Well?
Well?
what were to happen if you rested a plank on the exit portal
The plank would get knocked out of the way at great speed as the box which has no momentum transfers its non-existent momentum to the plank to make room for its rapid non-movement into the space where the plank is, obviously.
it's b
it's always been b
b is the only one that is logically consistent
a demands the cube to arrest all momentum instantaneously with no outside force acting on it, which is impossible, and is inconsistent with how portals behave in the game
these threads are always full of ebin faggots pretending to be retarded
inb4 hula hoop
a portal is not a hula hoop, moving a hula hoop over an object doesn't cause the object to start moving, stop with this retarded shit they are not remotely similar
if you fucking retards stopped to consider it for even a moment, you'd realise that the hula hoop analogy actually implies b in a situation where two portals were back to back anyway so just cut it out
A obviously
B is peak comedy of how dumb people are
what's the reverse? what if the cube is accelerating toward the portal? does the force transfer or does it just plop (A.) faster?
B people think that if you stand looking into the blue portal, and it LOOKS like the cube is approaching you at speed, that this is somehow the same thing as the cube ACTUALLY approaching you at speed. It's obviously an illusion caused by an atypical reference frame you motherfuckers.
Have you ever sat in a train, looking at another train in front of you, and when one of the trains starts moving you can't immediately tell which one it is? Same shit
I want all the a-niggers to explain this situation.
it just stops dead and doesn't go through the portal? have you ever played the fucking game?
Nigger in the game the cube does not enter a moving portal in the first place, the whole conversation is void if we go by the game's rules.
the whole conversation is void if we go by the game's rules.
exactly
/thread
They just do this every time.
But then when you forget they already said this entire conversation is stupid and pointless, they start saying it's A again.
Well?
Does it spin the other way in the southern hemisphere?
You can't expect us to answer the question without providing all the information.
Everything is moving
It appears to spin, but that's not what's happening. The cube is stationary and the portal constantly redefines what "stationary" means by warping space-time around the cube.
It's moving but it's not REAL movement
We got here pretty fast this time
I think it's B. Look at it from a very slow perspective.
Anything that enters the portal ends up at the same location on the other side.
When the first layer of atoms enters the portal, it is on the other side as close as your can get.
When the second layer moves through, it is in the same space, and the first layer must be moved out of the way for this to be the case.
This happens rapidly for many layers of matter. I think that an object not sturdy enough it gets squashed, but something like the cube would get launched.
So with that being said, what is the answer to
B. I have a college degree.
They'll just say "speedy thing in and speedy thing out" and never think too hard about how this situation is different.
Even worse, if you try to explain it they'll get mad and fling feces around.
B, I have an iq of 105
what is there to explain.
the cube doesn't move in the 4th dimension if it's stationary like that
that's why if you throw the cube through, it will keep momentum
but no matter how fast one of the portals travels, the event horizon of the portal is still stationary in the 4th dimension
the only way B makes sense is if the platform the cube is standing on transfers energy to the cube. for example if you hit your fist on a table, objects on the table might bounce up or fall over.
A, the cube appears to approach the portal at speed, but it's not actually approaching the portal at speed. Space-time is just warping around the cube and redefining where "here" is. It's A
what is there to explain
the part you're avoiding: what happens to the plank and why
Yes nigger it's an illusion. But what your dumb ass hasn't figured out yet is that whatever is an illusion as seen through a portal becomes reality when that thing passes through.
No seriously this is extremely consistent.
see something that looks like it's only a few metres away from you because you're looking at it through the portal? when it goes through it literally becomes only a few metres away from you
see something that looks like it's upside down to you because you're looking at it through the portal? when it goes through it literally becomes upside down to you
see something that looks like it's moving to you because you're looking at it through the portal? when it goes through it literally becomes moving to you
It drops out of the orange one
it has basically been thrown at a high speed at the cube so it will probably bounce off it.
Except moving portals demonstrably operate by literally changing object's state of motion, not merely by manipulating spacetime.
A. Placing a portal sideways doesn't make you come out of the portal sideways. It just makes the portal window sideways.
Are you actually suggesting the oval that makes the edge of the blue portal would be spinning on that platform?
so the cube has no momentum and anyone who implies it gains momentum via portals is a big dumb idiot, but oh wait the plank resting on the blue portal was "thrown at a high speed", lmao
it's a hula hoop
I can't believe nobody made a custom map of this and tried it out
Also place a portal sideways on the floor does actually impact the orientation an object leaves it.
But with your logic the plank had no momentum or energy, it was completely still, why would it get moved by the unmoving cube? The plank is not even effected by the portals unlike the cube.
I can't believe we keep hearing this retarded suggestion even when it has been done already.
we got an answer from the man himself, now kill yourself.
Why do people keep reposting this spam then?
Because it's not a discussion about in-game mechanics you retard.
How is it not?
Because a game glitching out upon being forced to simulate something that it wasn't programmed to simulate isn't an answer.
Because portal 2's implementation of moving portals is incredibly half-assed and literally doesn't allow cubes to pass through. That's why it's a retarded suggestion.
You just don't want to admit to being wrong.
His reason being cited is literally something valve has been established to get wrong meanwhile the valve dev who basically came up with the entire idea for portal says B in another email
now there is infighting at valve on the issue, you guys are legitimately insane.
Whether his final answer is right or not, the way he wrote his answer is dumb and suggests he didn't understand the diagram.
"... but gravity on the blue side of the portal will start affecting the object when it begins to pass through the portal."
Neither A nor B implies a lack of gravity. I mean if he thought the straight lines on the B side were meant to imply the cube never comes down, that's just fucking stupid. Any reasonable person would imagine the cube flying off in a parabolic trajectory. Drawing that entire trajectory just wasn't necessary because the point of the question is the portals' implications for inertia, i.e. whether the cube stops as soon as it is fully emerged from the blue portal or whether it retains that speed.
the answer is a, has always been a, will always be a, and valve closed the door on the issue by confirming it is in fact a. we don't need this thread anymore its been 10 years now or some shit for fucks sake.
The video of that I saw was neither A nor B. The portal just acted like a solid wall, because the game was not programmed to handle portals on moving surfaces. Moreover, the game could have been programmed to do either A or B depending on what the devs felt like doing (and I'd argue that B would make for better gameplay mechanics if moving portals were not simply out of scope but that's not the point). A physics engine is not actual physics and the question is hypothetical.
The whole situation is impossible because you could devise an experiment to determine a universal frame of reference. Therefore, if portals are to function as they do in the game, they cannot move relative to eachother.
You're not intelligent enough to deserve to get angry.
you could devise an experiment to determine a universal frame of reference
...how?
b tards refuse to accept reality, how many devs do we need to confirm? what will ever satisfy you, what amount of evidence do you need at this point, its ridiculous this is still going on.
how many devs do we need to confirm?
One more than 0, which is the sum total of a 1 plus a -1 on the matter.
Plus what the dev says needs to actually be correct >what will ever satisfy you
B literally happening in Portal 2. Which is has. Problem is you aren't satisfied, or rather don't understand it.
I don't have the two webms that shows the experiment from several changing frames of reference that used to get posted in this thread that showed the answer A or B entirely depended on the frame it's reference.
it's a magical hula hoop which has two sides separated by space, which can move objects that interact with it
so now the guys themselves who made the game are wrong too in your delusional fantasy world.
filename related
valve closed the door on the issue by confirming that it's b
The Forces applied by the Deceleration of the orange portal at the point of impact sticks the box to the surface, until gravity overcomes that force. A.
You're doing that as well you hypocrite. Since one already said B and you'll undoubtedly say he's wrong for saying so.
But yes, if what Jay says is literally wrong, then he's wrong. It's one thing to think you know better than a valve dev, it's another to think you know better than what the portals literally show to do and what the actual definition of momentum is.
heres the part where he lays down his credentials go on, i know you're dying to.
thinking knowing the momentum is a vector requires credentials
Jesus christ anon. This isn't complicated physics.
no, you retards.
1: there are moving portals in portal 2
2: there is enough information in those instances to, specifically the ending, to conclude that it could never ever be A. theres enough information in the first minutes use of portal in portal 1 to conclude that as well.
i was poking fun but go off seems to have struck a nerve, the cube goes from not being in motion on a plate, to being accelerated by what exactly, the portal is ethereal if the piston pushing down onto the plate with the cube is going as fast as light, how is that force applied to the cube when its passing through it without motion.
Jay Stelly is "the man himself"? I mean okay.
Evidently.
I don't know why I still have this image after all these years, but here it is. No, the original email screenshot was not mine, but it was posted in a thread like this ages ago. The time collectively wasted on this thought experiment on Anon Babble alone is astronomical.
ANSWER HIM
Observe the Stars. When earth Rotates, by our earthly perspective, the stars appear to move across the skies, accelerating at speeds clearly faster than light during this apparent orbit of earth. However, FTL movement is impossible
Are the Stars actually moving FTL? Or is it merely illusionary?
try slowing it down to a millisecond by millisecond thought experiment, you'll see that regardless of what causes the cube to move, it is in fact moving because it's position is changing over time
the cube goes from not being in motion on a plate, to being accelerated by what exactly
Doesn't matter. Portals are established to alter the momentum of whatever passes through them. There's no point in trying to demand a reason for something they are shown to be able to do in the games.
the cube goes from being on the plate passing through an ethereal portal which cannot apply force, to moving in figure b how exactly, what would accelerate the cube that was previously unmoving, to mach 1 by passing through a quickly moving portal it doesn't even make sense.
So the front of the bus is like the orange portal because it's moving, and the blue portal is like the back of the bus because... oh wait.
Sorry, do you have a video in which the front of the bus is moving but the back of the bus is paradoxically stationary? Also the front and back of the bus have to maintain a doorway-like connection through space despite existing in different inertial reference frames.
It's A, no matter how fast rhe portal moves, the cube itself has no momentum, the speed of the portal only affects how fast the cube appears on rhe other side, but since there isn't any actual contact there is no way for the cube to receive any enegy.
the portal moving at 10,000 mph onto an unmoving object wouldn't apply that force to the object you'd just pass through it without realizing it happened.
the plank was at rest until being displaced by the cube.
It depends if the bottom part is also in motion, which it doesn't imply it is, so it'd be A
Jay Stelly is "the man himself"? I mean okay.
why did gaben forward it to him and not the other guy?
Getting caught up on conservation of energy when it comes to portals is retard behavior. You could make an infinite energy perpetual waterwheel with them quite easily. Of course they break the laws of physics.
Everything portals do changes an object's momentum. If I go in a portal in one direction and come out of another portal in the opposite direction, the portal changed my momentum.
As yourself what caused the cube to be moving in the final shot of this gif. Your problem is your basing your entire argument on the assumption that portals don't change the momentum of whatever passes through them. They do this when they change the direction something is moving, which is identical to changing an object's speed depending on your reference frame.
This one, right? It's not that it's showing A or B. It's that it's showing what Afags agree to in the first shot and showing how it's the same thing as what they are trying to argue against in the final show. Essentially it's confirming B since it never contradicts B.
that wouldn't happen, the resistance would slow down the cube after it exited the blue side that gif isn't right.
This one, right? It's not that it's showing A or B. It's that it's showing what Afags agree to in the first shot and showing how it's the same thing as what they are trying to argue against in the final show. Essentially it's confirming B since it never contradicts B.
jewish argument
no really, consider the following
at point 0 in time the cube is entirely on the orange side of the portal, it is not moving but the portal is moving towards it
at point 1 in time, the cube is one quarter through the portal, and on the blue side one quarter of the cube has exited the portal
at point 2 in time, the cube is half way through the portal, and on the blue side one half of the cube has exited the portal, that first quarter than came through the blue portal first has moved forwards to accommodate the next quarter of the cube to exit the portal
at point 3 in time, the cube is three quarters through the portal, and on the blue side three quarters of the cube has exited the portal, that first half than came through the blue portal first has moved forwards to accommodate the next quarter of the cube to exit the portal
at point 3.9999999 in time, the cube is very nearly entirely through the portal, and on the blue side 99.9999% of the cube has exited the portal, if you had been watching on this side only, you would have observed the cube exiting the portal moving through the space in front of the blue portal
at point 4 in time, the cube is is through the portal, and on the blue side one quarter of the cube has exited the portal, the only way this is possible is if it has velocity, and because it has mass it therefore has momentum
from there it's just a moving object and it would follow a trajectory because it has momentum, like a thrown tennis ball, option a calls for all its momentum to magically vanish, which is impossible therefore option b is what happens
Because Dave wrote a huge fucking email last time and Gabe wants him to be more productive. He knows Jay will just shit out a quick answer and get back to work.
Assume it's a close carriage and therefore no air resistance. It's trivial to the point the gif makes.
oh ok now that we've moved the goal posts it makes sense now kind of like this entire thread, once you realize the posts haven't been sufficiently moved then it all makes more sense got it yeah my bad, now its more focused and clear.
you can't honestly be saying you thought that air resistance would be sufficient to cause option a
you can see the trees so its obviously not a closed carriage and one without a roof would have air resistance go fuck yourself the gif is retarded.
the cube goes from not being in motion
NTA, but the cube was always in motion from the relative perspective of the exit portal.
I've never really understood this debate, because you can literally see that the cube is in motion for even A to be possible. Even in A a """stationary""" cube is moving upwards out of the exit portal and then falling down. It has to COME OUT of the portal and that means it is moving. If it were actually stationary, and remained stationary despite the relative frame of reference, it would never rise out of the portal.
So then you've established that the cube is, with respect to the exit portal's frame of reference, moving in both A and B, and the question comes down to how fast is it moving? And the answer is that it is portal and cube maintain the same relative speed. If it takes 0.1s for the entry portal to "swallow" the cube, then it takes 0.1s for the cube to rise out of the exit portal. If the portal is moving very fast, the cube exits very fast.
God damn that gif is incredibly efficient and completely breaking Afag's brains. Turns them in to malding, emotional wrecks instantly.
All the "but gravity", "but air resistance", "but exactly HOW fast", etc. are just tactics to muddy the waters and derail the discussion when a valid point is being made.
glass doesn't exist according to afags
Fair point on the trees though, can't drive a close carriage past trees, that's... impossible?
A. The portal is weightless and therefore doesn't have any momentum to transfer to the box.
yeah it totally conveys being in a glass enclosure going on some train tracks sorry guess i missed something that gave that away.
I always love these threads because this specific problem reveals a fascinating psychological insight.
You're right. It's B, it's very obviously B if you think about it, and any argument for A is completely incoherent. The interesting thing is that people still come in to these threads and try to argue for A, even when B has been demonstrated to be the only possibility through a thousand thorough examples. It's like a little safari, studying the peculiar mind of an Afag as they desperately try to defend a bunk conclusion.
box has no momentum. ez
cope
I love how after thousands of these threads there are always people who come in and reply directly to OP with zero awareness of their answers already having been discussed and thrown in the trash countless times.
Now see and explain what happens while keeping in mind that you've already established that the cube has no momentum to impart on the plank.
How does an unmoving cube with no momentum displace another object?
contact force
actually, the portal has to have infinite mass for it to be able to affect momentum like it does in game
So you agree that the cube is moving and has momentum in order to apply contact force?
What were to happen if you dropped a hula hoop with a plank on it onto someone
Because you're reducing the distance between them
no
then we are right back to asking how an unmoving cube with no momentum can apply a contact force to displace another object
you trip and your dumb head hits a table. OMG HOW IS THERE CONTACT FORCE OMG THE TABLE WASN'T MOVING
Modern physics is wrong and portals operating off of it can’t exist.
So the cube is moving then? That's not what you said two posts ago
So the cube is moving then? That's not what you said two posts ago
I accept your concession
B is wrong
That's called motion
Yes nigger, in your stupid example the cube would be the "head" which is fucking moving. Atleast one side needs motion for there to be contact force.
lmao
Portals are oval, so there is really no choice but spinning. Now, if they were perfect circles, either would be allowable.
Another hoop retarded, not understanding the subtle but very important difference between a hoop and a portal.