Thread 718881490

This is just common sense. You already know it.

Ending proves B.

>>718881751
Except it can't be the real moon landing site because American flag was sun-bleached and turned into French flag long ago.

>>718881751
The vacuum of space is acting as external force pulling you out of the portal its a completely different scenario from OPs

>>718881490 (OP)
AHN!~

>no momentum
RETARD

>>718881490 (OP)
Why did you have to make it so sexual

>>718881938
How did Chell accelerate go 2200mph from a wind blowing at 10mph perpendicular to that direction?

>attaching the frame of references together while giving one priority because...uh...you just have to!
No.

Damn cube ...

>hurr durr it's A because nothing applies force to the cube
F=MA
if a mass moves, it's got force
it has to move in order to leave the portal, if it doesn't move it can't be A or B

>>718881751
>the ending that "proves" b doesnt actually prove b and is infamous for causing physicist rage on the physics forum
If we are talking about how they would actually work, b is wrong, if we are talking about how the game handles it, b is also wrong and you are a moron.

you niggers have been fought over this skub for almost 2 decades

It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.
It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.
It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.
It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.
It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.
It's A everyone who says it's B is trolling.

>>718882260
>>718881814
Are you the same fag from the thread the other night? I fucking told you idiots, the earth moves through space at an estimated 1.3 million miles an hour, and it rotates at over 1k mph, yet here you are, sitting perfectly still in front a computer.

>>718882726
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_invariance

>>718882260
>ignores the claw smacking the orb she was holding onto hard enough to send it fucking flying.

>>718882726
The moon's speed in orbit still means Chell's speed had to have change massively upon being at the moon.

>>718881938
The vacuum of space acting as an external force is irrelevant to the point being made.

>>718881814
Afags literally cannot refute this

>>718882520
>>718882726
>>718882789
Still haven't addressed how Chell accelerates to 2000mph from 10mph wind blowing perpendicular.

>>718882520
You're in no place to call anyone a moron if you aren't able to grasp how that was actually b happening. Even if you have physics-related issues with the scene, at the bare minimum you could be able to see how B has happened via the portal behaviour.

>>718883363
The funniest part is A fags haven't addressed when she goes back in the portal.

>>718883256
she doesn't though.
are you stupid?

>>718883617
Yeah, she did. She's moving with the moon.

>>718883617
Are you? >>718881814

Do you not grasp why >>718881751 is telling you the moon's speed in orbit?

It's B
Imagine instead of a cube we have a long rectangle, and there is a ball at the top of the long rectangle, if it was A, the ball would remain still after going through the portal, but the rectangle is pushing the ball as it moving through the portal, the ball would be sent flying went the portal stops.
I think this is like drawing, people who say A are bad at it and will never be able to imagine anything in their minds eye

>>718881751
You're really dumb

>>718883873
>What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

A-fags, try to refute this.

>>718884045
We already know they don't understand this because of how often they interpret B as ripping things in half.

>>718884045
Afags just don't understand that going through portals moving means your body is moving like you are in a car. They will never get it

>>718883363
>physicists say portals are impossible
>but if they are, the ending cant work like that
>also by the games rules its impossible
>still bfag
I just dont know what to say but dunning kruger is a hell of a thing.

>>718881490 (OP)
>The physics of something that can't exist is common sense!

>>718884045
If portals conserve relative velocity (B), then the front atom is moving out of the portal at the same rate that the portal is moving down on the cube, so the distance between them stays the same and there is no change in force between them. If the absolute velocity is conserved and the front atom is not moving (sounds like A,but isn't) then the portal moving towards the second atom will shorten the distance between them and cause it to push the front one out rather than pulling. If the cube moves out of the portal without momentum through some unexplained and unjustified mechanic (A), then it is the same as B where the distance between them stays the same and there is no change in force. Minor details aside, you are definitely right that a moving portal can causes forces as a result of changing the distance between atoms of an object.

>>718884045
There is no way to answer this because you are utterly failing from the start.
The cube isnt fucking moving, the platform isnt moving, the only thing moving is the piston containing the portal, which is moving at an unknown variable.
Portals do not actually exist you stupid nigger, but as they are shown in the game, you can place a portal on two walls and stand in the middle of each, nothing puts impetus on the object going through, it acts purely as a doorway, the only time you see objects increasing their velocity is when falling, not because the portals are somehow accelerating them, but because the object is falling without impediment and reaching its terminal velocity.

in other words, bfags are retarded and need to just stfu if they dont understand the question.

>>718884327
>physicists say portals are impossible
Fair enough
>but if they are, the ending cant work like that
Depends what the hold up is. But by the specific portal functionality the only way for Chell to have been able to end up at the moon the way she did was if her speed had changed on going through the portal, which is B.
>also by the games rules its impossible
No actually very consistent with the games. The games consistently show that the velocity and momentum of whatever passes through a portal will be changed to enable a consistent passage.
>dunning kruger is a hell of a thing.
You're projecting.

>>718883762
>>718881814
why are you drawing an incorrect diagram of the game physics?
the moon isn't moving, stupid.

>>718884692
>The cube isnt fucking moving
In which case you've got one stationary atom exiting into another stationary atom and the electromagnetic force pushes instead of pulls.

>>718881490 (OP)
I can't do these threads anymore. Such a high concentration of retarded posts.
>dumbfuck Atards
>even stupider Bfags that reached their conclusion with horrible reasoning

>>718884692
OK now what if everything but the portal was moving (as in from the perspective of the portal coming down). Would the cube fly out the other end?

>>718884887
>the moon isn't moving
I love how you shouldn't even have to question that the moon orbits the earth in portal just like it does in real life, and yet the game even manages to confirm that.

TWICE
>https://i1.theportalwiki.net/img/3/3d/Fact_core_fact24.wav

>>718884745
>Depends what the hold up is.
Depends on how many thing one notices.
>The games consistently show that the velocity and momentum of whatever passes through a portal will be changed to enable a consistent passage.
That translates to rocketing out the other end how?
Just load the fucking game up, shoot two portals, and stand between them, its not hard.
>You're projecting.
projecting a projection? classic D-K move.

>>718884692
>it acts purely as a doorway
Tell how you think A works without contradicting your own claim.

Question: what would happen if the portal stopped moving down when the cube was only halfway through? Assuming B is correct, would the rest of the cube get sucked through the portal, or would only the top half fly out somehow?

>>718884914
In that case I think you get nuclear fusion instead.

>>718885135
I assume what you are asking is if the piston held the cube, and not the portal, then yes, the piston would continue through until stopped, and the cube would then be imparted with momentum because it was (presumably) unattached.
If youre trying to do a bfag gotcha by insisting that its the same thing, its not, because the force it imparts from slamming down is a transfer of energy like if you hit a table and it causes a bowl to "jump", which is different from the velocity of the piston+cube being conserved at the point that the piston stops, like throwing a baseball.

>>718885231
>That translates to rocketing out the other end how?
Cube must exit portal at the same speed it enters. So in order for their to be a consistent passage the cube's speed must change when leaving the other end. This isn't hard to grasp.

It's not different to how a cube leaving a portal on a wall must leave it sideways even if the entrance was on the ground and the cube was moving down. Both entail the cube's momentum being changed by the portal.

>>718884947
>horrible reasoning
whether A or B happens depends on whether a portal can apply force
force is mass times acceleration
the cube has mass
in order to come out of the portal at all, the cube has to accelerate to the other side
it's got mass, it's got acceleration, it's got force

>>718885420
When you pick up and object but only hold it by the top half you are strictly speaking only picking up the top half. What happens to the bottom half depends on how strong the structure of the object is.

>>718885575
Don't ever reply to me again with your stupid horseshit

>>718885420
I saw a bfag once claim that if it was 50.00000000001% of the way through, it would then be rocketed to the other side.
Remember, A fags are following the game's physics, B fags are pretending the portals are real and someone has managed to prove that a real portal like the fake portal wouldnt actually act like a portal, and would instead act like a magic slingshot.

>>718885291
nta but
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXDHwCv5rhQ
technically speaking, portals moving would be like "moving" a hole in a piece of paper.
What should actually happen is that the portal slices up the cube into tiny sheets because the only way to "move" the hole would be to make a new hole constantly and repair the previous one.
But pretending like you can move a hole like a Looney Tunes character, it'd be A since you're folding 3D space around the Cube

>>718885758
>I saw a bfag once claim that if it was 50.00000000001% of the way through
You were being baited.

>>718885291
>please repeat saar
you cant even make this up.

Bfags are still unable to answer the Bus question, much like how niggers can't answer the Breakfast question.

>>718885806
I'm not following how you are extrapolating that portals are able to fold 3D space away from the portal itself, but this is about as far as you can get from acting as just a door.

>>718885994
Feel free to also quote where it was already stated in the original comment.

>>718885139
it isnt though.
they would never be able to deal with the physics of plugging those speeds into the game for all of that.
thats why portals work A style.
because the game cannot do them B style.

>>718885758
>Remember, A fags are following the game's physics
No you're not. The game doesn't model this. Are you lying or stupid? That's always the question with you people huh?
>>718885806
We know what you think that means but the fact remains that, logically, it can't. The cube is measurably moving relative to the Earth as it exits the portal.

the concept of portals as presented in the game completely rapes the laws of physics so arguing about it through that lens is grounds for a headache
within the scope of the videogame's gamey world and gamey physics and mechanics it's A but if valve made portal 3 that had moving portals as a feature in test chambers they'd make it work like B because that's more fun and creative
nevertheless this will never happen so this discussion will continue until the ends of time, have fun arguing about hula hoops and relativity for the next couple hours

>>718885806
Literally everything is moving according to some frame of reference. This idea that portals cannot move as a rule really doesn't make sense.

But if we're going to bring up interstellar.
>wormhole is shown to be spherical
>supposedly the two ends don't move relative to each other
With those two aspects established you can in fact have things travel through wormholes without it necessitating a change in motion. Portals changing your momentum in the games happens due to the nature of the portals being directional and the possibility of one end moving relative to the other.

>>718886134
Dyde someone already programmed a portal clone that trivially manages B. The rules that givern it are super simple, consistent, and intuitive. You know how you make it do A? You programme B and then make the cube stop.

>>718886094
Every wormhole explanation uses a piece of paper and punches 2 holes into it. They then align the holes to create what is a portal.
You otherwise need to fold 3D space in order to create a portal/wormhole. Otherwise you just create a hole to outside of reality.

>>718886279
Punch a hole into a piece of paper and try moving it to a different spot.
Makes sense? It doesn't because trying to move it would create a bigger hole.

>>718885420
if the force applied to the top half is greater than the inertia of the bottom half it will jerk the bottom through, with a reduction of energy from overcoming that inertia. kinetic energy is half mass times velocity squared, so at higher speeds it would be more likely to launch out, even if less than half were portaled, until the force exceeds the tensile strength of the material. then it would snap and send only the top out. it would take an inordinate force to do that to solid metal though
>>718885758
it doesn't even need to be 50% because velocity increases energy at a nonlinear rate

>>718886303
>already programmed a portal clone
you mean a decade after the game where their stuff AT THE TIME couldn't handle it?
nice "argument."
Look. I say they work like "A" because the games HAD to make them work like A, and if they were able to make it like B they would need to change the plot somewhat significantly OR slap some Cave johnson trivia on it like they did with the longfall boots.

>>718886074
The answer to your disingenuous bus question is that when a bus decelerates relative to the Earth it also decelerates relative to things on Earth.
But if a bus scoops up a pedestrian then the pedestrian will suddenly experience what it's like to be moving at 50 mph relative to some environment, though he was standing still in the road. Get it?

>>718886390
Because reality isn't a piece of paper.

And that's not how spacetime works either, or else you'd have a universal reference frame which goes completely against Einsteinian physics in the first place.

>>718885806
>wormholes
Not portals. If a physicist tried to theorize something like the technology in Portal he would lose his job.

>>718886310
I get that part, but how does the connection between the two holes move the cube not just between those two points, but also outside of the portal and away from it through what would seem to be normal non-folded space without additional justification.

>>718886534
If you didn't have breakfast this morning, how would you feel?

>>718886606
I'd still feel like the guy talking to me realises he doesn't have an answer for that.

>>718886279
>This idea that portals cannot move as a rule really doesn't make sense
they cannot move relative to each other, the portal on the moon and laser cutting should've have worked

>>718886420
>it doesn't even need to be 50% because velocity increases energy at a nonlinear rate
Alright man. Here's how we settle this.

Boot up portal.
Start walking through a portal.
Stop moving.

Did you character stop moving? Or did they physics glitch and splatter against a wall?

>>718886443
>you mean a decade after the game where their stuff AT THE TIME couldn't handle it?
You mean they were too lazy to do it. But what does it matter when it happened?
Anyway the games don't make them work like either one. You can't recreate this scenario without cheats or mods and the engine doesn't handle it. The cube collides with the wall as if no portal was there.
But the plot already involves portals acting like B, in the Moon scene, which is not a physics simulation but a scripted sequence. So in fact A would require a plot change. B is consistent with everything in the games, mechanics and cutscenes.

>>718886697
>shouldn't have*

>>718886754
>You mean they were too lazy to do it.
oh so its fanfiction time because you can't argue the point

>>718881490 (OP)
>momentum disappears with no explanation from the same frame of reference
>"this is common sense!"

>>718881751
Retarded A-fag false flagging as a B-fag to make us seem retarded.

>>718885420
Cube would be half at rest, half in motion, this evens out to a cube in motion but at a lower velocity.
The faster the piston comes down the higher the velocity obviously.

>>718886704
>Hula hoop argument

>In layman terms, speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out.
Its clearly A, the first game gave away the answer almost 2 decades ago, it would be B if the speedy thing AKA the cube was the one going up at high speed.
but in the original image the one with momentun is the portal not the cube.

>>718882716
>is trolling
Never underestimate the average person's level of retardation.

>>718886160
>No you're not. The game doesn't model this. Are you lying or stupid? That's always the question with you people huh?
its been said MULTIPLE times in this fucking thread, retard.
open game> shoot two portals> move through portals
if you DONT rocket through:
A
if you DO rocket through, picking up magical momentum that you did not enter with:
B

>>718886534
>goes completely against Einsteinian physics in the first place.
Whatever side your on, im now on the opposite, because einstein just keeps getting mogged by reality. Guess thats bound to happen when you steal your ideas from somebody else.

>>718886813
The momentum disappears because the plate collides with the platform.

>B-but the cubes momentum
The cube didn't have momentum. What you mistook for momentum is not momentum.

>>718886704
>Afag can't read
you know what velocity is? you know how you walk slow as shit in portal?
>>718886782
>the actual ending to portal 2 is fanfiction

>>718886782
What even is your asinine point?
A is not in the games.
They easily could've put it in the games.
But they didn't.
They put B in, which is consistent with all canon portal gameplay.

>>718886876
>the subject matter argument
this nigger doesnt even have portal.

>>718881751
Why did she get flown outwards and she's going into the portal at negligible velocity?

>>718881490 (OP)
>>718881751
>>718881814
hold on there, my picture prove your stupid!

>>718886887
Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out supports B though. The cube is going in with speed even if from our perspective it's the blue portal that's moving. From the orange portal the cube rockets through and keeps going.

>>718886704
>Start walking through a portal.
>Stop moving.
Chell changed direction because portals impart momentum

>>718885420
The top half continues to move, and the bottom half stays stationary, yes.
>If the cube material is weak, the cube splits in half
The bottom half remains unmoving, the top half launches at 1:1 the same speed at it would if the entire cube made it through.
>If the cube material is strong, the two halves stay connected and pull each other depending on how much of the mass is on each side. If exactly 50% of the mass made it through before the portal stopped halfway, the cube will launch at 1/2 the speed it would have if the entire cube made it through.

>>718882502
The cube never moved.

>>718886982
>nigger is just confusing things now
>>718886994
when they made portal and portal 2 they had to make that shit work on the xbox 360 and ps3.
the math to make portals work AT ALL was brand new tech they grabbed from some college kids who managed to figure it out, hiring the entire group to make portal.
Shut the fuck up with this "they were lazy" bullshit.

Portals in videogames that worked like Portal were literal unobtanium at the time, and Valve jumped at the chance to get it working.

>>718886697
You'd still have to accept them being able to move relative to each other while both being stationary in a rotating reference frame. As that's essentially what happens with the earth.

>>718886813
>Retarded A-fag false flagging as a B-fag to make us seem retarded.
Are you making the Afag mistake of thinking this is conflating the air rushing out with B? The scene demonstrates that Chell emerges from the portal at the same *relative* speed - which happens to be a change of 2000 mph compared to where she was. It demonstrates B.

>>718886876
MY GUY
You are out here saying "it'd work like this" based on a terrible understanding of physics.
I am telling you to boot up the game that starts this stupid argument, and do something that according your hypothesis would cause a certain result.
You're going "muh hula hoop argument" because you know what's going to happen if you boot up portal. The result that is inconsistent with your hypothesis will happen because you don't understand what the fuck you're talking about. You've been parroting talking points you've read on /v/ over the years with understanding the actual underlying mechanics - either real physics OR game mechanics.

>>718887072
>stationary thing is a speedy thing
Anon.

You know what, why we just don't ask someone smart? we can tweet this to someone like that science nigger or someone who knows physics, because its clear everyone here is either retarded or trolling or would never take someone else opinion as a fact.
>>718887072
Read your own answer, the portal is moving but the cube is static, in order to be B the cube would need to win momentum out of nowhere, it would be B if the cube was the one moving at high speed towards the portal not the other way around.

>>718886887
You're quoting a part of the game which gets contradicted by the game itself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASUUN0W4_JY

B provides a more consistent model of the speed of an object being relative to the Portal it enters. The Portal in a way is only aware of what in the infinitely small slice in it. It would not be able to differentiate that the cube us moving or not. All the portal knows is what enters/exits the other side.

>>718887190
>you know what, why we just don't ask someone smart?
Because so far every time someone with a physics background is asked they say B.

>>718886982
It's a simple question anon: Do you keep moving or do you stop?

>>718887175
Relative motion is taught in middle school. You have to be an adult to use this website.

>>718886962
No, Anon, it doesn't work like that. B in fact only says that the cube exits at the same relative speed it enters. You may recognise that this is both the very thing you do in the game all the time, and logically the only thing that can happen. And from there, B naturally follows if one portal is stationary relative to Earth. If you don't get this, you're not qualified to have an opinion.

>>718887120
cope

>>718887273
i don't believe you, anyone with a physics background who says B deserves to get its tittle revoked.

>>718887190
>someone who knows physics
Because they'd just say "however the game engine implements it"

>>718887134
All right
They still didn't put A in the game, nor is A actually an easier solution
What they did was just not put moving portals in the game
So what are you on about?

>>718887403
well, portal 1 can't handle moving portals but 2 can, did anyone ever try to recreate it there to see what happens?

>>718887467
>too stupid to read >>718886443

>>718887190
>someone smart
>knows physics
>science nigger
You cant be serious. Do you also think bill nye is real?
Dolph lungren would be a better pick.
...of course that doesnt matter because this has already been endlessly debated by physicists and the answer is always:
1. portals arent real
2. I dont understand the question (see 1)
3. Kinda like A, but it would transfer energy to the cube relative to the force at which the piston is impacting against the platform

Theres one science fag on youtube that said it was B, until someone pointed out to him that he did his calculations based on two pistons slamming into each other, not one piston moving against a stationary platform, at which point he said #3.

retard

>>718887174
Everything that happens in portal is entirely consistent with B and you are only revealing that you haven't the first clue of what B even is. You are embarrassing yourself.

You can all argue and draw until you're blue in the face, but B just feels more right.

>>718887547
anyone would be a better pick, we just need a neutral party that isn't irony poisoned by this place, we could just tweet or ask
>hey my friend says B would be the answer to this pic, is he right?
don't give him context, just leave him say its opinion.

>>718887342
>the cube exits at the same RELATIVE speed it enters.
Yes, and thats why B is wrong you stupid fuck

A and B are both wrong.

>>718881751
Is this how you get your jollies? By pretending to be retarded on the internet?

>>718887175
>the earth isn't moving
>>718887190
>win momentum out of nowhere
it's literally just F=MA
>>718887278
you stop because you're walking at low velocity and not carrying much energy. noclip towards a portal at 60mph and try to stop halfway.

>>718887693
You don't know what relative means..?
Part of why this is so arduous is because Afriends need to be taught basic concepts all the time

>>718887553
see the problem with that image is that Bfags believe the log would have already shot out the other side, so Achad is thankfully safe, Unfortunately Btard got away again.

>>718887387
Sean M. Caroll was asked and he said B.

Literally the most popular youtube video on this topic right now is by Minutephysics who also says it's B. Sabine Hossenfelder also said B. I'm sure you'll say "physics youtubers don't count" even though they've all done videos covering far more complicated topics than this.

It really shouldn't be a surprise that people who understand that motion is relative are able to see why B would be the answer.

>>718887553
Hey Bfags.
If momentum is conserved when moving through a portal, why is the other half of the log not moving?

>>718887869
Even assuming a slide is a bit much but then who *knows* because A just doesn't have an actual model for this

>>718887937
>If momentum is conserved when moving through a portal
It's not >>718887224

>>718887063
>Asissies have weak flow (probably from outstanding renal system problems) while BGODS have SUPER LASER PISS

>>718887829
>you stop because you're walking at low velocity and not carrying much energy. noclip towards a portal at 60mph and try to stop halfway.
Easily done with tool assistance.
You know what happens?
YOU STOP MOVING.

>>718887859
Okay, im forced to assume you are trolling, you got me, I actually thought you were an idiot.

>>718887378
What force moved the cube from stationary?

>>718887879
No, we do not believe that. Tell me why I supposedly believe that because every time you people attempt your misrepresentations of B, you conveniently elide that bit.

I'd like some stats on who's arguing, pls respond.
https://strawpoll.com/e6Z2AB5XGgN

>>718888045
Damn son, just admit you don't know something, I could respect that way more than this lame attempt at saving face

>>718887906
>if I can name three people who didnt understand the question, I win!
Every time you actually explain what the image is showing they agree A*

>>718881814
As we all know, the moon has zero gravity what-so-ever, right?

>>718888083
Same force that moves cubes from falling to shooting up in the games

Hey B tards
A portal moving 60mph down passes over a stationary cube. At what time in the cube’s movement was the cube moving 40mph?

>>718888162
>lame attempt at saving face
>on an anonymous forum
so you are retarded.

>>718888094
>misrepresentation
its literally the B scenario you clown, you chose it, not me.

>>718888153
You can drawfag all you want, but your previous illustration fails. Why is the log both moving and not moving?

they actually think this

>>718888181
That hasn't happened even once.

>>718888223
The portal gun's tractor beam?

>>718888181
They do not. In fact the only time an authority answered A (a Valve dev) they clearly misunderstood the image, yet Afriends never cease parading that victory around.
For the record, a senior dev already said it was B years before with actual reasons given.

>>718887906
>Literally the most popular youtube video on this topic right now is by Minutephysics who also says it's B. Sabine Hossenfelder also said B.
im watching it right now and in its opinion it would be B if the portals gave momentum as some sort of wormhole, in that case yes i agree that it would be B, but the ones in portal don't give momentum out of nowhere.
For example when you enter a portal, by B logic you would gain a small speed boost on the exit even if you are just walking towards it, but that never happens.

>>718888223
>cubes falling
In this case the cube is not stationary

bfags actually believe this

>>718888234
None

>>718888320
nta but it sounds like I am completely right here
>>718886443
>>718887134

Bbros our rebuttal?

>>718888262
Because it has the same momentum relative to the portal on both sides. Its the same as if Glados stuck her arm out a portal to the moon. Same momentum relative to both sides of the portal, but very different momentum relative to other things in the environment.

>>718888309
Technically he should be coming out head first towards the camera.

>>718887937
air resistance would act against the half sticking out, but thick trees withstand wind all the time without snapping in half or uprooting unless that truck is going over 94mph
>>718888083
the portal descending to it

>>718882502
The a in ma is acceleration you can move without acceleration

>>718888240
>so you are retarded.
You're the one doing it.
>its literally the B scenario
No it's not. Can't help but notice you failed my challenge.

>>718888262
Remember, Bfags hate:
Aristotle
Thomas Aquinas
God (the creator of physics)
Bfags worship:
Nigger science man
Jew science man
Child molester science man
All of which affirm that there are unlimited genders, troon surgery is "affirming" and everything they dont like is hitler.

>>718881930
The acceleration by gravity is 1/6 the earth, so rounded up to 2m/s^2. Chell slowed down to 0 in 4 seconds, so that's 8m/s delta v, or 17mph. A rounding error out of 2200mph.

>>718888348
>For example when you enter a portal, by B logic you would gain a small speed boost on the exit even if you are just walking towards it,
That's literally not B's logic at all. Here:

>velocity relative to entrance on entering = velocity relative to exit on exiting
That's how B works. It's also how portals in the games work. Portals in the games literally do change your momentum: >>718887224

>>718888475
In these respects Bfags are correct they're just wrong about how Portal works.

>>718888449
Portal has no mass. F=ma.

>>718888381
That’s impossible an object that changes velocity has an acceleration

>>718888361
Stationary is just a measurement relative to some arbitrary point. Portals translate momentum.

>>718888554
Does the piston touch the cube?

>>718888391
It doesn't sound like that at all because nothing you said is actually true and this was already pointed out to you

>>718888471
>Can't help but notice you failed my challenge.
Get the fuck over yourself, dork, nobody read that and thought "wow, what a badass"

>>718888554
Yeah, this pretty much dunks on A fags.

>>718888583
No you need a force to move the cube's mass from rest.

>>718888650
bullshitting by saying "nuh uh" and refusing to argue further when I point out what a massive breakthrough in gaming the portals were ISNT proving me wrong, retard.

>>718888429
Game's retarded
https://youtu.be/xEg0GhUURnk?si=bH7vglkFw279E-9U&t=136

>>718888449
>the portal descending to it
Portals don't have mass, dipshit.

Force = Mass * Acceleration. Any child can tell you this.

So let's return to simple math for literal children.

If are portal with a mass of 0 is acceleration towards an object at 100 m/s, how much force does the portal apply to the object?

>>718882848
Chell cant have a change in speed because the velocity differential as she enters the portal to the moon would tear her apart, the moon moves at like 1000m/s compared to the earth.

>>718888234
40 mph relative to what? The platform it was standing on? Then during the time the portal comes to an abrupt stop.

i think asuka is better

>>718888083
The normal force from attempting to crush the cube.

>>718888742
But should Ratchet get shot out of the portal in that gif?

>>718888561
So at what point are you stationary when going from moving left to moving right when travelling through one of two portals on a wall?

>>718888561
It is possible with portals since it happens in the game. >>718881751

>>718888554
>Draw a thing that agrees with you
>WOW THIS DRAWING AGREES WITH ME
Does this mean if I draw myself fucking your ass you will no longer be a virgin?

>>718888718
but the cube is the one with momentum in that gif not the piston, the piston is now the one without movement, in that case yeah B would be the answer.

>>718888710
They're only supposed to think "damn this guy really can't refute B"
>>718888723
Not with portals.
>>718888729
I don't give a shit. You claim A is in the games - it's not. The rest is all red herrings.

>>718888941
>it's not
literally the ending to 2, retard.

>>718888785
Portals are never shown to enact any kind of damage when changing your motion no matter how massively. It's also pointless to try and argue that you think something should have happened when Chell's motion is changed when it doesn't change the fact that Chell's motion clearly changed.

>>718888785
That's precisely why it can't be A. Chell experiences traversing the portal as continuous, but an observer from Earth would day her momentum changed in an instant.
But then, that same observer would've said that thousands of times already throughout the game, if he appears to be ignoring the portal.

>>718888840
Normal force is from the bottom of the cube retard. And it's only equal to the cube's weight.

>>718888941
So you get free force when going through portals? By how much?

Portals are inherently paradoxical so there are problems applying real physics to both situations. That said, B is still more natural simply because objects must leave the portal as quickly as they enter or else it would be like hitting a wall, and the cube would get pancaked.

>>718888979
Shows B
Any more brilliant aces up your sleeve?

>>718888886
The retard part is that the platform is the thing moving up, which no shit the cube is going to move when the platform moves.
The whole webm is trying to illustrate that the piston and platform moving are the same thing, which it isn't if you have experience in real life physics.

>>718889067
Portals are windows. The void of air in space pulls in air from Earth creating a suction.

>>718888941
>"damn this guy really can't refute B"
They arent thinking that either, sorry. Bfags really need to start engaging with reality.

>>718889127
it doesnt show b because the moons movement isn't calculated.

>>718889165
See >>718882943

>>718888742
Even when I was a kid this kind of blunt force messaging felt extremely cringeworthy and unhelpful
>Hey young boy, have you considered that females can also do stuff?
No, I’ve never had to consider it because it’s just reality and nearly all my cartoons and viddie games have female characters doing stuff

>>718885575
>whether A or B happens depends on whether a portal can apply force
>can an absence of matter apply force

>>718889087
>So you get free force when going through portals?
Apparently
But you can literally make perpetual motion with them in the games, this shouldn't be news to you
>By how much?
There appears to be no limit

>>718887937
it is, just not very much because it weighs more than the air pushing on it
when it smacks your dumb fucking skull to pieces it'll vibrate mightily

>>718889213
Why won't air get sucked out into the void of space?

>>718889287
No one's denying it does. It's not what's relevant to the point being made here.

>>718889167
Oh, believe me, everyone is thinking that at this point.
>>718889181
You mean it's not simulated? No, they instead scripted it to be B, rather than model orbital mechanics for one scene.

>>718889240
So I jump through a portal, how much boost I'm getting?

>>718889137
They are if you have experience in real life physics and a basic understanding of perspective
to the cube, they are the same thing

>>718888905
The situation is 100% identicle to the original a vs b problem. That's why the last scene shows it matching.

>>718889352
So that scene is not air getting sucked into space?

>>718889371
velocity relative to entrance on entering = velocity relative to exit on exiting
Dunno if that can be called a "boost" but that's the rule for how a portal might change your velocity on passing through. This literally happens in the games.

>>718889167
Anyway, explain what you think B is. Without saying anything happens "for some reason". I need the reason. If you can't do that, you don't know what you're talking about.

>>718889356
>rather than model orbital mechanics for one scene.
the entire engine works on A.
there is nothing to show B anywhere because they didn't program it in, like I said.
theoretically it was meant to be B, sure.
but its A in the games.

>>718889067
>her momentum changed in an instant
What happens when she stands half in and half out of the portal? You can do this ingame, they dont teleport you. The answer is the front half of her accelerates to 1000m/s and the back half doesnt and she splits in half which is why it cant be b, portal space or "environmental" momentum is a none factor in game

>>718889137
>The retard part is that the platform is the thing moving up
This is the most infuriating part. I cant remember his name, but some swedish physics nerd on youtube changed his answer to A when he was informed that the platform the box was on was not another piston. You wouldnt think you had to explain it as there are speedlines on the piston and pistons dont smash into each other, but people constantly fail to understand this and think the question is about TWO (or three) moving bodies colliding at equal speeds and how that would effect an affiliated but unsecured cube.

Btards just refuse to accept that they misunderstood the question to begin with, and Atards dont assume this is the case and start reinforcing the error by turning to mockery.

>>718889371
according to B fags you would get out flying into a wall just by doing a small jump.

>>718889439
Jesus are you not able to read what's said to you? No one is denying that's what happens in the scene. But it's not the ONLY thing happening in the scene and it's not why the scene gets brought up.

>>718889462
>the entire engine works on A.
No it doesn't. What makes you say this? I told you before, B is consistent with everything in the games.

>>718889462
>the entire engine works on A.
Except that A cannot happen in-engine.

>>718889458
So youre an Afag, nice.

>>718888234
If the portal passes over the cube at a constant rate of 60mph, then there's no time where any individual portion of the cube is passed through at a rate of 40mph, since y'know, it's being passed though at 60mph the whole time.

You could say that the average speed of all parts of the cube is 40mph at the the moment exactly when 2/3 of the cube has exited (1/3 at 0, 2/3 at 60), but that's the average of all points of both sides, not an individual point.

>>718889565
except A constantly is happening in engine because the portals movement never imparts any momentum on anything moving through them.
retard.

>>718889568
No that literally describes B. Velocity relative to the entrance means the cube is moving in the original problem.

>>718889462
portal works on A
please make your own game called bortal and apply B

>>718889645
Gmod works on B already.

>>718889645
people already did.
didn't you hear from one of the guys I argued with?
there is a fanmade game that does B.

>>718889515
Nope, see >>718889458

>>718889645
>portbl

>>718889472
>What happens when she stands half in and half out of the portal?
Half if her will be moving at 2000 mph relative to the other half. But in her experience, it's like standing in a doorway. You fail to visualise what happens. The speed measured outside the portal and the speed measured through the portal are different things. You intuitively realise this as you play the games but when you have to think about it, your imagination falls short.

>>718889612
A cannot happen. The cube will not go through.

>>718889494
Youre giving them too much credit there are multiple ppl posting who dont even comprehend the doorway vs teleport difference

>>718889459
>already answered multiple times
>ignoring it
"I will keep demanding you affirm my stupidity until you do"
>"Without saying anything happens "for some reason"
who the fuck even said this you strawmanning goon?

>>718889612
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASUUN0W4_JY
The retard is you.

>>718889494
I misunderstood nothing. You, however, misunderstand me.

I like how the person dumb enough to misinterpret it went with A.

>>718889724
Wow youre retarded...that isnt how relativity works

>>718889626
>No that literally describes B.
Yeahnah, it doesnt.

>>718889758
You've given multiple evasive answers and basically just turned to abuse, but nothing of substance. Explain B or it will be assumed that you don't know what you're talking about.

>>718886964
>The momentum disappears because the plate collides with the platform.
At that point, the full momentum of the portal is already transferred to the cube. The portal isn't a hula hoop, it's a different frame of reference entirely.
>The cube didn't have momentum. What you mistook for momentum is not momentum.
Everything always has a momentum, because momentum doesn't exist in absolutes; all motion is relative. From the frame of reference of the room in which the cube is sitting, it has no momentum. From the frame of reference of the room moving towards the cube at the velocity of the portal, the cube has momentum. By the time the entire cube is through, it is flying through the portal. It doesn't matter whether the cube moves through the room or the room moves around the cube: they are identical.
>t. mechanical engineer

>>718887167
No, you fucking moron. Chell isn't emerging at 2000 mph, and if that was the case, the portal wouldn't be sucking the room out. Chell (and the remainder of the room) gets sucked out because of pressure differential between the moon surface and the Earth's surface.

>>718889892
>velocity relative to the entrance means the cube is moving in the original problem.
Fucking read.

>>718889795
>guys i programmed a model that uses real physics to prove B!
>"why does it use a completely different scenario?"
>YOURE RETARDED!
just give up.

>>718889880
You're not thinking with portals.
>Omg I was just falling but then I was shooting up in the air instead, this change in momentum should have broken every bone in my body!

>>718886964
what happens if there's a stack of cubes on the pillar and the descending piston stops before its portal crosses over the the last/bottom cube?
when does any given cube "belong" to the exit reference frame?

>>718889426
No it fucking isn't you faggot. The last scene shows that for B to work you have to have significant factors that are not included in the original picture.

>>718881490 (OP)
Achads win another thread

>>718889946
>>718885994

>>718889458
Cube's velocity was zero entering the portal

>>718889982
>Chell isn't emerging at 2000 mph
She is, relative to Earth. You fucking moron.
I don't get how you understand relative motion but are seemingly unaware that the Moon orbits the Earth

>>718889530
So what else is happening other than air getting sucked out?

>>718888886
>>718889137
Well done anons, you completely fell for the trap

>>718890032
Nothing you're saying any longer even remotely resembles reality

>>718890171
Look at the information you are given >>718881751

What do you think is the reason it's telling you the moon's speed in orbit?
>>718881814 should spell it out.

>>718890034
Oh the ironing lmao

>>718890091
Damn, another non-answer
And it wasn't even to the same question
Can you even read at all? How much further down should I adjust my expectations for you?

>>718890116
Not relative to the portal

>>718890091
>Linking to a post where you ignore answering the question.
I'm actually still waiting for a response on that one you linked. It is an interesting trend how people who claim the answer is A refuse to actually say what they think is happening in A.

>>718890131
>braindead retard doesn't understand how fast 2000 mph is, or what a pressure differential is
Never verbalize another independent thought ever again. You need to become a real life NPC.

>>718889494
>You wouldnt think you had to explain it as there are speedlines on the piston and pistons dont smash into each other, but people constantly fail to understand this and think the question is about TWO (or three) moving bodies colliding at equal speeds and how that would effect an affiliated but unsecured cube.
Gonna go with what the other anon said to you. You've just noticed that said swedish guy is a total idiot and ultimately said A. Put two and two together.

Is this kind of thread really a thing?

>>718890310
I don't know how much more clearly I can show you that your way of thinking is flawed? The games literally prove you wrong with their basic mechanics.

>>718889982
If im interpreting your post right youre a b fag but you dont make sense, the cube has momentum from.the frame of the room moving into it yes but the b fags say it suddenly increases in momentum once it enters the portal

>>718890262
All I see is air getting sucked out in a linear direction

>>718890184
>>718888886

>>718890382
Orange or blue portal?

>>718890404
Anon, the pressure differential is completely irrelevant. 2000 mphbis an approximation of the Moon's orbital speed. You *are* making tge exact mistake I said you were, and even with me holding your hand through it you're still too proud to even consider that you overlooked something.

>>718890184
>Draw thing that agrees with me
>WOW MY DRAWING AGREES WITH ME

>>718881751
You can't place portals onto moving objects.
The moon isn't a moving object.

>>718890468
>the cube has momentum from.the frame of the room moving into it yes
That's all B says. If this is true then the cube is in motion and has momentum.

>>718890468
No, there is no increase of momentum. There is a CONSERVATION of momentum. Two frames of reference exist. The frame of reference of the room in which the cube is sitting, and the frame of reference of the same room through the portal which is moving towards the cube (and therefore confers the cube relative momentum). When the cube has fully crossed over to the other room (through the portal), it conserves the momentum conferred by the room. From the perspective of the cube, it never moved. The room around it. From the perspective of the room through the portal, the cube is moving towards it through the portal. Either way, this is basic dynamics.
>again t. mechanical engineer

Orange and blue light have different momentum (yes, massless momentum) so does the cube jump slightly more when it enters orange vs blue?

THE CUBE DOES NOT MOVE
MOMENTUM DRIVES THE PORTAL
TO COME TO THE GROUND

THE PORTAL PISTON
IMPACTS THE CUBES RESTING THRONE
VELOCITY ENDS

THE CUBE STANDS UNTOUCHED
OBJECT UNMOTION STAYS SUCH
NEWTONIAN LAWS

Bfags have always been niggers
Unable to comprehend newtonian figures
Their arguments suck
They will never fuck
But they still make gay little pictures.

>>718890546
Both. That's the beauty of it. This measurement is always consistent.

>>718890626
You can.

>>718890565
Nothing would move in that room (and definitely wouldn't get sucked through a portal) if there was no pressure differential, you fucking moron. And if Chell emerged from that portal moving at 2000 mph, she get launched sideways from the surface of the moon at that velocity (as the moon is tidally locked to the earth, and rotates around it).

>>718890476
Jesus

You've been told the moon moves at 1000 mph.

So for Chell to suddenly be at the moon. She'd need to be moving with the moon in orbit.

Which means she speed had to have changed. Not just by her being pulled by the air pressure. But by a far more massive amount at the exact point she went through the portal.

Again, >>718881814 spells this out to you.

>>718890184
>hah! I tricked you, it turns out I actually AM retarded!
Wow, good one?

Afags, your thoughts?

>>718890730
I see the blue portal to be stationary

>>718890671
>When the cube has fully crossed over to the other room
Why fully

>>718890906
and yet the cube is approaching it somehow

>>718890709
According to that gay poll only bfags answered, these are the people who will be getting paid millions of taxpayer dollars to experiment with the physics of transexuals in brazil.

>>718890497
>>718890607
But it's your belief that it matters whether it's the cube or the portal moving right?

And it's just been confirmed to you that the webm was depicting the opposite of what you through it was?

So you can't be going from saying >>718888886 to still saying >>718890607

>>718881751
I didn't realize they use portals on diving bells.

>>718890657
Everything is in motion from some frame. From the platforms frame in b the cube is stationary then jumps without any force acting on it

>>718890818
The portal transported her to the moon, she was pushed into the portal by air pressure. If I get what you're saying, there should be a barrier of speed force blocking the moon's side of the portal because the moon is moving so fast.

>>718890813
>Nothing would move in that room (and definitely wouldn't get sucked through a portal) if there was no pressure differential
Indeed.
And yet, I have explained to you several times now that this is entirely irrelevant to the point being made.
>And if Chell emerged from that portal moving at 2000 mph, she get launched sideways from the surface of the moon at that velocity (as the moon is tidally locked to the earth, and rotates around it).
Rotates around it at roughly 2000 mph, in fact. So the fact that Chell *didn't* shoot off at that speed tells us she is now moving with the Moon, when before she was moving with the Earth.
The tidal lock is also not relevant. The orbit is.

>>718891007
A pressure difference of 1 atmosphere won't accelerate you 2000mph perpendicular to the hole.

>>718890894
aircraft use lift, yes.

>>718890906
So what does that tell you, when a cube comes out?

>>718891046
>If I get what you're saying, there should be a barrier of speed force blocking the moon's side of the portal because the moon is moving so fast.
That's what would be happening if it was A. But because it's B, Chells motion changes to match the moon's.

>>718890948
So if you're saying the blue portal is also moving with velocity same as the orange portal, what happens when the orange portal stops after it bangs on the pedestal? All relative velocity becomes zero?

>>718890984
>you cant go from saying im full of shit to saying im full of shit
nah, youre still full of shit.

>>718891017
>From the platforms frame in b the cube is stationary then jumps without any force acting on it
Yes, but who cares, that's on the other side of the portal by then. On the other side, gravity is slanted and things that weren't moving here were moving there

>>718890931
Because the portal doesn't stop moving until the cube is completely through, aka when it doesn't matter anymore that the room's relative momentum has ceased.

>>718891069
>it's another episode of retard thinks he understands motion better than a mechanical engineer

>>718891187
Supposedly the first time round you were saying it was full of shit when it was actually agreeing with you.

>>718891017
From the platforms frame the entire room on the other side suddenly stops without any force acting on it.

>>718888234
average acceleration is measured in velocity divided by time. If a cube is 2x2x2 feet, and it passes through the 60mph (88fps) portal, it takes 0.0227 seconds. the average acceleration is 3876ft/s^2. 40 mph is 58 and 2/3 feet per second, so, 58.667/3876, it would reach 40mph in about 0.0151 seconds, or about 66.51% of the full time

>>718890894
B here. The plane can't takeoff without breaking the constraints of the problem. The "right" answer is wrong because someone tried too hard to make a gotcha without actually thinking it through.

>>718891141
No A believes portals are windows. Air gets sucked out of a window. On the other side the the space has no air and has zero velocity

how do I make cool animations bros

>>718891263
What if the cube was thin slices would it still wait

>>718891330
A believes travelling through a portal doesn't change your motion. See the left outcome of >>718881814

>>718891368
Nothing would be different if the cube was in thin slices, because again, momentum gets conserved. The only time where the momentum gets discontinued is when the portal plate strikes the floor, at which point the cube has full relative motion.

>>718891069
the moon portal scene is so far beyond physical realism that it dwarfs any A-/B-fag brain damaged theories.
the vented air stream would be flowing at the speed of sound (~343 m/s), limited by the depressurization and adiabatic hyper-chilling of the air in the aperture lab facility.
chell would be flash-frozen and shot into lunar orbit like a bullet before she could blink.

>>718891450
Yes she gets sucked into the portal by air pressure and remains being sucked by air pressure on the other side

>>718891263
>it's another episode of retard thinks he understands motion better than a mechanical engineer
Apparently I do. How embarrassing for you.
I'd find it easier to be convinced if you gave the first indication that you had any idea what the issue even is because you haven't actually even addressed the thing people keep telling you it's about.
It's not "IF" Chell emerged at 2000 mph - we've observed her doing that in the game.

>>718891121
Tell that to the minceman.

>>718891560
While the moon moves past her at 1000 mph?That's not what happens in portal 2.

>>718891630
Scratch that, it's actually over double that amount it seems. 2200mph. Again not what happens in the game.

>>718891584
>It's not "IF" Chell emerged at 2000 mph - we've observed her doing that in the game.
Acted upon by the same force that did pic related.

>>718891494
tentative B-fag here.
how the fuck does momentum get conserved when the portal exits are allowed to freely accelerate relative to each other?

>>718891752
No one gives a shit about your KFC.

>>718891752
Yes, all right, creative licence was involved

>>718891231
You think gravity cant penetrate portals?
>>718891274
Dont think a wormhole position changing=a room moving

>>718891832
So then stop treating your argument like it's based on the laws of physics when you're admitting that they took creative licence with the laws of physics.

>>718891752
See >>718889026

>>718891892
Distance changes = things move.

>>718891584
Ironically enough for a Bfag, the Portal 2 ending speaks to A being correct even though it makes no sense. I'll make it very easy for you since you seem to be completely fucking retarded. If the moon is moving at 2000 mph parallel to the surface of the earth (aka the surface of the moon since they're tidally locked), Chell would emerge sideways going 2000 mph and get launched off the surface of the moon (and not even pick up orbit due to weak gravity). Additionally, the acceleration shoving Chell backwards out of the portal due to pressure differential would be calculated as follows. Assuming Chell's projected area is 0.5 m^2 and her mass is approx 60 kg. 1 atm = 101325 Pa. The force she sustains is 50662 N. Meaning her acceleration as she gets sucked towards the portal is approximately 844 m/s^2.

It's not B because of Portal 2's ending, it's B because of conservation of momentum.

>>718881490 (OP)
stupid sexy rose cube

>>718891630
She's in the moon's gravitational pull

>>718891929
Atmospheric decompression.

PORTALS
DISAPPEAR
IF
PLATFORM
MOVES
FORDWARD
/BACKWARDS
THEY
CAN
ONLY
MOVE
UP
/DOWN
SIDEWAYS

NOW YOU CAN FUCK OFF

>>718891782
Portals as they function in Portal 2 are impossible in real life due to a massive thermodynamics problem which you've just stumbled on (infinite energy). However, neglecting the question of conservation of energy, assuming the portals are able to move independent of each other, each portal creates its own frame of reference. Momentum is not absolute, it's only conserved within its own frame of reference. Example, I have no momentum relative to myself if I'm sprinting down the road, but I have momentum relative to the Earth as we're moving independently from one another. Whether the cube moves into the room or the room moves around the cube is irrelevant: from the perspective of the moving portal (which again, represents an entire room with its own frame of reference), the cube itself has momentum.

>>718891494
Ok...so would you happen to be a chinese or india mechanical engineer? Because that would explain these answers

>>718892087
We've been over this as well >>718882943

Literally see >>718881814

>>718891984
Distance is always changing from the universe expanding wormholes heat flux etc.

>>718891910
I'm a different anon jumping in here. The parts that matter to the problem do follow expected physics. A game not being a 100% accurate simulation of reality where it doesn't matter for the game means nothing. If I'm following this right, you are the mechanical engineer who says her velocity changing by 2000 m/h would cause here to get splattered over the moon, right? Try drawing a picture of it and label the velocity of both halves of Chell and both portals. What is the change in distance between her top and bottom over some period of time.

>>718891910
NTA but it's based on how the portals are shown to work. Talking about realism is a bit silly given, they're portals. But there is a consistent rule they follow.

>velocity relative to entrance on entering = velocity relative to exit on exiting
Now if you're the anon claiming to be a mechanical engineer you should actually be able to understand what that means.

>>718892203
>i have no understanding of dynamics of rigid bodies, i just like hearing myself talk
If you wanna hear me say that the thin slices would fan out slightly as they travel mid-air due to the earlier effect of gravity on the other side of the portal, congratulations on being the most pedantic dipshit I talked to this week (and you have strong competition).

>>718892208
The reason she is sucked into the portal in the first place is because of atmospheric decompression.
The room, ON EARTH, was decompressing INTO SPACE.

So suck my dick

Suck my balls

Suck my ass.

And suck my grundle

Suck my gooch.

Suck my sphincter.

Suck my foreskin.

And my cyst pilonidal.

>>718892352
I just want you to make the slightest.bit of sense while bragging about your cereal box degree from jeetistan

>>718892380
>The reason she is sucked into the portal in the first place is because of atmospheric decompression.
No
One
Is
Denying
That
You
Idiot

Again look at >>718881814 and assume the 10 m/s you have on earth is the atmospheric decompression.

>>718892286
Yeah. Room's moving.

>>718892536
Yeah..but not really

>>718892453
>making 130k a year in a MCOL area with 4 YOE
I think I'm doing fine with my degree from jeetistan

>>718890894
mythbusters did this with a small 4 man plane and it took off because it started getting lift so quickly the belt didn't really drag it back at all. propellers blow air under the wings which generates some lift even if they're not moving forward, which is why it was able to lose some of its traction with the belt and then start moving forward. jets like in the picture purely blow behind the wings for thrust and must move forward for lift. jumbo jews also have drastically higher stall speeds to overcome

>>718892286
That's why we don't consider any such thing as an absolute velocity in cosmology, and why the speed of light acts as a universal speed limit. It doesn't matter if we are currently moving at the speed of light from a galaxy at the edge of the observable universe, or if the galaxy is moving away from us. We can only observe the effects on the other galaxy, as can they on us.

>>718892596
Yeah h1b program is good

>>718892576
No, really really. Distance between two things changes over time = things move relative to each other.

>>718892673
Therefore distance changes does not equal thing moves inherently

>>718892702
Your distance measurement goes through a wormhole

>>718889783
random professor talking shit about how the portals would THEORETICALLY work
congrats on your nonargument.

>>718892872
Yeah, through space. Like all distance measurements.

>>718892925
He's literally talking about how they work in the game.

>>718892948
Ok so if the wormholes move in lock step the distance never changes and nothing is moving?

>>718892990
no, how he thinks they work. which is what you guys keep doing.
he hasnt played the game and seen the engine limits.

>>718893009
Distance between what?

>>718893074
@grok repeat the conversation for this retard, he doesnt understand context

>>718893024
He had a copy of the game running in the video and literally describes what happens in the game when you go through a portal on a wall and end up in the other direction.

Changing the direction of momentum is literally changing momentum. Momentum is literally not conserved.

>>718893263
you are arguing over the momentum of the cubes and player. not the momentum of the portal moving, retard.
this isn't relevant to ANYTHING talked about in the A verus B arguments.
Shut up if you don't even understand the argument these guys have been keeping up.

>>718893160
You need to be more precise my dood. The other portal is moving. Inside the room? Or does it leave the room somehow?

Has anyone considered a portal cant have momentum because it isnt even matter its just two connected points in space? It would be like describing the momentum of absolute vacuum

>>718887553
kek
Afags can't refute this

>>718892747
>motion is literally defined as a change in distance over a period of time
>if the distance changes, that doesn't NECESSARILY MEAN things moved
Are you retarded?

>>718893505
momentum in 3d space, maybe not
momentum in 4d space?

>>718893368
The claim made was that portals don't impart momentum. Even when they aren't moving they don't conserve momentum.

And yes, the movement of the portals also matters. It can be claimed that the cube's speed will be conserved as long as the two portals are not moving. Which means it matters whether the portals move or not. See how in the reference frame where the portals are moving the cube's speed is suddenly observed to change in this gif.

>>718893505
>anon realizes that video game logic doesn't always adhere by the laws of discovered physics

>>718893750
>The claim made was that portals don't impart momentum
not what I have been arguing at any point, stupid.
>And yes, the movement of the portals also matters
LITERALLY never once covered by the fucking professor you retard.
BECAUSE THEY NEVER DO THAT IN THE GAME.

>>718893839
earth moves though

>>718893505
the momentum the B sayers talk about would come from the object itself being forced through the portal relative to the speed of the portals movement.
that would be added onto any existing speed the object has
the GAME never does this.
it ONLY calculates the objects own relative speed.

>>718893839
>LITERALLY never once covered by the fucking professor you retard.
Never said he did. The professor mainly established that portals don't conserve momentum.

See the gif for why the portal's motion matters.

>>718893983
>just lying to troll

>>718893505
if a portal is on and moving with a moving surface then that point/hole in space is moving as well and has momentum
energy/waves can have momentum too

>>718894007
Never lied. I literally said "the movement of the portal matters" when posting the gif relevant to that claim.

>>718893632
Yeah im not the one using a newtonian definition and applying it to nonnewtonian mechanics and insisting its still true

>>718881751
the entrance portal is stationary here.
this has nothing to do with B.

>>718894007
earth moves, so the train gif is valid with or without a train

>>718893839
>BECAUSE THEY NEVER DO THAT IN THE GAME
if you actually played the game you would remember the neurotoxin plant. and the moon

>>718894135
Watch the whole thing. Both sides of the portal function as entrance.

Can any bfags just use even one real life example of this supposed "reality" of B?
I mean, if you are correct, then its because the same thing has already been observed, so post it.

>>718881751
>moon is always in the same position
>even if you spend an hour fighting wheatley the moon still appears in the exact same spot
>therefore in the portal universe the moon is stationary relative to the earth
>therefore the moon portal shot proves nothing

>>718894076
The portal doesnt exist in the way youre describing it though its two merged points of space, the portal is an absence how can it have any properties

>>718894135
>the entrance portal is stationary here
>the earth isn't moving

Why are people thinking that "momentum" is some kind of prescriptive property that can be added onto an object, and not a term used to describe the product of the object's mass and velocity?

>>718894191
>lying again to troll when the moon in game does A stuff

>>718894284
Sure let me get my real life portal gun.

>>718893928
An object can't have motion relative to itself. The motion that the game measures is the motion relative to the game's map.

BUT, the actual programming of the portal physics uses relative calculations to the portal. It would be impractical otherwise since the logic the portals use is literally relative.

Imagine dropping a cube into a portal on a slanted surface. You need to know the relative angle the cube is entering the portal at, which is inherently relative to the portal itself.

>>718894303
>"momentum" is some kind of prescriptive property that can be added onto an object
because it isn't the real world.
its a video game and that's exactly how it needs to work for the physics engine and portal programming.

>>718894284
neither A nor B can be proven, and the bottom line is that portals are in fact not real.

>>718894293
the earth is always moving. it's irrelevant.

>>718894303
because we are past the point of pretending to be retarded for funsies to just being retarded to annoy everyone else.

>>718893505
Vast majority of the use of the term momentum in these discussions would refer to the cube, which absolutely has mass. When discussing the movement of the portal anyone who knows what they are talking about would use velocity.

>>718894287
Space Core confirms the Moon is not stationary.

>>718894390
>An object can't have motion relative to itself
in video games where its a single physics object, yes.
in the real world, no, because its made of billions of atoms that are their own "physics objects", not counting quantum physics.
you are trolling or retarded.

>>718894113
>anon thinks the expansion of universe doesn't constitute motion because it's not described in classical models
>"but it's le fabric of spacetime that's being expanded! nothing is moving!!!"
Retard.

>>718894456
My point applies to velocity as well

>>718894373
>>718894415
>bfags finally concede
thank you, hopefully these threads will die forever now.

>>718894415
>neither A nor B can be proven
stop lying.
the portals work like A in the video games.
IRL they would have to work like B or have a strange dampening effect regarding the movement of the objects they were placed on to give them the functionality of A.

>>718894461
Even then you're specifically measure an atom relative to another atom.

>>718894341
What is the A stuff that happens for the moon scene?

>>718894461
NTA but
>if the dunning-krueger effect was a person
When we define an object within a model, we typically set a scale for the interactions studied. Quantum interactions occurring in a system-level analysis doesn't mean the object has motion relative to itself, you absolute fucking imbecile.

>>718894540
>the portals work like A in the video games.
A is not possible ingame.

>>718888309
not only the thread but the entire topic should have ended with this post.

>>718894507
Then you'd be wrong. Portals can have a definable location that changes over time. That can be used as a measurable vector meaning it can have a velocity.

>>718894560
Portals act as windows

>>718894468
>Anon is btfo so he infers a retarded point from a disconnected rhetorical point

>>718894547
yes, and?
you measure the effect of opposing forces on the object versus the inherent strength of its bonds.

>>718894572
YOU are dunning kruger.
you don't have the brain power to see objects as a collection of molecules that are also a collection of atoms.

>>718894589
>lying

>>718894536
this is you
>>718887553


>>718894540
>stop lying.
stop being retarded.

>>718894629
Can a doorway without a door have a velocity?

>>718894290
if a portal were just an absence, it wouldn't function as a portal, putting one on a wall would just delete the matter and make a hole to the other side of the same wall. portals move waves or particles to separated locations instantly, which is an interaction of some kind. that's the problem comparing them to hoops or doorways, hoops and doors don't interact with passerthroughs in any special way. a portal inherently moves everything that crosses it. port literally means to carry.

>>718894696
>cope because he is lying to troll

>>718894682
Let me break it down for you very simply since you seem to be having trouble: when the distance between two objects is increasing within a fixed frame of reference, the objects are moving relative to one another.

>>718894695
A is not possible Anon. Stationary objects will not go through a moving portal.

>>718894695
>lying
Depends what claim of A you're going by but the "portals conserve momentum" claim is literally contradicted by portal flings.

>>718894668
How does a portal acting as a window let A or the moon scene happen? A window can't change the real or perceived velocity of an object.

>>718894743
>greentexts with ad hominems because he can't refute the point

>>718894695
>YOU are dunning kruger.
>you don't have the brain power to see objects as a collection of molecules that are also a collection of atoms.
>retard continues to misunderstand what an "arbitrary" reference is as defined by a point of reference on an object vs an atom
>retard continues to misunderstand macroscopic interactions vs quantum interactions
Someone get bro a brain

>>718894696
Sorry, only one (Me) in your post.

>>718894731
Yes. A doorway without a door is still an open passage with a definable location. If it has a definable location then changes in location can also be defined.

>>718894732
the portal acts as a 2 dimensional thing with a 1 dimensional connection.
the backside doesnt do anything so the surface it is placed on wont change.

>>718894780
they do if they are placed in a position for gravity to pull on them retard.
>>718894785
>retard who doesn't understand whats being argued
>>718894816
>projection after getting reduced to insults because he doesn't understand physics.
>>718894836
>purposefully distorting what is being talked about so he can pretend shear force and the like doesnt exist
fuck off.

>>718894879
you in the picture

>>718894890
>>purposefully distorting what is being talked about so he can pretend shear force and the like doesnt exist
>fuck off.
Please stop misusing terms you don't understand. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

>>718894890
>they do if they are placed in a position for gravity to pull on them retard.
They won't. Gravity does not work through portals.

>>718894770
The distance is only changing from measurements through the wormhole...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_length#Proper_distance_along_a_path

>>718894780
>Stationary objects will not go through a moving portal.
So youre claiming the answer is C: piston stops dead on top of the cube?

>>718894890
>projection after getting reduced to insults because he doesn't understand physics.
You can't prove A because A doesn't follow the laws of physics, but of course you just have to be a contrarian retard

>>718894943
>lying without elaborating because he is too stupid to understand.
>>718894946
>talking about situations NO ONE is even trying to argue
retard.

>>718894992
Yes, the engine does not allow A.

>>718894889
So what would be the effects on me if the doorway were accelerated into me at 2000mph? Lets assume its in vacuum in space to make it simple.

>>718894790
Air get sucked out into space. That's all.

>>718891282
So you're arguing for a delay in the cube matching the speed of the portal lol? You should be able to think about that and realize it doesn't make sense.

>>718895012
A like it is shown in the OP is not possible ingame.

>>718895003
>A doesn't follow the laws of physics
retard crying because the video games A physics doesnt match the real world
>>718895062
just flat out wrong and proven by putting two portals side by side, one under the cube
retard.

>>718895092
correct, thank you for having a brain,
also >>718894790
retard.
in game the moon isnt moving like that, and the scripted sequence treats it as a static object.

>>718895142
>lying
wrong.

>>718894959
>theoretical babble

>>718895198
That is the entire point of these threads, lmao

>>718895197
>retard crying because the video games A physics doesnt match the real world
Neither in the real world nor in the engine. You're insufferable.

>>718881490 (OP)
I might literally be brain damaged because I'm now seeing how it could be A.

I have a question to put forth though, to those which would answer, A. and I'd like to see how they reconcile this with the answer being A.

If a speeding bullet, traveling at a speed of 3,000 FPS (feet per second), fired at a portal, traveling towards it, also at 3,000 FPS, I don't think any one of us is denying that the bullet, as it enters through the portal is moving out from the stationary exit portal at a speed of 6,000 FPS. Is it possible that a portal would accelerate the movement of an object, if it couldn't move an object at all in the first place? Maybe that's a stupid fucking question but I'm just curious.

I would also ask that you invision a 100 foot long pole being in the place of the cube. Yes, it's stationary, there's no movement applied, but if that piston with the entrance portal is slamming down around that object at a speed of, say (and the speed doesn't matter much but I'll use an extreme example) 100 FPS, would not the very fact of continued matter following the front end of that pole as the pole continues out become a pushing force, therefore meaning the object would be pushed?
It's then not a question of velocity but literall force? If the room, in which both portals are, is stationary, which we all must agree to by the fact of the shared stillness of the cube in the cube question, does it not then mean that the pole is not stationary on the exit side of the portal (answer this)? If that is indeed the case, then by answering A. are you not applying logic only consistant with the one side of the portal?

That is where I take issue with A. fags, I think fundamentally the very logic they attempt to use is not consistant with the very premise of the existence of portals and the violation of logic inherent therein, so I see the answer B. as synthesis, so it ceases to be a question of physics so much as a logic problem because physics itself is-

>>718882716
fuck you troll its obviously b

>>718881751
Those things are clearly not shooting out of that portal at 2288 miles per hour.

>>718895197
>one under the cube
The cube is not stationary as gravity is moving it, while the portal is not moving. This has nothing to do with A. A stationary cube will not go through a moving portal inside the actual game.
>wrong.
You can verify this yourself.

>>718881490 (OP)
Portals aren't supposed to have relative velocity compared to one another. Dev commentary mentions they threw this out so that you could cut the nerve gas tube with a laser, and it also works with the moon. The surface moving should disrupt the portal.

>>718895092
What does that have to do with A? There is no space or vacuum in the original problem, so that can't be relevant.

>>718895197
>the scripted sequence treats it as a static object.
So how is A intended to be represented in that scripted sequence? What is is implied to be happening?

>>718895139
the portal does not pass over the entire cube instantly

>>718895293
-violated by the question. Am I wrong?

>>718884947
>people agree with me
>but for completely retarded reasons
A strange feeling. Not that I would know about that, because my fellow A-nons are all geniuses.

>>718895293
Youre thinking about it wrong if youre thinking in terms of entering a portal, the portal points are no different than entering a room through an open door

Since moving portals "track" the object they're on, does it mean you can rotate the orientation of portals?

>>718895361
If your airplane window gets blown out what will happen? Hence portals are windows and the cube will just plop out.

>>718895276
>didn't play the game and is seething because someone who did understands the physics of it
cry more.

>>718895361
the moon effectively isn't moving.
no alteration of any movement happens.
the ONLY forces acting on anyone in that sequence are the airflow and the movement of the arm used to smack Wheatley into space before grabbing Chell.
everything else that ACTUALLY would need to be accounted for IRL is stripped out of the equation entirely.

>>718895345
I have. the cube is moved without momentum into a place where the gravity now can pull freely on it because its no longer on solid ground aligned with it.
that is what pulls it.
retard.

>>718895361
Moon's orbit velocity doesn't matter when anything on the moon side of the portal will be subjected to the moon's gravity

>>718895452
??????? I don't follow.

>>718890709
>Afags constantly arguing that relativity isn't real

It's okay, anon, most people are too stupid to understand relativity. Just stop making ill-informed arguments on the interwebs.

>>718895551
you're just wrong though

>>718895551
>I have
No, you haven't. The engine does not support what you are talking about.

>make the best portal diagram to ever be put to pen
>thread is already over

fug :(

>>718888554
>>718888718
>cube moves towards portal
B-fags always have to change the question in order to be "right". Surely a coincidence.

>>718895581
So when the orange portal stops, will all relative velocity be zero?

>>718895574
>anything on the moon side of the portal will be subjected to the moon's gravity
that gravity is barely there.
the moons gravity is 1/5 of earths.

>>718895605
>zero arguments
thanks, I already know I'm right.

>>718895581
relativity ISNT real within the video game. correct.

>>718895625
>just flat out wrong and too stupid to understand.
its the same interaction as if you put a portal under yourself.
suddenly there is no resistance to gravity, and you are pulled through.
the cube is forced into a position with no resistance to gravity, so it moves.

>>718895579
Draw your pole scenario

>>718895725
>its the same interaction as if you put a portal under yourself.
It's not the same interaction. A stationary cube will not go through a moving portal with how portals are implement in the game.

>>718895725
>thanks, I already know I'm right.
you didn't refute anything though, but I guess your head canon is too strong for actual arguments.

>>718895492
There is no pressure difference in the original problem for that to be the explanation for how A works.

>>718895551
>the moon effectively isn't moving.
What does "effectively isn't moving" mean? I'm not sure how to respond without knowing what that means.

>>718895574
Why does the moon's gravity have to do with how A works?

>>718884947
Look, buddy, think of it like a hula hoop...

>>718895080
>unironic hula hoop posting
Assuming the edges of the doorway doesn't hit you, nothing. However the equivalent of a doorway is two ends of a portal moving with each other and even B doesn't claim that will change your motion.

>>718895676
as the one handling all the b-tards pretending they understand the games limited physics, the cube does nothing a 0%, nothing at 50%, falls through at anything above 50%.

>>718895802
yes, it is.
you are just too stupid to picture the apple in your mind.
>>718895817
I refuted everything. you are just mad.
>>718895820
the moon in the game is just another static surface object.
IRL everthing moves, the earth, the moon, etc.
in the game the earth and the moon are rock solid and have NO physics interactions beyond collisions.
this is basic game shit.
the moons gravity doesnt have much to do with how A works, you are right to question it.
its gravity is weak versus the constant air flow blasting chell and everything through.

>>718895920
>you are just too stupid to picture the apple in your mind.
It's not about picturing, it's about what the actual engine allows. It does not allow the original A scenario.

>>718895920
>I refuted everything. you are just mad.
>>718887553
you're this guy

>>718895725
So if you're standing on the moon surface without any portals, will the moon's velocity pull you?

>>718895871
cut portal line: speedy thing goes in speedy thing comes out plus the relative velocity differential applied quantized so you dont explode

>>718895689
for the love of god you retards, the earth and everything on it are always moving, what matters is the relative motion two bodies meet at, the original image with a portal slamming down on a "still" cube is technically the exact same reaction as a cube slamming into a "still" portal at equal velocity

those tards actually believe this!

>>718895492
See >>718882943

>>718895579
>>718895452
Well, at least I don't follow in the context of this referring to the pole/box question, but in the case of the bullet question, it's not the same, because you would be suggesting that as the bullet traveled through the doorway, at that very point, the room began to move around the bullet at the same speed, therefore meaning the bullet retained it's speed but then the world moved, which is even more absurd than the hypothetical question of portals and the answer being B., which brings me back to the problem of the room being stationary, sharing both portals, and how you would reconcile that with no increase in speed and a reason for the continuation of movement.

I ask these questions, firstly for an answer and to see how people respond, but also because I am curious who is or is not computing some important detail here, if the people that would answer A. aren't confronting the absurdity of the premise in their attempt to answer.
>>718895729
I will try, but it's more or less the exact same as the box question, just with an object switch, and I think the usage of a pole over a box (to which the same logic must necesarilly apply), better illustrates in the mind my problem with the answer being A.

>>718895964
>It does not allow the original A scenario.
it does.
>>718895965
nope.
>>718895981
not in game, no.
the moon is just the map file.
it has no physics beyond the collision of physics objects with it.
thats how the source engine works.

>>718896073
>nope.
kek

>>718895920
>the moon in the game is just another static surface object.
Scripted sequences in games are intended to to represent the things they are showing. They do not need to be physics simulations. What is A and how does it work with the intended representation of a moving moon shown in the movie?

>>718895920
>the moon in the game is just another static surface object.
This is a retarded argument and you know it.

There is an established canon that says the moon orbits the earth in the portal universe and there is a goal in the game's cutscene to depict that canon.

>>718896059
You are just enforcing your B argument and saying portals are not windows to me who believes otherwise. The game shows air being sucked out into space which means the two spaces are connected. You lose.

>>718895402
>Portal has already reached top speed of 60mph at the moment it hits the cube
>For some reason the cube can move slower than the space moving over it because ???

>>718896073
Yeah so that's called the moon's gravitational pull.

>>718892076
Wouldn't change the fact you would see the 2200 mph difference between chell and the moon. Even if the gravity attempt to pull her towards it.

>>718896132
A is the way the physics work in game.
in game the cubes are a singular physics object, and the moon and earth are as well.
there is no need to consider the adjustment of the movement of someone on the earth into the movement of the moon, nor the shear forces potentially enacts on the object as it goes partway through.
all of that is cut out, and a great deal of physics mystically "disappears" effectively.
Otherwise, the velocity difference would effectively turn the portal into a woodchipper that strips away everything that enters apart from whatever is still on the other side of the portal.

>>718896169
no, its how the game treats it.
its how the fucking source engine works.
the map is the map. its just a bunch of collision boxes and textures with various entities frozen together on it.

>>718896248
you are too stupid for me to understand your retardation.

>>718896073
>it does.
No it does not. You have no idea about the engine and it shows.

It's obviously B!
Half of you are retarded.

>>718896173
>The game shows air being sucked out into space which means the two spaces are connected.
For what might be the fifth time I've had to say it this thread. No one is denying that.

You're demonstrating you don't actually know what it is you're arguing against. B also understands the portals behave like windows. But they also alter the motion of whatever passes through them in order to behave like a seamless passage.

>>718896281
yeah. as I said here >>718896442
without something magically equalizing forces between the two sides of the portal, it turns into a massively destructive shearing force.
>>718896458
nice projection.
>>718896468
you reversed the letters from OP image, but yes it is B, there.
the cube would not gain any momentum from the speed of it traveling through the portal, because the game engine reads it has having no movement until the gravity has a chance to pull it somewhere.

>>718896442
>no, its how the game treats it.
>its how the fucking source engine works.
All irrelevant when it comes to intended canon.

Do you think its canon that Chell can bring herself back to life whenever she dies? Do you think its canon that Chell can reverse time via loading saves?

>>718896595
>nice projection.
You had enough time to check it yourself. Now fuck off.

>>718896442
>all of that is cut out, and a great deal of physics mystically "disappears" effectively.
Ok, lets accept this for the moment. We now have to take a step back and question how Chell was pulled out of the portal if there is no air in the game to create a pressure difference.

>Otherwise, the velocity difference would effectively turn the portal into a woodchipper that strips away everything that enters apart from whatever is still on the other side of the portal.
Show your work. What would be the velocity difference between the different parts of her body in relation to each other.

>>718896226
>the cube can move slower than the space moving over it because ???
inertia

>>718896638
>All irrelevant when it comes to intended canon.
moving the goalposts
ignoring anything else you try to say
I already said that the game is limited so the portals work like A, even if the devs want it to be B and physics would say B.
>>718896650
ok so the engine is even more limited making it C.
must have caused some funny physics issues so they made a special collision rule.

>>718896684
>if there is no air in the game to create a pressure difference.
not what happened. you are twisting things around for the sake of arguing.
if there was no air then nothing would have happened. no one is talking about that.

>>718896830
>ok so the engine is even more limited making it C.
Exactly. It's not A.

>>718896830
>you are twisting things around for the sake of arguing.
My argument here is simply just that cut scenes are intended to represent some physics without actually having those physics. Also, you skipped responding to the second half.

>>718896830
>moving the goalposts
From the start what mattered was canon. Arguing over some technically of what implemented in the code is a stupid hill to fight for. Especially when the answer is basically "portals aren't developed enough for this shit >>718896650"

>>718895729
>>718896069
Here it is! Sorry it's a bit shitty, it's haphazardly thrown together in an online drawing thingy. Like I said, basically the same as the original box portal question.

>>718896875
I will instead shift my argument into a mere assumption that if it WERENT for whatever limitations that let to them making that extra collision, it would work like A.

hell maybe they put that in because they didn't like that it would work like A and wanted to make it like B.
but the physics of how stuff collides and gets force on itself doesnt change.
spent too much time fucking with shit on gmod.

>>718897058
your argument is something irrelevant. there is no point.

>>718897063
per the intended canon the moon sequence would have DESTROYED chell and wheatley as if they were being belt sanded at planetary speeds.
intended cannon portal physics does not work with the story.

>>718897154
Slight alteration with motion lines for consistancy.

>>718897154
if we eliminate the safeguard the devs put in, the option C, it would behave like A.
nothing is pushing the pole object but gravity, so it doesn't move until gravity can start tilting it.

>>718897156
>making that extra collision
There is no extra collision. It's the cube interacting with the platform as intended. Stop talking about the engine. It's not A in the game.

>>718897156
>your argument is something irrelevant. there is no point.
Why do you think that? Also, you still skipped the second half again.

>>718897258
you want the math.
fine, give me a bit.

>>718897156
Intended canon portal physics shows that portal seamlessly change momentums without incurring any kind of damage. This even makes physical sense when you stop to think about what it is about sudden changes in motion that causes damage to things.

>>718897235
I think that very word "continuous" is one of many keys to the answer, continuity, but again, those who answer A. don't seem to account for that. I've yet to have it proven to me (and my mind is open to it) that they do so in conjunction with their application of laws of physics, because as I understand it it's only continuous with the context of the entrance portal side, yet once again, all is still in the room itself.
(side note, the stillness of the room necesarilly disproves the hula hoop/Buster Keeton analogy by the fact that the opposite end of a hula hoop doesn't move all of reality along with it.

Check out my hula hoops, B fags.

>>718897154
Yeah i was trying to understand why it was a contention, i dont see any issue with a. Your notion of a bullet doubling its speed likewise makes no sense. Can you describe what force is acting on the pole/bullet?

>>718897335
no, it doesn't make physical sense.
seamlessly changing momentums without incurring damage is the A scenario, because in the A scenario those conflicting forces are magically prevented from shearing on the object.

>>718897258
here
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/809086/speed-at-which-the-moon-moves-past-a-point-on-earths-surface

think about the shear forces generated from an INSTANT acceleration into even 30 meters per second.
the SHEAR forces of that enacted upon any physical object, starting from the very tip that emerges from a portal.

>>718897528
Omg hes gonna kill us all, everyone buckle in when they hit the floor we're gonna see some serious shit

>>718885139
The fact core notoriously makes shit up thoughbeit

>>718881751
it only works that way in a vacuum, in a room with atmosphere the portal is also taking in air which causes air resistance to stop the cube from launching
both A and B are right under different circumstances

>>718897605
>no, it doesn't make physical sense
Damage is incurred by suddenly accelerations due to the way the structure of your body can end up out of shape. If you hit a wall at 100 mph it's specifically the front part of you suddenly stop while the back part of you is still moving that means you body is pushed out of shape and it damages you.

With a portal though? The change in motion that happens perfectly aligns with the portal moving over you meaning there's no point where your body end up out of shape. So your body structure remains in tact and you don't receive any damage.

>>718897578
>Can you describe what force is acting on the pole
Yes, the very pole itself, necessitate by the fact of it's movement in a stationary room and the movement continuing behind it, another question, which would perhaps illustrate it even better would be if you had not just one box but 2 stacked on top of each other, then you would have to ask he would answer A., would box one not launch box two as it is fully on the other side? I think the one that would answer A. would be hard pressed to deny rapid movement of an object out of the exit portal wouldn't force soemthing out of it's way to get out. All of these things I think invariably and a giant arrown pointing directly at the answer being B, down to the intimate contradiction between the premise of the A. answer and the premise of the existence of portals.

At what point do you apply physics on the exit end of the portal? You can't answer the quesiton in a way that deletes portals, so then the question becomes where the continuity lies between the end of portal 1 and 2, which I've yet to hear those that would answer A. (who I will now call A. fags, not for argument but for expediency) give any account for whatsoever. My contention lies in the fact that I have on the other hand, formed a theory.-

>>718898116
>The change in motion that happens perfectly aligns with the portal moving over you meaning there's no point where your body end up out of shape. So your body structure remains in tact and you don't receive any damage.
A scenario due to magical and limited game physics.

>>718897605
>the shear forces generated from an INSTANT acceleration
I see what the issue is here. B simply says that the relative velocity is conserved in part specifically to counteract what you are talking about. Chell comes out at the velocity of the moon, not starting from the velocity of the earth and then accelerated to the velocity of the moon. There is not actually a force involved in B. The upper body moved at 2000 m/h along with a portal moving 2000 m/h while the lower body doesn't move with a portal that isn't moving. There is no deformation of the body, which means there is no damage.

>>718898231
B simultaneously DOES allow those forces to be in place from the speed of the entering portal moving.
they want the acceleration difference to NOT matter on the moon, between two moving objects, but ALSO matter at far lower speeds in all of their gifs.

>>718898159
>>718897578
Regarding the bullet question... did you even envision what I spoke of? If the portal is traveling at the object, and the object is traveling it at it, then, if both are traveling at each other, both moving 3000 FPS, then the speed at which it escapes the exit portal will be 6000 FPS, but the question is, would it for some reason come to an abrupt stop slow back to 3000 FPS as it exits the portal or will it continue at the speed at which it escaped, 6000 FPS, and if not, can you reconcile the logic behind that, with the belief that the answers are A. for both the pole, and the box question?

>>718898159
It sounds like you havent played portal. There is no start and end to a portal, if you stand inside it youre half in one room and half in another. You say the pole is acting on itself so where is the newton 3rd law bc it cant be on itself twice

>>718884947
Yeah. /v/ is full of actual retards and schizos, hence why these threads are so garbage.

>>718898169
You mean due to portals. But it aligns with a physical logic. It's not just "the portal don't damage you because MAGIC".

>>718898503
There is never a situation where there are forces in the standard explanation for B. It is always rate in equals rate out without a force or acceleration.

>>718887506
That laser cutting section is a scripted sequence, moving portals don't actually work in engine

>>718898556
Could you clarify the question?

>>718898550
Youre confusing the speed at which the piston and the bullet are moving towards each other for the speed of the bullet itself. This is a frame of reference error. The kinetic energy of the bullet never changes

>>718898663
Newtons 3rd law is for every force there is an equal and opposite reaction you said the pole is acting on itself so where is the opposite force applied

>>718898007
To my understanding, the idea of A would be the equivalent of another universe or "frame of reality or whatever" would be crashing into our unmoving universe, therefore the lack of force from our stable universe would flop into the charging universe.

While for B, the idea is that the entrance universe would be moving from the perspective of the exit universe, thus that would be where the sudden force is generated.
Is that all clear? My use of the word universe is just a placebo because i can't think word for it atm.

>>718898503
If by acceleration difference you mean damage happening due to the momentum changing, B never claims that happens.

>>718898231
>Bfags: its literally magic

>>718898965
This is what is shown in the game.

>>718898965
>Afags
>The cube magically loses speed upon exiting the portal
>Bfags
>The cube magically gains speed upon entering the portal
The whole argument is essentially about precisely when the magical stuff happens.

>Portals aren't Do-ACK!
>>718898878
What now Bisters?

>>718899087
Regardless neither a nor b make prescriptions for the scenario so the argument is irrelevant. Either works fine for magic portals nullify environmental velocity and gravity etc

>>718898703
This would be best illustrated if I knew how to depict it with a video, because it's hard to understand if you aren't envisioning it with your mind, and it's hard to find the words to articulate it, although, I will try to do so in an indirect way. Say you have 2 cars on a road, on both sides of the road, one is still, one is moving, and it passes the car, and lets say, in a period of 3 seconds the car is 10 feet ahead of where the still car was from. Now lets imagine both cars are moving that same speed, in opposite direactions, the cars would be 20 feet from each other in the same amount of time. This too, would be much the case for the bullet and the portal, but here's the problem. The room in which bothe portals reside, is the same, and on one end, the bullet is 3000 FPS, the other, 6000.
See the problems that come from the fundamental contradiction in physics from the premise of portals? It's an interesting question but best case scenario if we are applying physics to the question the answer has to be the violation of the question itself, and the disproval of portals. Therein lies much of my problems with the answer A., but here, I think I may have equally disproven B. in the bounds of the question so I will have to think about this one for a moment...
>>718898758
You are applying physics only on one side and the continuity of there then being a pole on the exit portal's side would therefore make no sense. We are acknowleding that the pole is indeed moving, correct?

>>718899162
The difference is that portals changing momentum isn't pulled out of no where. Changing direction is a change in momentum, especially when the portals are on a moving object like the Earth in a way that is comparable to >>718893750. It isn't 100% defined in the games, but everything points towards B. Meanwhile whatever happens in A is completely new and no one can actually decide what A actually is.

>>718899361
You would have a lot more to consider if you wanted to program a comprehensive version of A that goes beyond the initial problem. Sure it could be done, but defining the rules are completely arbitrary while B actually fits well with what portals have already been shown to do. Most importantly, arguments are fun even if I get the feeling many people are not arguing in good faith. It is still fun to try and think about how both answers would work and see how other people describe it.

>>718899386
>We are acknowleding that the pole is indeed moving, correct
If the portals are oriented on the same axis there would be no movement. In the image the movement is due to gravity being on different axes

Youre still not understand frames for the bullet, lets try in energy terms since we know you can't create it. Does the bullets kinetic energy change when you think its 6000fps? The answer cant be yes.because there is no force acting on it. Inthe frame you can calculate it based on the velocity addition of the two objects but that is the energy potential of the collision. And there is no collision so the energy is static and therefore the speed and mass are too

>>718899729
>You would have a lot more to consider if you wanted to program a comprehensive version of A that goes beyond the initial problem
A is a normal physics sim, b creates a force out of nothing, bfags resort to misunderstanding frames and now the moon nonsense to justify it because its intuitive to them. But things in physics are often not intuitive

>>718899997
Then tell me how A works next time we have a thread.

>>718899780
The continuity and physics of which the object fully is a part as it is on the oppsite end would have to sort that out and it better do it quick because reality is gonna break real fuckin fast LOLE

I joke but this is the problem, the premise of the question really disproves it all. I've taken the side of B. for a long time though because it's continuous in a way which seems to have a synthesis between the problems presented by the portal question, but really I can't say it's any less absurd than A ultimately, I just find the manner of approach that those who apply the logic that gets you A. to be a rather straghtforward but not fully thought out one. I'd be really curious to see a portal game programmed like portal, where this is properly resolved. I start to think about the slit experiment, but I digress.

Suggesting an answer here is like suggesting a glitch in our finely tuned reality.

>>718900213
Do you think gravity goes through portals?

>>718900496
Which is to say, it's absurd, and any amount of a deviation from it's fundamental structure, necessites the whole not being, it just can't be at all.

>>718900070
I rly dont know whats to tell, portal makes a hole between 2 pts and thats how it functions in game what more do you need

>>718900554
Either I'm having a stroke or you are.

>>718900537
I guess I'm too dumb to answer that. What do you think?

>>718900652
We are.

>>718881751
Aren't you not supposed to be able to put portals on moving surfaces?
I suppose the earth is always moving, but assuming the portals keeping perfect relativity to each other by merit of being on the same planet let's them function makes sense, since any extra movement causes them to fizzle.
So why does the moon work?

Because of the fine tuning argument, the portal question leads to the proof of the existence of God.
Things have gotten real.

>>718900726
Oh well i thought you were alluding to it. I think it should but if theres a big diff like the moon then things would go ham and you have to fall back onto magic portals blend spacetime or w/e but you have to do that anyway rly

>>718885563
>Cube must exit portal at the same speed it enters
"Exiting at the same speed it enters" and "maintaining momentum" aren't always the same thing.