actually prove any theory regarding the function of portals and the effect of objects being passed through them because we don't have sufficient data or ability to test the theory. People who operate on feelings (people who believe B) are absolutely the irresponsible types to teach ai that their unproven beliefs should be actual fact. It's almost like people B are teaching ai the basics of religion "just trust me bro. I can't prove it but just feel it"

>>718843579
It shouldn't have been by either rules...

it's interesting, there's plenty of people who'll admit to being having been an afag before becoming a bfag
there are zero bfags who convert to being an afag

Bfags are just lesser beings. Fit only for slaughter

>>718839640
To an observer on the exit end, the cube was travelling at 10m/s and instantly stopped, where did that velocity go?

I dunno why this is still a thing. It’s clearly A in the game, and it’d clearly by B if you try to imagine a wonky scenario where they exist in real life and you’re applying real life physics to something that doesn’t have the ability to exist.

i keep forgetting which one's A and which one's B
post the original pic please

>>718831725 (OP)
B is correct. I've already tried this experiment with a cousin of mine irl, but he accelerated too much and rippen through the roof of my garage, my neighbor said he flew for some good 200ft before landing in an old lady's porch. I still have the apparatus, but now there's a huge duct tape-covered hole in my garage's ceiling

>>718843324
Any portals are locked together, they cannot move at different speeds, the hole in space that they create can be moving different ways on either side but the entrance and exit being separate things is for illustrative clarity

>>718843618
that's because Atards are incapable of critical thinking, once they learn it, the answer is obvious

>>718843719
They move at different speeds in Portal 2. Play the game.

>>718831725 (OP)
It should be B, but it's A because Cave Johnson was an Afag and made his engineers make it work that way despite not making sense.

>>718843717
>cousin
The scenario clearly calls for a cube

>>718843716
Atrannies are ploppers, Bchads are whooshers

>>718843583
Except the maths don't apply because it's a video game and the portal is a literal door where one side moves in the example. That's it.

>>718837330
That's what you think, because you're not actually visualising them as continuous. You say you do but you lack the imagination required.

>>718843768
You don't understand the core of what you read

>>718837874
Literally all projection on your part

>>718843870
Poor explanation then

>>718843593
But you are posting now and providing potential training data for an LLM that might repeat that it is A because you just know but can't prove it. The only reason it doesn't repeat that is because everyone else who supports A isn't as honest about being unable to defend it.

>>718843908
And then it happened all on it's own anyway somehow

>>718843821
>errrm its just a videogame bro stop thinking
thank you for your concession

>>718843821
b-b-b-but the game says.. >>718838979 Wrong. Source engine is a Bgod

Afags will LITERALLY say
>Yeah the cube moves out of the portal and then it stops because it has no momentum
and not see the problem

>>718843909
Some people are simply not capable of recieving an explanation

>>718843697
The physics don't care about your perception. What you might see and how your brain tries to extrapolate an expected result can be very different to what the math say will deterministically will happen

>>718842021
understand that its just people pretending to be afags at this point to get autistic people to type out paragraphs of explanations noone cares about

>>718840570
B - relative speed in = relative speed out -is entirely consistent with your hula hoop. When you understand this, you will have achieved enlightenment.

>>718844036
Yes
The space that the movement can be observed from is itself moving, invalidating the measurement

>>718843992
Altered code.
Actual game proves A as others have demonstrated.

>>718837183
it is literally the exact same scenario

>>718844198
Why would the space be moving?

>>718844256
Source engine treats props and brushes differently so technically its both.

>>718844180
Nah that was years ago. We've looped back around to legitimate Afags. This is what always happens:
>thing gets posted as obvious bait
>everybody understands it's bait
>bait reposted ad infinitum
>retards start taking the bait seriously
>retards repost the bait, but they actually believe it now

Why do people pretend there are genuine Btards out there

Everyone knows it's A. Some people try to troll others by pretending it's B. That's how it's always been newfags

>>718840140
No, this is just a gross misunderstanding of B. If this were true, the same thing would happen in the games, yet you can easily see how a continuous path through the portal works even if, relative to Earth, you can turn a cube on a dime. That's also instant and infinite acceleration, Anon. But only because you're measuring wrong.

>>718844256
>as others have demonstrated
>no example
Afag moment

>>718844314
Because that's what making a portal move causes

>>718844351
Why do you think that?

>>718844332
>even LLMs know it's B
>Everyone knows it's A
lmao

>>718839719
No, just for all intents and purposes you can treat it as if it is. But if the portal stops, that also means motion between them stops. Only after the cube passes through is its momentum actually translated.

>>718843975
In your head yes

>>718839640
>Bfags misrepresenting A
>A knife wouldn’t stab you just because the portal wouldn’t shoot the knife out at 100 m/s
>Afags “misrepresenting” B
>The cube that was “moving” suddenly stops when the piston does and doesn’t keep moving like in the frame of reference argument Bfag poorly understand

>>718843697
Perception is meaningless. It didn't enter a portal at a relative momentum, so it doesn't exit a portal at the same relative momentum.

>>718842329
>B sissies relying on freemium robot chatbox to do logical thinking for him
AI is much like women, they're only useful for porn and sucking dick (sexbots)

>>718844198
You're telling me
>The cube is stationary!
But then insist the portal is "actually moving" though we can plainly see it isn't within the same frame of reference as you use to declare that the cube is stationary

>>718844512
>misrepresenting posts

>>718844381
You could stand on either side of a moving portal and observe that things on the other side get closer or further away matching the portal's movement. This is repeatable from any position in view of the portal. Moving a portal causes the space on the other side to change position

>>718844618
That a portal is moving is the absolute most fundamental aspect of the entire debate

>>718843208
Bchads, at last I truly see.

>>718831807
The other way around. Pretty much everyone who creates a serious animation of the problem is a Bfag or becomes one in the proccess of understanding what he's doing.
It's very easy for Afags to say that an object moves with no movement or to remember something they heard about conservation of momentum, but they fail to see and understand how that plays out and all the contradictions that come with it.

>>718843850
That's what you think, because you're not actually visualising me visualising. You say you do but you lack the imagination required.

>>718842779
>if you're an Afag then [Mariana Trench out of nowhere]

>>718844512
You cry you're being misrepresented but you're actually just unable to follow your own premises yo their logical conclusion. This same inability for rational thought further shines through when you also don't even see how you're misrepresenting B

>>718844132
So why do you think the physics changes?

>>718844804
Sorry meant to reply to >>718839640

>>718844742
One of them is
>They're the same tho!
Okay then I guess it isn't, as we can see. Then it must be the cube that moves. The other motion is illusory :^)
This is where your logic leads, you've done nothing to resolve the paradox

>>718844618
>we can plainly see it isn't within the same frame of reference
And when you make the observation from a different point of reference you get a different result because you are focusing on an unreliable point to take your measurements from

>>718844796
He was talking about pressure, water is very pressurised at the bottom of the ocean

>>718844648
That's just because the portal is a shortcut though space that creates a shorter distance. There is nothing there that would suggest space is moving.

>>718844796
we call them spix here

>>718844537
Portal is just an arbitrary line, measuring the cubes distance to the portal after a second, it's got closer, so it has relative momentum.

>>718844890
No I didn't dishonest Acunt

>>718839796
wooo i get to post this

>you're misrepresenting A because the result is stupid and i'm not stupid!
>no, i can't tell you how it's misrepresented or how it'd actually work under A or what the underlying logic behind anything is.

>>718844921
Precisely. The only reliable point is the portal and relative to that, the cube is moving. Everything else leads to contradictions. This is the only consistent measurement.

>>718844906
If the motion of the portal is somehow an illusion then I agree that the cube will be what is moving. It's a retarded leap of logic for you to try to make because if you will no longer agree that the portal moves then there is no discussion to be had

>>718844395
>LLMs are unthinking regurgitators of whatever they've read and pick B
Self own.

>>718831725 (OP)
By the simple fact that it's not a doorway

>>718834057
>Portals have fictional rules and we're arguing fictional physics.
You don't even know all the fictional rules. You are just speculating from the few rules the game reveals to you. You can never come to a conclusion with just that.

>>718839698
Picture is correct. Since both objects are stationary your head will be pushed out gently by forces of portal magic. (B)ucks can't into imagination

I used to post in these threads and argue for both A and B because I thought everyone was just joking around and pretending to be retarded to entertain A
Then I met people irl that thought it was A and then argued that it's correct
I still hop in and shitpost on these threads but it actually makes me a little uncomfortable how little people want to think about things. It's like the egg mirror thing- thought it had to be a joke until someone I trusted brought it up and asked about it

>>718845073
It's the same logic that says that the portal is moving and the cube isn't. And Afags will make frequent reference to "illusory" movement when they describe the cube coming out of a stationary portal. The point here is it works both ways, so it's not an answer.

>>718844804
> to follow your own premises yo their logical conclusion
"The relative speed an object enters a portal is the relative speed an objects exits a portal."

Please, tell me how your "logical conclusion" applies to an object that doesn't enter a portal at all. Or don't bother, because you're a disingenuous asshat who was so angry he replied to the wrong person.

>>718845131
>everyone knows it's A
>therefore the unthinking regurgitators of the common opinion says B
LLMs are still smarter than you, it seems

>>718845201
>Maling shit up and declaring yourself correct
Worst part is you can't even tell if he's trolling, they're actually just like this

Pic is my favorite quandary of the Afags.

>>718845251
I argue either way arbitrarily because the answer is neither, portals don't exist and in actual in game testing without modifying the game engine to reach your favourite conclusion the cube refuses to pass through.

>>718845340
Oh, I see, you thought >>718844890 wa really me
No, he's a butthurt disingenuous cunt (same one you were arguing with probably) and I replied to the right person the first time.

>>718845403
No no, the portal doesn't impart any force so the molecules just move from one end to the other, into each other, causing immediate nuclear fusion and its consequences

>>718831725 (OP)
B, because energy transfer

>>718845047
>This is the only consistent measurement
If you decide to only take a measurement from that position then yes it will be consistent. The inconsistent measurements are the result of making multiple observations of the same thing and without all of them you will never have the full picture. You find one observation that you feel comfortable with and call it a day.

>>718845484
Amogus.

>>718845403
He would actually be sent flying.

>>718845516
Gotcha, my mistake.

>>718845484
imagine thinking an A fag can comprehend the intricacies of space

>>718845532
when you flick on something with your finger you push atoms that push other atoms and so on, which causes a shockwave

this process travels at the speed of sound in the material, it doesn't cause fusion unless it's a very strong force involved

>>718845604
The "through" half would pull the "original place" half. If the bonds are strong enough, he goes flying. If they aren't, as they wouldn't be with 100,000mph, he's ripped in half.

>>718845353
I'm always correct. Cope Bsissy

>>718845551
But Anon, even just in the games you'll get inconsistent measurements if you don't account for the portal. The cube was falling and then it shoots up, whuuaaat? But seen through the portal it's a continuous path. B is a continuous path.

>>718845648
Sooo.. the portal DOES impart force then and B is correct, nice thanks!

>>718845726
What I said had nothing to do with portals

>>718845484
Cool cool
So when a bus drives to a bus stop and “stop” why don’t the civilians go shooting to the side?

>>718845759
Then you missed the topic and therefore the thread, better delete your post for being off-topic

>>718837048
>Folding space doesn't give objects momentum, as far as I'm aware
Objects falling due to gravity have no momentum?

>>718845484
It really doesn't matter which is in motion, load up your legs like springs and boot the cube away

>>718845824
nigga what

>>718845824
Because portals aren't involved

>>718845403
What happens to the other rows of atoms? A cube has more than four atoms, you know.

>>718845692
A is also a continuous path, the issue is whether there is a change in the momentum along that straight path

>>718845975
Classic Atwat strawman: if portals translate momentum then why doesn't everything? I thought motion was relative!??

>>718845487
And with the question "but what if the portals did exist" you'd first have to define the physical properties of the portals, which is basically the same as arbitrarily choosing the answer, before you could give a reasonable answer.

>>718846013
Yes, B says there isn't, A says the cube stops without forces acting on it

Newfag here, I don't even understand what B is trying to represent. Is he going up? Is he going diagonally across the floor? Why the fuck would he move at all?

>>718845824
>if a car crashes, the passengers just stay in the vehicle through magic, I don't actually need a seatbelt!

>>718846160
Google "portal a or b"
You wouldn't get that from the OP because it's a complete misrepresentation

>>718846184
Anon "invents" a shipping company with extra steps

>>718831725 (OP)
How is this a portal thing if isn't blue and yellow?

In classical physics matter is infinitely divisible. Imo these portals would break both relativity and atomic physics so it's best to stick to the fundamentals.

>>718846296
The first mistake Afriends make is thinking they can represent portals without portals

>>718846296
Atards think that portals are just doorways, they can't think beyond their mundane perceptions
It's literal childthink, like when you explain a spaceship to someone and they go "uuuuuh so like a car but in space!!"

>>718846370
>it stops because.. BECAUSE IT DOES OKAY??

>>718846370
>speed lines with horizontal component
If the cube moved out of the portal, what stopped it?

>>718846135
Keep saying it, it's still wrong

>>718846582
Nothing, he was just lucky that the platform with the portal had momentum, not the cube.
>>718846487
see above

>>718845975
>Bus is driving East 100 m/s
>But from its perspective it’s actually stationary
>Also from the Bus’s perspective, civilians are going West 100 m/s
>When the Bus Driver slams on his breaks, the bus is no longer moving East
According to B, because those civilians were going 100 m/s West before, they should keep moving West at that speed. In real life this doesn’t happen and Bfags can’t explain why without admitting its A

>>718846787
That doesn't make ANY fucking sense
why would the passengers be moving 100m/s to the west if the bus is moving eastwards?

>>718846704
But the cube is drawn plopping out with explicit speed lines that indicate a horizontal component to its movement. It's not falling vertically. What was that horizontal speed?

>>718846904
it rolled after reaching the gravity of the amogus room and hitting the edge of the portal

You should need to expend energy/time to equal out the difference in energy/time between ends of the portals.

Rather than thinking about what moves through the portals, think about how the portals move in relation to each other. There's no issues if they're immobile with respect to each other, they're just a doorway, but there are issues when they move.

There needs to be some kind of wormhole tensor or something that converts energy/dilates time between ends of the portals to account for the difference in relative motion between the ends of the portal.

>>718843208
this nigga is using a fucking string with his other hand!
i knew b fags couldn't be trusted

>>718846869
The bus is the only good reference point you can observe from

>>718847116
Then who was camera?

>>718847183
he's fellating the camera like b fags naturally do

>>718846904
How desperate are you to resort to this pedantry?
The lines are included as a clear representation of *plopping*

>>718846062
Indeed, and with that out the way, we can safely pick a side to pretend for the day and draw funny comics.

Here's a simple example.

>>718847373
A but actually neither as he would be upsidedown

>>718847478
That'd imply he enters faster than he leaves. Does he just get crushed at the exit?

>>718832224
The portal is moving not the dildo.

>>718847116
I think this is more likely.

>>718847262
A clear representation that the cube moves out of the portal at a certain speed. What stops it?

>>718837874
based and correct
B is the idol of the midwit redditor

>>718831725 (OP)
in reality both happen at the same time.
both A and B are wrong, and no one seems to grasp this. hence why "moving portals" werent allowed.

>>718847945
Except when they were

>>718838979
You can clearly see the explosives under the box shooting it out.

>>718847593
There is nothing there to crush him

>>718832507
this is literally what bfags believe

they are retarded

>>718848105
The top of his head would enter while only half his body has left.
Wouldn't he be crushed into himself?

The A camp think of the experiment as an object being surrounded by air. In A, the object is independent and could only be moved only by direct outside forces and the forces of gravity.

The B camp think of the scenario as being in a dimension of water, where solid objects are constantly influenced by the space surrounding it. In B, the object is intrinsically "combined" with the space around it, and therefore moving an object is effortless and easy, you simply need to manipulate the space surrounding it.

If only it were that easy. If reality really worked as in B, then we wouldn't have need for wind or water turbines or nuclear reactors because we can spin turbines perpetually by manipulating space.

The box has momentum when it exits and that momentum pulls the rest of the box. The box is given momentum by magic when entering the portal because that's what portals are.

It's undeniable the box is given momentum because otherwise putting anything in front of the portal would be enough to stop it. Making A physically impossible.

Also implies portals might never exist IRL but that's already obvious.

>>718848415
The guys at Haltech didn't strap my brother's 747 down to the dyno properly when he was having some power runs done to check the new blower and the nose caved a section of the ceiling in when it started taking off

>>718848415
Bfag here, the answer is yes it will take off

Theres air.

>>718848415
Yes, because the thrust that generates the forward movement is working against the surrounding air, not relative to the ground. As the airplane's engines generate enough thrust to push the plane forward, it will simply move along or off the conveyor belt, depending how it's set up, and take off normally.

If you'd try to do the same experiment by moving the air instead of the ground, matching the air's speed to the speed of the plane by having the plane face an extremely strong head wind that is the exact same speed as the plane would be going with no wind whatsoever, from a bystanders point of view the plane would take off vertically as the plane reached the take off speed.

>>718848343
You got so close to figuring out the truth here.

Yes, you've realised that when you imagine it in water it becomes obvious it's B. Well done. For some reason though you seem to think air isn't also a medium whereby "solid objects are constantly influenced by the space surrounding it". What exactly do you think wind or air resistance is? Why is your concept of water rushing out of the blue portal not also going to apply to air? Do you think air pressure is not a thing?

Now here's the real kicker. Realise that what you're saying happens with liquid, not only also applies to gas, but solid matter as well. And therefore would apply to the solid matter of the cube. Meaning B happens even if it's in a vacuum.

>>718848415
the aircraft isn't propelled by the stream, it is allegedly propelled by the thrust produced by the engines

>>718849428
>stream
wheels, I don't know how that happened

>>718832892
>>718832982
the car is moving at 5mph

>>718847373
10 km/h obviously

>>718846869
EXACTLY
B DOESN’T MAKE ANY FUCKING SENSE IN REAL LIFE! THAT’S THE POINT!

>>718848664 (falsefag)
>>718849149
it would stall

>>718848415
Afag here, is there a big fan in front of the plane blowing air into the turbines and under the wings?

>>718846787
>Also from the Bus’s perspective, civilians are going West 100 m/s
From the bus's perspective the civilians are sat down completely stationary. You couldn't even get the basics right.
>>718849985
You're an idiot.

>>718850235
Anon the point of the analogy is to show how retarded B is since that’s how Btards argue it’s B, when it should be A.

i can't believe we've had these shit arguments for decades straight and it still achieves one of the highest posts per minute on the board
fuck you gabe

>>718850789
>hat’s how Btards argue it’s B
No it isn't.

A premise was set up with the greentext with the goal of then saying how you think B gets it wrong. But the retarded post couldn't even the premise right to begin with.

Here's what happens. The bus is moving at a consistent speed, from the perspective of the bus it is stationary and so are the passengers on the bus. When the bus stops the bus's reference frame is momentarily non-inertial. That means the reference frame is subject to something called a fictitious force. Which is the jolt everyone on the bus feels when the bus stops.

What causes this?

>>718833395
The portal itself is not moving. Yes, it appears to be moving because it is on a moving platform, but the portal itself does not convey motion or movement. This is what B fags don't understand.
>hurr you need an education over a theoretical that has literally never been observed involving phenomena that we have never measured
Midwit argument.

>>718850026
Watch it stall
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YORCk1BN7QY

>>718850167
Check >>718849149

A-fags are funny little people. They flail and flop around like a fish out of water over simple facts.

>>718841731
That's Einsteinian relativity. Hearing the word relative and immediately assuming Einstein's theories shows a poor physics education since the concept of relativity predates Einstein by centuries.

>>718851809
If something has a definable location then it is always moving in at least one frame of reference.

>>718851791
The A drawing comes from the conflict of how an object can have no momentum, but also transfer momentum to other things. The point is to show that simply saying the cube isn't moving and has no momentum isn't enough to explain the answer. The hope that people defending A will expand and explain their answer, which they never do. The B drawing is hopefully an intentional misinterpretation for laughs since it goes against the clearly defined rules of B.

Most importantly, you need a dick and someone about to be penetrated by it to make your picture truly representative. We do more than just violence around here.

>>718852102
Simple facts like non-moving objects can't move through portals? Bfags always forget this simple fact.

If we accept that a portal moving towards an object gives it its momentum.
Then what happens if the portal abruptly stops before the impact? Does the object suddenly jump in the air?

>>718833395
Except that's not how portals work otherwise going into any portals would instantly kill you in the game.

>>718848924
you have to account for the air that left also, leaving a vacuum

>>718852346
>Simple facts like non-moving objects can't move through portals?
But that's literally the very thing Afags violate. They insist on the non-moving object being able to travel through the portal but refuse to acknowledge the inevitable consequence that.

>>718848343
Actually a great way for Atards to visualize why B is correct

>>718852242
Portals do not have "defined location". The portal itself is not an object. It is literally a hole in reality. It doesn't convey motion or momentum. It doesn't impart such forces on anything passing through it. The only thing it does is bridge two points in space together. Yes, the platform the portal is on may be moving, but the portal itself is just a hole. It would literally just be a window frame falling over you.
Yes, I know the classic response to this is
>B-BUT YOU APPEAR ON THE OTHER END SUPER QUICK SO YOU HAVE TO FLY OFF
But that can literally also be observed with a hoola hoop. If you launch one downwards and it falls around someone, then from the perspective of the top of the hoola hoop, it appears as if you are appearing very quickly.

Yes, this does look extremely weird if you sent someone through a portal. It'd look like they are "launching" for a split second out of the portal, before they suddenly stick to a standstill and topple over from gravity, but considering that these are portals we are talking about, it should be expected that weird observations will be made.

>>718852651
>Except that's not how portals work otherwise going into any portals would instantly kill you in the game.
We literally see portals being able to change you momentum by massive amounts without it causing any damage. Which is obvious when you understand that the portal never being the structure of your body out of place.

>>718852540
In B the relative velocity between the cube and portal is conserved. If you accelerate the portal or the cube so that their relative velocity is 0 like in your picture, then the distance between them will no longer be changing (B2). The important catch is that once the cube comes out of the blue portal, the movement of the orange portal no longer has any affect on the relative velocity of the cube. That is because the distance from blue to orange is always 0, so no matter how erratically the orange portal moves, the distance between the cube to orange is the same as the distance between the cube and the blue. That is why the cube keeps moving after going out of the portal even though the orange portal stops moving.

Your move, Bfags

Thinking about this. it really makes no sense

>>718838979
>>718839062
Retard

>>718852847
>Portals do not have "defined location".
The orange portal is two metres above the cube.

>>718853168
A

>>718852846
Except that we're not in a dimension of water so B's perception of reality is immediately disregarded.

>>718851560
B’s premise is
>Guy looks through portal
>Guy sees Cube getting closer
>This must mean B
That’s exactly B’s entire argument. The only change here is that instead of a Cube it’s civilians and instead of a piston it’s a bus.
And seeing that you have failed to explain why the civilians/cube moves suddenly and are just arguing semantics, I see that it’s you silently admitting its A but hiding behind your pride.

>>718853035
>i'll add a little jump!
It's shit like that what makes things untrustworthy.
I don't care either way, but if you're doing something do it right.

>>718851106
>no response fro fAggots

Here's another brain tickler, halfway through the piston's descent, right as the cube is both in and out of the portal, the scientist fires the portal gun, moving the exit portal three inches to the left instantly. does the cubes relative momentum now reach infinity?

Bait used to be good.

>>718832027
No. What Afags fail to understand is that a doorway or hula hoop or whatever other shit you substitute for a hole maintains consistent distance between it's thickness on the outside and the inside. A single moving portal does not. So it's not a moving doorway, it's a moving half of a doorway with increasing thickness on the outside but not the inside.

>>718852540
Once it passes through the portal it is among the new inertial frame
The confusing part about this whole portal question that 99% of people can't wrap their heads around is that there are 2 separate inertial frames of reference that are both moving relative to each other

>>718853226
and why does the conservation of momentum work underwater but not in air?

>>718852993
No, you've shown you don't actually know what it is you are arguing against.. Here's B's rule:

>velocity relative to entrance when entering = velocity relative to exit when exiting
Unfortunately not understanding what that means is basically an Afag job requirement.

>>718853313
No, you've shown you don't actually know what it is you are arguing against.. Here's B's rule:

>velocity relative to entrance when entering = velocity relative to exit when exiting
Unfortunately not understanding what that means is basically an Afag job requirement.

>>718836651
Space absolutely moves. This isn't even contested it's proven science confirmed by gravity around black holes.

>>718852927
It's not about distance, but about momentum.
In B, the cube would start flying from the floor, now at the base of the blue portal, as, on the other side, it was always travelling with it towards them.
But if you stop the portal before, making it come to a full halt, then did the cube not go from x speed to 0? So where does that force go?

>>718852847
So in the example of >>718851106, being window frame'd by the portal while traveling 1990 m/s away from it means an immediate crater of cube impact in an arbitrary direction on the other side? Just a gentle, slow approaching world behind it, suddenly transitions into impact?

>>718852820
But it is closer to the truth. Therefore most correct. B is just outright ridiculous.

>>718833331
It's not a matter of momentum and yes, if you apply force on one part of the object it propagates throughout it

>>718846704
>the portal had momentum, not the cube
>yes I DID randomly make that up

>>718848343
You get incredibly close to figuring out that it's B because the surrounding medium doesn't matter but you refuse to acknowledge that it's B so you have to invent some stipulation
>b-but it's a-actually water..
to make it make sense. A few more years and you'll be there

I don't get it

>>718853965
The truth is that portals alter the momentum of whatever passes through them in order to behave as a passage. That's literally what portal flinging is in the games. You turn a downwards momentum into a sideways momentum in order to cross a gap. And that happens because the only way to go from going down into a portal in he ground to out a portal on a wall is if your downwards momentum becomes sideways.

Likewise, the only way to go from not moving and having a portal moving over you, to moving out of a portal that isn't moving, is for your momentum to also change so that you are moving.


>velocity relative to entrance when entering = velocity relative to exit when exiting
Is the rule portals consistently follow throughout the games.

>>718843785
I repeated it after cubing the cousing, he rippen'd again and landed in ukraine