Portal problem

user, plz. Remember that you are a fag, therefore, everything you say is invalid.

...

And the Moon too.

What if you placed a portal on a stable "non moving" surface and then that surface became dislodged and fell?

The portal would dissipate, I imagine.

Do you want black holes? Because this is how you get black holes.

So if this can be done, why doesn't someone test the ancient ass shitposting starter and put the whole thing to rest?

Yes it can, remember that bit with the toxic gas pipes in portal 2?

The cube has no velocity, there is no reason why it would fly.

You're gay.

this.

It always puzzled my why people would ponder this question if they haven't taken high school physics yet.

you know the answer.
they're not in high school

Probably because they have niggerbrains and did take high school physics but no amount of help will make them any more clever than your average dog.

Are you telling me that this adult Christian imageboard is host to middle schoolers?

This is a christian image board?!?!?

well, it is summer right now

yes. Fuck off, furfag.

into the folder it goes

I might be an idiot, but the cube does have velocity relative to the orange portal so looking from the blue portal (which is stationary) the cube is coming jn at the velocity of the orange portal.

QUALITY

You're an idiot. The portal is a false flag, it simply a hole with an exit somewhere else. If we remove it and slam down a regular panel with a hole we see the panel does not touch the cube and if it did the cube wouldn't just suddenly accelerate in the opposite direction that the panel was traveling.

In a simpler terms: the cube wouldn't fly if a hula hoop fell on it.

donate to my patreon so I can make a video about this guys

Another way of saying it is that portals only translate the velocity of the object entering/exiting them, not whatever surface they are attached on.

And as you said, they're basically a "hole" in the object, just one whose exit is someplace else.

Since the platform is coming at the cube at high speed, the cube has to come out of the other portal at equivalent speed. In order for A to happen, the cube would have to compressed in space between the 2 portals.

bumping this quality post
can't wait to screencap some sweet replies and post to /r/gaming

When was the last time you felt the earth move?

...

Just dump already

Last time your mom fell down lol

...

The cube could fly if the hoop hit the surface while going Plaid, but I'm pretty sure everything would just explode then.

rekt lmao

but it works off velocity. the cube has no velocity so its not going to fly out like B.

more?

FUCK OFF OVERWATCH

Neither A nor B. The block has no velocity, therefore B doesn't happen. The blue portal angles up, and gravity exists, so it would fall back through the blue portal immediately as gravity forced it down, however since the orange portal sits on the platform, the block sits atop the platform while jutting out the blue portal. So…?

Kek at all the fags saying this is high school physics tier while failing to realize that the block will be forced down back through the blue portal but sit on platform and just jut out. How's it going to HOP out to plop at the bottom of the ramp?

Why does she have her plain paws and not some prehensile paw fingers?
I mean you gave her some tits and she stands upright but she has no fingers of any sort?
That tongue would be good for blowjobs

what's your Battle.net, fellow anonymous? Me and my friends (some are girls :P) LOVE to play Overwatch more than we love to play LoL and we're always looking for more friends! :D

It has to have velocity in order to come out in the first place.

Portals are filled with tiny elves that push cubes through, and only through.

You can't fuck yourself with portals. All you can do is autofellate.

That's not on in the games. Just because of an engine oversight it doesn't mean it's possible.

Every surface that moves forwards or backwards in the games deletes the portal on it. Which means they can't be on surfaces that are moving forwards or backwards

user, why are you being so pedantic? It's a funny fast drawn cartoon just to make a point.

Because the force of the top surface hitting the bottom will transfer some energy into the cube. Try slamming your fist down really hard on a table with stuff on it, it will all bounce a little bit.

keep posting

Oh hey what's going on he-

No, NO! NOT THIS FUCKING THREAD AGAIN! I THOUGHT THIS SHIT WAS OVER AND DONE WITH IN FUCKING 2008.

AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Imagine all the lewd possibilities that portals could achieve, especially if portals were only visible to you and nobody else

Point is you can't do something on a whim and not think about it a little. How can she do anything but suck dick if she can't even hold them?
That rabbit is far too small for me so her allure isn't as strong as Gazelle's. I'm just a lonely guy and wanna fuck something with intellect okay

CHECK THIS HOT CHICK OUT!!!

Isn't it just far away?

That's true. We lack the information to know how MUCH energy though, it may or may not be enough

CHECK THIS HOT CHICK OUT

She's two feet tall. My dick would kill her if it even fit.

Definitely B

G-guys, t-take it easy now.

The real world doesn't have absolute position, everything is relative

Source engine isn't the real world, it does have absolute position and as such absolute velocity and momentum, you dumb shit

b-but it IS 2008!

Why don't you fucking test it? shows it can be done

How is it lewd if it's truth?
I'm like 6'5 and she's like 2'11 I'm by all means not a large dicked man. Even still the head of my phallus couldn't possibly penetrate without risking damage to her vagina. I'd fuck Blaziken though. Might be fun, she's a real fighter

Why would I fucking bother

Is there anywhere else it's supposed to be?

reported

This a bird posting thread now?

deported

Could have been a portal thread, but eh.

Again, think of it like a simple hula hoop. If it falls with you in the middle, do you need a velocity to exit?

You seem to have the fundamental misunderstanding that those panels will be for the most part air tight after slamming down. There's no falling back down because there won't be any space for it to do so.

While that is true, it will be so, so much closer to A than B

I wish

This is relevant to my interests.

...

...

A

its like you baboons dont even know basic physics

Get out, degenerate.

Your hula hoop analogy would be true if the second portal was also moving, but it isn't.

The cube can't "plop" out of the second portal since it exits an un-moving portal at very high speed.

B because the cube will have the momentum of the speed of the orange portal along the normal of the blue portal and the mass of the cube.

Portals work by ignoring every frame of reference except from the one in the junction between the portals.

From that perspective, the box is moving very fast, and the result is B.
Every time someone posts this shit I die a little more inside over how overwhelmingly people choose A.

The whole deal with portals is that they create a contradictory frame of reference. Under ALL circumstances. This situation is not some crazy exception just because moving portals aren't in the games.

Saying A is like thinking if you dropped the box into a floor portal and it came out a wall portal, that it would instantly move straight down and hit the floor under the wall portal.

The panel with the portal would have to decelerate as it impacts the panel holding the cube. From the blue portal's perspective, the cube would appear to rapidly approach the portal and then suddenly stop right as the bottom passes through, resulting in scenario A.

If the box was somehow suspended (e.g. magnetically) then scenario B would result.

But consider a long object with a separation point partway down. The orange portal falls, engulfs part of the object at high speed, and once the top section is entirely through it detaches. Since the length of the rod must be constant (inb4 relativistic contraction, we're too slow for that) then the speed of the end of the rod out of the blue must be equal to the speed of the falling orange portal.
Now suppose the top part has detached. The orange portal is decelerated to a stop. The bottom part of the object must also stop its travel through the portal. But the top part, now detached, cannot be affected by motion of the rest of the object or the portal, and so will continue along its trajectory.
Thus, the two objects that initially shared the same velocity (0) are now moving apart despite no force having been applied to either.

...

Maybe portals can only account for the rotation movement of the earth, or can't take acceleration.

The portal represent the minorities forcing the superior white race to move, which is the reason why the cube is white while the portals are colored. Ergo, portals are liberal propaganda perpetuated by the jews and need to be exterminated.

Ah so that's what it's like to fuck yourself in the ass

Just have her ride you like this. Not that hard to figure out.

that is a bad comparison. In the image the box has ZERO MOMENTUM. Dropping it means IT HAS MOMENTUM. You are literally comparing to different scenarios and saying they should have the same result.

...

I feel like you fucked up the wording hard

Imagine looking inside the Blue portal. From that perspective, the block isn't staying still, but instead moving towards the portal quickly. I can't see this as being anything but B. Why are so many people saying A? Is it really just because the box wasn't moving?

It's already been determined that:

In real life, don't think of it like a hula hoop going over a box. Think of it like one half of a hula hoop and another half in a different spot. You keep the relative momentum of what went through that first hula hoop half through the second half.

...

but the box has no momentum. Going through a hole in space does not magically give it momentum

The first half of the portal is what gives it that momentum. It's called relative velocity. It's why you don't fly to the back of an airplane when jumping in the cabin.

a is right because the portal has momentum, but the cube is just standing there; it gains only enough momentum to leave the other portal

I've just read through it again. Everything I've written is consistent. Would make an awful lot of sense if the people who think A is the answer can't grasp basic english though.

No, but being pushed out of the portal by the part of the box entering it would.

Please leave, underaged.

You're retarded.

Closer to A.

The cube is at rest and therefore a force must be exerted in order to cause it to start moving. The orange portal "hitting" the cube does not exert a force on the cube. If we assume the end position for the orange portal is when the distance between it and the platform the cube is on is 0, the cube will be fully through the portal where, since it is raised at an angle, the force of gravity will pull it down and it will slide(or possibly roll) down the incline.

If the friction between the cube and platform is high enough, and the incline steep enough, it is possible that the cube will simple sit on the ramp and not move.

Except it isn't, you dumb shit

No, but the part of the cube emerging from the portal consequently pushing into the part of the cube that has already left it would.

But what about the fact that the same length that is engulfed by the orange portal must emerge in exactly the same time from the blue portal?
As the orange portal engulfs the cube, the same amount of cube as has been engulfed MUST emerge from the blue portal. There is nowhere else for that volume to go, and as far as we know size is preserved across portals. Thus, if the orange portal is moving down at some speed, the cube must leave the blue portal with the same speed relative to the portal as it entered, which is in this case the same speed as the orange portal had.
This is assuming that the acceleration component I already mentioned here are ignored.

The problem is that moving portals allow an object's motion in one reference frame to be freely transferred to a different frame. Either physical size or momentum must become non-conservative.

I consider this from the cube's perspective, it would literally be like a door frame falling with my in the middle.

Perhaps they can exist under Uniformly Accelerated Rectilinear Motions? Any accelerations acquired after appearing on a surface might destabilize them.

Think of the portal as a net. Imagine passing something through the hoop of a net: the object doesn't move even if you slam the net down as fast as you can. All a portal is is a "net" except the inside of the net is wherever the other portal is.

A is correct because gravity would be the only thing that would make the cube move.

Shit forgot to quote
perhaps only Uniform Rectilinear Motions?

Except the part of you above said door frame would be pushed upwards by the part of you that's below said door frame.

FOR
FUCK
SAKE

But that doesn't affect motion. It's a purely structural force.

that would hardly give me or anything enough force TO FLY

someone gets it

A it would rest about halfway in the portal

Definitely A, it is the only one that makes logical sense.

Why halfway? the other portal is clearly resting firmly against the other surface.

…goddamn.
That's a pretty convincing way to stump like half the people in this thread. I'm not one for this term, and I think it's the mark of a shill a lot of the time, but just this once:
BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
L
O
W
N

T
H
E

F
U
C
K

O
U
T

The cube enters the orange portal with some relative velocity and leaves the blue with that same relative velocity - flying up out of the blue portal. Since the orange and blue are moving together, then the cube remains stationary with respect to the platform it was resting on.

That is not the problem. The problem is when the orange and blue are moving relative to one another, because the relative velocity of the cube to the orange portal MUST be the same as its velocity relative to the blue portal, which means it MUST change its velocity relative to its surroundings.

Here's a video that tests this scenario in Portal 2. Apparently the engine can't handle it, and usually the cube just gets stuck in the floor, or some other odd behaviour happens.

It'd be cool to write an engine or just program a one-time simulation that could actually handle moving portals, but I probably couldn't do it on my crap machine.

Pretty much this. The cube has no momentum, and the platform as no way of transferring momentum to the cube so it won't really go anywhere

Relativity says B. Think of the two portals as representing two reference frames, or even just two separate worlds if that helps you picture it.

When you look through the blue portal into the "orange world", you see the entire world moving up toward the portal, including the cube itself. When the orange portal stops moving, the "orange world" stops moving. By the time the "orange world" stops moving however, the cube has moved through the portals and entered "blue world", maintaining its velocity relative to the portal.

Put out of your mind the idea that a stationary object has no momentum. For an observer looking through the blue portal at the box in the orange world, the box is not stationary.

It's roughly equivalent to considering the static post below the orange portal as a pillar thrust quickly through the orange portal, and then suddenly stopped. The momentum of the cube is maintained because it is unattached, so continues moving (pic related).

For bonus points, here is a diagram of how to fuck yourself in the ass using portals. It's not to scale, and you'd probably need a long cock anyway.

...

I'm starting to think they're doing this to us on purpose
just like the anons that support flat earth

Nobody talking about momentum has addressed the issue of the physical size and structure of the cube. If 1m of cube enters the orange portal in 1 second, the 1m of cube must leave the blue portal in 1 second. Since the blue is stationary relative to the room, then the cube MUST be moving relative to the room, or it could not emerge.

...

Any time I see a sage anymore it's somebody being deliberately retarded or getting huffy at the joke that it's a downvote.

I want off this ride.

...

Just picture yourself being slammed down with a portal and you'd be standing still. Would it really make sense for you to suddenly go flying?

Say the orange is moving down at 1 m/s towards a 1 m cube. It takes 1 s to engulf the cube.
It must also take 1 s for the blue portal to expel the cube. In that 1 s, the top of the cube must travel 1 m in order for the bottom to emerge. Thus, the top is traveling at 1 m/s relative to the blue portal - and therefore to its original speed as well.

The only way for this not to be the case is if physical size is not conserved, in which case it is very difficult indeed to make sense of anything.

not enough to spontaneously give the cube kinetic energy and send it flying

Fuck I am still upset about that.
They made a big point about that in the first game, even to the point of stopping the action just to show you that portals disappear on moving surfaces, and then they just forget all about that in the second game.

uuugh fuck

...

ah how devastating, it invalidates all my fanfictions

It's like 100 years later, SCIENCE happened

Except it only brought 1 puzzle which doesn't actually work with physics objects

If a doorframe comes flying at you, would you instanty get propelled forward?

In that case why wouldn't they tell us about it?
If there was somebody working on improving the portal gun then why is this the only thing that was changed about it?
Who changed the portal gun? Was it glados? Wasn't she only there to oversee testing?
It was a dumb thing to change the mechanics of the game for a single puzzle, it breaks immersion by showing you that the world presented has inconsistent rules .

smh fam

Of course not. Your speed relative to the doorframe would be the same before and after it passed you. You would see the doorframe flying away behind you. Which is exactly what the cube sees in scenario B.

And while I am on the topic of bitching about portal 2 am I the only one that feels like they never take the training wheels off?
It feels like you spend the entire game learning new mechanics only for them to be dropped soon after you learn them.
To me the game never really feels like it hits it's stride when you have to combine everything that you learned together.
Compare the "outside the main testing chamber" levels from the two games.
In the first game this is where you show mastery of all the tricks you learned in the testing chambers in order to, in turn master the entire laboratory.
In the second game this is a chance to learn some new game mechanics that aren't really used in conjunction with the things presented in the beginning of the game.

Why did I even bother opening this thread

clinking my ribs to be honest addams fam

This game made a mistake Tetris avoided for years; Fucking story time. I just want puzzles, why should lore interfere with the mechanics of the game?

It's better than it would turn out an a certain other top board. At least here it doesn't devolve into calling Werner Heisenberg's work fake Jewish science.

The biggest problem with portals is that they seemingly violate conservation of energy. People point out that by putting one portal on the ceiling and one on the floor, you can essentially create a perpetual motion machine.

If portals or teleportation in general existed it would be constrained by this rule. Transmitting an object from one portal to another must require at least as much energy as the difference in potential energies of the object at the start and endpoints. Otherwise they would break the universe.

Also nobody would want to go through them because you can't be certain that you'd ever come out the other side - perhaps an exact copy, but persistence of consciousness would certainly be a serious question.

LONGER THAN YOU THINK DAD!

Fucking hell people this isn't hard.

Imagine what is happening as the portal is passed over the damn cube.

There's one part that's just had the portal passed over it, while there is another which is about to have it passed over.

If you're saying that the part cube that's just had the portal passed over it is stationary, that means that the other part of the cube is going to emerge from the portal and fucking push into it.

Imagine the cubes as fucking particles if you have to. Imagine the particles of the cube getting pushed into each other because every stationary particle leaving the portal is suddenly getting particles pushed into it.

I swear to god if I see one more dipshit try to talk about portals as if they behave the same as hula hoops or door frames, not even bothering to check the thread to see they're stupid fucking reasoning has already been said by every other dumbass…

wait, are you saying that if a something existed that broke conservation of energy instead of assuming that there is something wrong with the law of the conservation of energy you'd throw the thing that broke it out? that would be like saying things can't approach the speed of light because that breaks conventional gravity or something.

IF portals were to be actualized as portals (rather than extremely fast atomic printers) you'd have to assume it would be because we'd discovered some property of the universe that's currently unknown to us anyway, so saying 'conservation of energy hurrdurr' is a bit silly when you are already assuming there is some massive property of the universe we aren't observing right now.

The conservation of energy also assumes a closed system, if portals were to exist I'd guess it would be a function of our universe not actually being a closed system and we could be pulling the energy in from somewhere else or dumping an equal amount of 'anti-energy' into some other place where that concept makes sense.

As for OP physics doesn't care if the box thinks its not moving, its relative speed at its new point is going to be high because the relative speed of the portal that's pushing it out to the box is high at its entry point.

Here's the thing, portals don't exist

Alright you earthcuck, it doesn't move, that's simply a meme. everyone knows the Earth is entirely flat, just like in DnD.

But there is a section where you place a portal on a moving object in game.

You can't move portals, but if you theoretically could, they would have to still use the "speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out" logic. The cube is moving towards the portal at the same speed that the portal is moving towards the cube. Actual movement is irrelevant here because what you're looking for is relative velocity. Between the two pieces, it's identical.

Therefore, B.

Portals function as a wormhole, so they're effectively motionless even if they're placed on "moving" surfaces. It is not the equivalent of slamming a hula-hoop over a cube at all.

If you don't understand this, you either don't understand the problem presented, or can't wrap your head around basic physics.

See flowchart if you're still mentally ill.

This is a fundamentally different problem. In the original image, only one of the portals is moving.

Yeah but we can have hypothetical scenarios where something that doesn't exist is applied to our current framework - we know how portals act in general in regards to a physics system that at least emulates ours and can extrapolate how it would work with very slightly higher order physics.

Some people think about this sort of thing for fun

Not me, I like to think of a unified theory of time travel that could explain all the different things we see in time travel in fiction - even things that are explicitly contradictory. It takes all kinds

spotted the martian. prepare to get ayytomized

DnD earth isn't flat. Grayhawk is geocentric though and there is magic water on the sun to keep it cool.

By the way, to everyone talking about conservation of momentum:
Even stationary portals violate it
Momentum is a vector. If you go into an orange portal and come out a blue portal facing a direction orthogonal to the orange, you've just violated conservation of momentum.
Since portals transfer the frame-dependent properties like speed and momentum from one frame to another, you cannot discuss conservation of these quantities before and after as measured by an unchanged external observer frame.

fuck this reddit shit

Only in shit modules. You see, earthcucks don't realize the truth of our modern world. It's all a part of a master plan, you see, and that's why our world exists on a Plane, making it flat.

I think the key here is acceleration.
If a surface moves at a constant/ near constant velocity the portal would not "feel" the difference movement and stasis.

The problem would then be to create a device which can move from stasis to a constant velocity with minimal acceleration.

It would necessitate a ridiculous quantity of energy to accelerate an object within an indetectible window.

Nigger I don't care whether you think our Earth is flat or not, Oerth, the world of Greyhawk, is a sphere and it's sun orbits it.

Though depending on the nature of portals, relative movement between the ends may have an effect even if constant.

The blue portal is moving in this example numpnuts

it's option C

Thusly is the infinite enigma that is fiction.

It's not a matter of the world being just "flat", it's a matter of the world being a plane user. Can't you see what this means? Can't you hotheads comprehend the consequences of the world being a Plane?

we are on the plane of disappointment

...

...

So how come this cunt didn't do the cube experiment so we'd get an answer once and for all?
I think it would just plop out because lol source engine.

see
Basically, it flips the fuck out and puts the prop into the floor because lol Source Engine.

Do those physics feel in control?

...

A, because the block is not moviing. non-speedy object goes in, non-speedy thing comes out.

If you look at it from blue's point of view, it is still not moving because what is causing the block to come closer, is the "camera" aka the orange portal. If you place an object far away from you and then start running towards it. It becomes closer, is it cause the object is moving? No, its cause you are …. aka the orange portal.

If you think it is option B. Pick up a physics book. Seriously.

Fuck off, kike.

We've had this thread a million fucking times already. Its been answered many times before

Its option A because the block itself is moving only within its reference frame ie. the same way the world appears to be moving with reference to an observer on a train looking out a window

All potential momentum is lost because only the portal itself is moving, not the block

This is fucking high-school level physics

We've been having this argument since 2007 on 4/b/.

That gif is bad and can create misconception, use this one instead.

It's B.
Momentum is not conserved; even the most basic portal situations prove that (>>10344420). You have to look at it in terms of how it enters the portal and the space it occupies.
The top of the block leaves the blue portal first, since it enters the orange portal first. Then the part just below it enters, and the top must move to make room. then a bit further down enters and the top must move further. The rate at which the block enters the portal is the same as that at which it exits it. This rate is determined by the orange portal's motion.
The block must leave the portal as fast as it enters, in order to make room for the parts of the block entering and exiting behind it, or it will overlap itself.
Therefore, it must exit with the same speed as the orange platform.

Momentum depends on reference frame. The block's frame changes when it passes through the portal. Analyzing momentum will not solve the problem.

and
They explain correctly.

Right, up until the orange portal stops moving. When that happens, the block stops being….displaced? into the blue portal and gravity pushes the block down the slope. Just like A shows.

I booted up Terraria to try to do some tests with portals there only to realize there are no mobile blocks in the game and if the supporting blocks disappear the portal gets dispelled. I did discover that you can hammer temporary ice blocks into slopes so I guess that counts for something.

falling sand?

What happened to inertia? Things in motion staying in motion?

the cube was never in motion
it is not moving through the portal
the portal is moving around it

Then it becomes a question of how the orange portal's platform decelerates. I've mostly been assuming that the miniscule gap between the block and it's platform means the whole block has entered before the orange portal stops.

That would be true, if the blue portal was also moving. You're incorrect.

Tried that. It doesn't move as a "real" block and it dispels any portal connected to it.

That's the key. The portal is moving relative to the block. The orange is moving relative to the observer. Since the blue is not moving relative to the observer, for the block-portal relative motion to be the same, the block must be moving.

The portal intertia is stopped by the platform, the block is not moving and has none.

When part of the block is next to the orange portal it's movement is 0, when the next fraction of a second happens and the portal makes the same part of the block next to the blue portal(whatever the hell is happening there), no force has been applied to the block, its movement is still 0.

But the block must move to make room for the rest of the block behind it, which leaves the blue as fast as it enters the orange, and so the block must have the same speed relative to the blue as the orange has to the block.

Portals don't exist. The question is impossible because we're missing information on how'd they theoretically work. This isn't a logic question.

If it was being displaced, it was moving.

What happens Holla Forums?

it maintains speed

False vacuum metastability event.

oh shit, pressure

Assuming the blue portal is stationary, it maintains its speed. If the blue portal is also moving at the same speed and direction of the companion cube, then it would be suspended between both portals.

I always assumed that portals just created a tesseract like structure. Something like action at a distance but with the ability to transmit classical information.

The other poster explained it better than me, What is happening is THE PORTAL IS MOVING. The portal is moving "around" the block and therefore the block does not move. This is possible even when only one "side" is moving, in this case the orange one.

Once special relativity comes in it will probably depend on the nature of the portals and how the object and information are transported.
It could be a simple relativistic vocity addition, or it could be more complex from varying length contraction between the orange and blue ends.

The cube moves out at 99.99994994997500001251250624997% of the speed of light, according to special relativity.
I'm assuming the blue portal is stationary.

Then how does it come out of the portal?

Motion is relative. The block and orange portal are moving relative to one another, and that's all that matters. Which is moving is a matter of perspective.

It all hinges on whether portals have a "surface" that matter is absorbed into and extruded from or whether portals create an instantaneous conjunction between two separate locations.

What does scenario A even describe, anyway?
In either case, the block must move to emerge from the blue end, since the blue isn't moving relative to the observer. The block must have some speed.
So the argument is either B, where the speed is the same as it enters with, or A, where it leaves… vaguely slowly?

Speed of light is relative. The relative velocity from the perspective of the portal would be V= (.999+.999)/((1+(.999*.999))/1) * c

Like a wormhole? Honestly I don't know enough about the theory behind them to say what that'd imply.

Imagine there is a non moving block in the air, you take a hula hoop and swing it around the block, much like a magician and the floating girl trick. How did that block go threw the hula hoop if the block never moved? Same thing is happining here.

I don't see how that would matter.
For the block to come out of the exit plane, it has to move relative to that exit.

This is my question as well. If the matter in A all "appears" at a single point without moving, it seems like it would fuse, or explode, or form a singularity, or something.

And if you define stationary based on the hula hoop, then the block is moving. And we define the blue as stationary, so likewise the block moves.

But the block was moving, relative to the hoop.
In fact, assuming I did this on earth, we're all moving, relative to say, the moon.

I think we have to create a special frame of reference to make portals even work. Or maybe not? Maybe it's a quantum entanglement thing?

Mash the two portals back-to-back and form that hula hoop, and then move it toward a stationary, floating cube and have the cube go through the middle. What is the result?

Stays still, because both portals are moving.

Has anyone tried to test this in Narbacular Drop?

Portals can't move relative to one another. Very simple. Solves problem.

If 1 portal is moving and one is stationary, and the moving portal stops halfway over the cube, does it get yanked through or stay still?

If the cube stays still. why would it move when fully covered?

If the cube moves, how would it do so when no force is applied?

movement is relative, not absolute.
math teaches us that a pull is the same as a push from the other side.
what would happen if the cube's platform was moving instead?
the end result of that example would be the same as this.
b. is the correct answer.

The distance covered by the orange portal must be equal to the distance traveled by the object emerging from the blue portal, in the same time. They must therefore have the same speed.
The ruler starts stationary, enters a moving portal, and must emerge moving from a stationary portal.

A hula hoop doesn't conserve the velocity of another object

A Hula hoop is not a fucking portal and it doesn't even behave like a portal as defined by the game portal

I think we three (me vs you 2) have different views on what movement means. I view the hoop as moving cause a outside force causes it to move, "my" hand pushes on the hoop and that gives it acceleration and movement. If i were to stop pressing on the hoop, it would still be moving, until another force (gravity?) acted on it. While the block is not moving cause it has no acceleration or anything else.

So let me ask you way back to the original question, before the orange portal hits the block. The block has no force pressing on it, when the orange portal reaches the block, in order for B to happen, a force has to be applied to the block to make it shoot out like that. You guys claim that the displacing of the block causes this force(essentually), while I and are trying to show that no force is being applied to the block when it goes through the portal.

So my question is how is there any force being applied to the block when going between the portals and from where?

Force is irrelevant. Force only matters when we look at acceleration. No force is necessary since the block has constant speed.
It's the definition of "stationary" that changes.

is there any possible way for the result to be B? is there any possible way to make it B without accelerating or pushing the cube to the orange portal?

But that is what I am saying, The speed of the block is 0 (before the portal hits the block anyway) , for B to work, the block speed must be something other than 0, to change the speed of an object, a force must be applied.

First of all, your view, or frame of reference, is irrelevant, because we're not discussing your interaction with the hoop or block, we're discussing the hoop's interaction with the block.

Secondly, the block is composed of particles. So when you ask where this force comes from, I say the particles of the block emerging from the portal push on the particles of the block that have already emerged from the portal. If they didn't, they would occupy the same point in space.

force doesn't matter.
Movement is completely relative. It's the same reason why a unmovable object is impossible. Due to relativity, you can make that object "move" by moving yourself, and just figuring that you're actually completely still.

The end result IS B.

Reminder that the logic "speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out" is actually true.

NO NO NO!
You are completely correct!
It isn't that the block is moving, but rather everything ELSE is moving! The reason why portals cannot move is because their velocities and properties are linked with each other, the question itself is fallible!

The result is you're fucking retarded. Only one portal is moving in the original question. Read the thread and get your head checked.

The block has speed from the perspective of the orange portal, therefore, it must have speed when it comes out of the blue portal. It's because the blue portal is stationary and the orange portal isn't that it seems like the cube gets speed out of nowhere.

the speedy thing goes in? but the block is perfectly still, from any point of reference
this shit is physics, you sure you're formulating your question the non-retarded way?

But the speed isn't changing. The frame of reference is.

Under Newton's model of physics A would be correct because it's all based on forces applied. In this case moving from gravitational pull to another. Under Einstein's model of physics B would be correct because everything is based on movement in relative time-space. In other words, to the other side of the portal it's the cube moving; not the entire universe. Who's right, Newton or Einstein? Probably Einstein.

If you stop thinking about the block and start thinking about the portal and how things move relative to the portal this makes more sense.

The first thing you learn in any physics course is everything is relative. It's just as fair to say you are walking on the earth as it is to say the earth is moving underneath yourself.

Honestly, neither really applies here, since portals require things neither model includes (additional dimensions, or something like that). The portals freely transfer quantities like velocity and momentum from one frame to another, which is not something any real physical theory actually allows.

DEAR GOD SOMEONE MAKE ME BELIEVE ITS B!

...

the problem is remade like this
what changes?

Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out.
Your prospective is the moving portal. You believe you are not moving. You are still. What is everything else doing? The cube is then moving towards YOU.
Then the cube goes inside you.
That's speedy thing in.

What's the next part?
speedy thing out of course.
Option B. is correct. Newton can eat shit.

See my diagram in
If 2.5 cm/s of ruler enters the orange portal - regardless of how the two meet - then 2.5 cm/s must emerge from the other end. If the blue portal is not moving, then the ruler must be. And it must be moving at the same speed as it enters, which is the speed set by the orange portal.

Consider an experiment where the orange portal comes to an immediate stop just inches above the cube on the pedestal. I think we can all agree that the cube won't magically jump up off the pedestal and into the orange portal. An observer watching through the blue portal would see the pedestal and cube approaching themselves at breakneck speed, before both coming to an immediate stop just moments before passing through the portal. Again, we can say that the cube won't magically jump up off the pedestal, through the orange portal, and hit the observer in the face. This reasoning holds true regardless of if the orange portal comes to a stop after it has engulfed a quarter of the cube, half of the cube, or even all of the cube.

The logical mistake that the believers of the B argument make is in thinking that an apparent change in spatial position must always come from a change in velocity, acceleration, momentum, etc. This is wholeheartedly untrue when dealing with spatial distortions.

Please refute

Why?

The obvious refutation is his belief that a change in position must be accompanied by a change in speed. As I mentioned, this is not true when dealing with spacial distortions.

Consider the cases yourself, why would a quarter of the cube (that is not in contact with the pedestal) gain momentum, while the 3/4 of the cube (that is in contact with the pedestal) not gain momentum? It seems rather suspect to believe that the part of the cube that is in contact with nothing would gain momentum while the part that is in contact with something would not.

Do portals transfer gravity or electromagnetism? If you put a portal on the north pole and another on the south, would all the magnetic field lines all fall into the portals, and if so, what would happen.

The diagram shows speed as constant, at 2.5 cm/s. No change about it, before or after the portal.

If the top of the block is not moving, and the blue portal is not moving, what happens to the stuff that enters the orange behind the top if the block? It must go somewhere, but if the top of the block is not moving fast enough to make room for it to leave the blue portal, it can't come out there.

In order to come out of the blue portal, the cube MUST move. As the orange portal is forcing the cube through at X speed, the cube MUST come through the blue portal at X speed.

It doesn't move when not in contact with the portal because it isn't in contact with the portal. It's a false equivalency.

The only way that A is even possible is if the cube goes through the orange portal from the bottom up and appears from the blue portal in the same way, but that is obviously impossible.

Hello halfchan my old friend.

WITHOUT B, WELL NEVER SURPASS ANYTHING IN LIFE, WE NEED TO MAKE B HAPPEN!

itt: dissapointing physics. I told you Doom 3 was better but noo.

IM GOING

B

no A

FUCK GOD DAMMIT

Well, I'm at (26) and I need to wake up in four hours, so I'm leaving.
I hope my shitty diagrams helped some people figure out what was going on.

And for the record, for what such claims are worth, I am actually a physicist.

its a, you're changing the problem by having the blue portal move

Again I state that the that apparent changes in position need not be accompanied by motion when dealing with spatial distortions. Consider the cube position change to be a result of a bending and distorting of the Cartesian coordinates from their oh so ordinary perpendicular straight lines that they typically are, and not as a position change due to motion.

Because that's more or less what happens when one tries to apply motion to a spatial portal.

Hmm poor wording, and a failure to view the diagram in detail on my part.

A better refutation would be against his belief that they must have the same speed. The apparent change in position of the part of the ruler sticking out of the blue portal is not due to motion (velocity), but rather due to a distorting of space.

The P = V*t equation is still valid, its just that the spatial position (in vector coordinates if you prefer) of the end of the ruler at t=1 is the same as the spatial position at t=2 even though it might not appear to be so.

IM SAYING ITS [A] RETARDS

A, the blue portal is already moving at the same velocity as the orange portal so the cube is just gonna stay in place.

IT'S OBVIOUSLY A YOU RETARDED FAGGOTS. THE ONLY SCNEARIO IN WHICH B WOULD HAPPEN IS IF THE BOTTOM PLATFORM WERE MOVING UP

POST MORE ARYANNE, UNLESS YOU'RE A NIGGER-LOVING FAGGOT

The cube is observed passing through the portal before it actually passes through the portal.

That is the ambient music from the vid.

it's sad when Holla Forums posts better porn than /furry/. Those faggots are just posting pedo and fart threads all day.

If you're looking for porn you might want to head over here
>>>/kemono/

We even get scans sometimes.

Speed of light being the max cap is just pure fucking bullshit and you know it.

The simple answer is that the block is stationary in one area of space and moving in another area. So B is correct.

Inertia would disagree with you. Since the orange portal does not impart any force to the cube, the cube remains at rest relative to its gravitational frame of reference.

>snakes use their tongue to taste the air

But the travel between portals means the cube's frame is not the same relative to the observer. In a simple situation like the portal travel causes the cube's frame to rotate with respect to the observers.
Momentum is dependent on reference frame, so it makes complete sense that freely transferring frames like that would make conventional momentum considerations like conservation meaningless.

Lads I can map in the source sdk and find the truth once and for all.

Should I do it?

you are not on facebook user ,
so nobody here (exept bait) will answer b …

I'm interested.

Yes.

Installing Portal 2 and the SDK now.

Once it's installed it shouldn't take long to set the chamber up.

...

the box has no potential energy
the portal moving does not give it potential energy
if the room is a vacuum with gravity, A.
if the room is a vacuum without any gravitational effects, B. The impact would probably cause tremor waves that would equally and oppositely push upwards the cube slowly.
if the room is not a vacuum without any gravitational effects, A. The pressure of the gases around the cube would likely slow the cube to a stop shortly after entering the new space. Really, the cube would be stuck at the corner of the portal, diagonally.
If the room is not a vacuum with gravity, A. Really, the cube would be stuck at the corner of the portal, level with the black surface.

...

Shitposting is a bannable offense.

Neither. The box explodes as it is crammed into itself.

reported

Save yourself the effort it's already been tried. It depresses me that people actually think Valve's programming would prove anything.

Fun fact, here's a little game engine someone made called portalized which uses an implementation of portals which is far more developed than Valve's and that game went with answer B. Given how much more develop the objects physics prove to be in regards to portals I wouldn't be surprised if it actually happened naturally due to the what's actually happening to objects that get passed through portals like this.

???

Did you think B would mean the teapot would come flying out despite the fact that the portal wasn't moving fast enough to create that sort of momentum to begin with? You do realise that the answer B is build on the idea that the portal needs to be moving at the cube at a fast speed.

He shows the B happening to the player character in one of the older videos.

And yeah I ought to clarify this doesn't necessarily prove anything except how the programmer made it work (unless this happened naturally, as I had said). But it does work as a counterpoint to any idiot who thinks Valve's programming should be used as proof.

It's pretty fucking simple.

Actually looking at the video you linked, even that one clearly shows the teapot being pushed forwards to at least some degree, A would argue that the Teapot would just fall directly downwards.

Oh hey look, another retard.

This is pretty much what happens. The orange portal goes over it, and the block would extend out very fast, but would just plop down out of the blue portal because of gravity. This is because the block has no momentum , the portal does, but the orange portal cannot excert force on the block.

So the platform is stopped by the box, then the box magically jumps out of the platform's way.

If I replace the box with myself I just fall out the other portal like in option A.

Sorry for the potato quality. I've never recorded or made a video before so I don't really understand what I'm doing.

Looks like you have a little speed coming out of there
Can you set it up for a faster slam from the column?

Making it go any faster seems to just make me get stuck like the box did.

...

The answer is simple

You have no god damn idea how many times I've seen people try this shit. It gets tiresome as fuck.

Yes but if we're talking about time slices, then gravity would begin pulling on the part that is through the portal the instant it begins to push through and so the whole thing would just plop over