It's B and none of you nimrods can prove it wrong
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
It's B and none of you nimrods can prove it wrong
>>709002949
B cause when the orange panel hits at high speed the energy will transfer to the other one and will make it bounce
>>709003262
Nonsence.
Because cube dont have Angular momentum. and dont absorbing it from falling orange panel.
Energy never comeing from nothing( or does?)
>>709002949
One of the rules of portal is that portals can't be placed on moving platforms. If they could it would be A.
actualy no, A the arm coming down wont give any momentum because before it can touch the block the block will go through the portal.
>>709003262
Gotta agree with this guy. If the stamping thing somehow managed to stop perfectly or just not smash on the other platform, it would be A.
>>709002949
Can u put a portal on a moving surface?
>>709003661
This.
Perfect answer to a piece of shit question.
>>709002949
Put a cube on a board and ram a hoop into it, like shown in picture. Change orientation so the hoop is vertical at the same time. Cube falls off like picture A.
Now ram the board with the cube into the hoop essentially throwing the cube through the hoop. Change orientation so hoop is vertical. Cube shoots out of hoop
A is right. In order for the cube to shoot out it needs to have velocity. Portals don't add velocity. They transfer it.
>>709002949
>>709004111
portals aren't hula-hoops you stupid niggerfaggot
A is right because OP thinks it's B and OP never delivers
Newton's first law of motion, an object in motion stays in motion and an object in rest stays at rest, unless acted upon by another force.
>>709002949
>>709002949
The cube is at rest and has no potential energy to use to fly off
>>709002949
actual physics would say it would have no momentum at all.
>>709004284
Imagination doesn't hurt, think that half of the hoop is blue portal half is orange - enter and exit
>>709002949
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TZd95BCKMY
this is better.
>>709002949
I can.
YOUR ALL FUCKING RETARDS
IMAGINE PORTAL AS DOOR
>put door frame on wheels
>move door frame towards you
>door frame passes through you
>YOU DONT GO FLYING THROUGH DOOR FRAME
>>709004683
>YOU DONT GO FLYING THROUGH DOOR FRAME
I think we need more testing. We should have the mythbusters solve it with science.
>>709003678
>>709003661
>>709003534
>>709004008
>>709004111
>>709004320
>>709004358
>>709004405
>>709004433
>>709004451
>>709004469
>>709004512
>>709002949
The most important thing to note is that both objects are always in motion. What we look at is relative motion. Nothing on earth is literally not moving. Regardless of which object is 'moving' at one another, the cube has a movement relative to the portal of whatever speed either is moving towards the other. In the picture, you follow the cube's platform as you frame of reference. If you instead follow the portal's platform as your frame of reference, the cube is moving, not the portal.
TL;DR: Relative motion is the same, so it's B
A portal surface can not transfer energy. Hence it is A. A portal can't transfer energy because it is just fixed spacial link, if it did transfer energy itself there would be problems. The cube's spacial position changes but because it changed due to a portal it does not gain anything. And a moving portal doesn't change anything, its still a fixed point in space that is connected to another point in space at any one time, motion does not affect it.
The answer is B. Portals move materia from place Z to place X, so the hula-hoop/door explanation is invalid, as in those the object is stationary and no material is moved from one place to another. However, when you get slammed with the portal your atoms will begin to come out of the another portal at the velocity equal to the portals velocity (materia is moved). Thus option B is correct.
"Momentum, a function of mass and velocity, is conserved between portals. In layman's terms: Speedy-thing goes in, speedy-thing comes out. "
-GLaDOS
The cube is not moving, because of this nothing speedy is going in therefore is shouldn't leave with the speed shown in B but *plop* as shown in A.
(Not a physics fag,)
Think of it in slow motion like this:
As the portal starts to engulf the cube, we see it start to come out the other portal. At one moment the edge of the cube will be 1 inch from the portal, then 2 inches, then 3 and so on. The cube has velocity as it exits the portal.
So it becomes obvious that B is the correct answer.
>>709004683
the doorframe analogy doesn't work because both sides of the doorframe are moving. If both portals were moving then you'd have a point, but they aren't so you're just a fucking retard.
If the surface which the orange portal impacts the platform with a force proportional to it's downward velocity, then B cannot be the answer.
Energy conservation dictates that A must be the answer, since the kinetic energy conveyed by the orange portal is dissipated in the impact with the platform.
>>709005917
Or if you imagine it more like a hoola-hoop being dropped over it..
>>709006411
Draw a diagram of the cube being halfway through the portal and you'll see quite easily that A is impossible
>>709006485
Only one of the portals is moving, but both side of the hula hoop are moving dumbass.
Gimme Nobel prize.
Lets suppose you do the experiment and it come out its B, how would you explain it ?
>>709003983
Nope.
Lots of newfaggotry ITT
>>709006611
A may potentially be impossible. Conservation of energy makes B impossible though, since a proportional amount of energy cannot both be
1) expended when stopping the orange portal
2) applied to the object when leaving the blue portal
It is possible that neither answer is correct
>>709006677
OUUU SHIIIEEEETTTT
>>709006677
Niceeeeeee /thread
>>709002949
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TZd95BCKMY
>>709006611
the energy is coming from top down, on the portal side. In game, momentum is preserved as you enter/exit the portal. The box in A is not traveling, because it didnt travel through the portal, therefore its momentum of nothing is preserved, to which it falls with a plop to the ground with gravity.
How do you propose it is ejected violently as shown in B?
>>709006725
But the earth hurling through space at 300m/s, or however the fuck fast we're going, has absolutely no effect? Bullshit you can't put a portal on a moving surface.
>>709006677
And triple dubs you won nobel price so hard
>>709006834
cool shit
>>709006834
wtf am i looking at?
>>709006677
holy shit
>>709006834
does not answer the question but ok
>>709006725
Newfag like you? Go watch crowbcat on YouTube. Sift through the satire, find the portal experiment video.
Lol can't be placed on moving surfaces hurr durr I'm such a fucking summerfag
>>709006677
Double dubs never lie!
>>709006677
DUDUDUDUDUDUBZZZZZZZZZZ
It's b. If you think it's a, you're retarded.
>>709007057
get outta here with that troll shit.
If by your very description, that is exactly what happens in A. It has no velocity, its merely falling out of what it happened to be crushed through in the first place.
I dont go swimming underwater, then fucking rocket out into the sky when I breach the surface.
>>709007212
lol wut?
What the fuck does swimming have to do with portals?
>>709002949
fast thingy in. fast thingy out. it needs momentum as a force for B to happen. The cube does not move unless the new portal position after movement causes the cube to fall through.
A is the only possible answer
>>709007212
If you think that performing the experiment in question in the game itself is a valid test, then you also think that the source engine is an accurate physics simulator, which would be... regrettable
>>709007212
Your analogy is fucking retarded.
defenetaly A
>>709007320
Bout the same it does by gaining velocity on the exit of it.
VERY FUCKING LITTLE. Because it doesnt happen like that.
>>709007348
this wasn't meant to have a link to that comment
>>709007333
Momentum is relative. We've known this since the 16th century.
It's A, because the strong of the press is not apply to the cube, for 1 reason.
The portal is a "hole".
B is the answer if the portal is on the plate, and the cube on the press.
>>709007410
>very little
How much precisely?
>>709007467
Relative doesnt mean it gains a whole shit ton of it from out of thin air.
>>709007410
When making a comparison with something they better fucking relate.
>a falling tree makes sound because magnets attracts iron
>>709002949
IF I PUT A DILDO ON YHE GROUND AND SAT MY ASS DOWN ON IT REALLY FAST, IT WON'T FLY UP MY BODY AND OUT MY MOUTH. IT WOULD STAY WHERE IT WAS ON THE GROUND.
IF I PUT A CUBE ON THE GROUND AND DROPPED A PORTAL ON IT REALLY FAST IT WOULD NOT FLY OUT IT WOULD STAY WHERE IT WAS ON THE GROUND.
>yes ik its bait
>Yes ik us smart people actually know A is correct
>But when you act like a newfag, other actual newfags come and feel at home.
>pretending to be 9gag still makes us as cancerous as 9gag
>>709007565
It's not gaining it from thin air you fucking mong. It HAS momentum Relative to the portal.
>>709007566
Oh, you mean like how B is somehow the solution to this puzzle?
>linear objects gain speed out of nowhere because your mums retarded?
>>709007640
The falling portal has momentum dumbass, not the fucking stationary inert cube on the giant not moving platform.
>>709007655
>gain
It HAS speed from the very beginning, RELATIVE to the portal
>>709007701
>hurr what is a "Newton"? What do his theories have to do with anything? Durr
>>709007803
a speed relative to zero is still a speed I guess. numbnuts.
Wow, try this yourself, it really works!
Throw a rubber band around an object. Does the object move relative to the rubber band, or does nothing happen (don't let the rubber band bounce, just slam it into your desk around the object). Once the rubber band hits the desk, it will stop moving, so the object on your desk will stop moving relative to the rubber band.
>>709007803
Don't talk about Newton like you have any clue.
A doubles the energy in the system by applying the momentum to the object while the orange portal still possesses it. Newton says this is impossible.
>>709007908
When two objects collide, the same thing happens regardless of which one you perceive to be moving. You know that, right?
The answer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85nudR6D-Y
>>709002949
You forgot the part where almost nobody gives a fuck
>>709008110
Valve's source engine, as impressive as it is, is not a physics simulator.
>>709008062
So a portal colliding with an object is different from an object colliding with a portal, even though the laws of physics say that they're THE EXACT SAME THING?
>>709002949
The Correct answer is "A." and I can prove it.
a direct quote from the games own logic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjeMOhb9enI
Try that. Proven.
/thread
>>709008094
for all intent and purpose, lets just cut your bullshit for a minute and call a stationary box, exactly that. Regardless of your exertions, forces and distance, a box standing still, will be perceived as exactly that a box whos output is virtually nil.
It cannot and will not suddenly create or transfer the momentum of that other object, when the object is zero point in weight during the collision.
Where is the transfer? How did it gain the speed? It didnt. It passed up through the portal at whatever speed that the portal approached it, entered it, and exited it with the exact same state it began in.
Zero. None, nadda. It wasnt moving. Youre trying to apply physics ontop of an already theoretical instead of actually just applying the logic.
Zero in, zero out.
Not zero in, 100 out.
No collison with something that has no weight to transfer momentum of crash, no newton gain on exit.
It hurts to drag knuckles at your level.
>>709008385
So instead of responding to my point, you're just going to ignore it and post your retarded ass sophistry? Yeah, no thanks.
>>709008557
Tell me again about how your right instead of strawmanning it brother.
>>709006677
/thread
>>709004866
shut up, nobody cares what an autismo who replies to 13 posts has to say
>>709004866
This is the best answer in this thread
>>709008279
Look, I'm not saying the answer is A, I'm only saying that the laws of conservation say that the answer CANNOT be B.
Can you see that by applying the velocity of the orange portal to the object, you are effectively doubling the energy in the system, since the orange portal still retains its energy, even once the object has passed through it.
The only feasible explanation that I can think of is that portals do not constitute objects, and therefore cannot take on properties such as momentum, even when the objects they are applied to, do. In such a system, interacting with the portal would cause an unknown reaction, since technically the system contains energy, but since that energy, at the time, is attached to the portal, an object which cannot inherently have such a property, who knows what would happen.
>>709002949
If you move a doorway past yourself at high speeds and it smashes in to a wall behind you, it will not make you propel forwards like a bullet. get the fuck out of life
>>709003661
I'd love to agree with you, but that was disproved in Portal 2. You place portals on moving platforms to destroy the neurotoxin container with laser beams. One can only assume that in Portal 1, all cases of moving platforms were either surfaces incompatible with portals, or the portals were disabled as soon as the platforms started to move.
>>709002949
I thought about it, and paid it some thought, regarding point of views and the actual functionality of portals.
The idea of a portal is connecting two points in space as if by an open window. Anything regarding gravity seems to apply up to the surface of the portals' "shared surface" (visible in the game as the orange/blue haze hovering over the portal opening). You're on the blue side of the portal, you experience the gravity of the blue side, you're on the orange side and you feel the gravity of the orange side. There doesn't seem to be any "leaking" of gravity. Now, the way the point of view goes, it's like someone put the two walls of the portals back to back and cut an oval hole in them, to allow passage between the two.
>How do objects behave when passing the portals' window?
Well, objects, when going through a portal, dismiss all energy or momentum they had before, and instead take new ones, depending on how they appear to be moving from the exit portal. Talking about conservation of energy or momentum when handling portals is wrong, because with portals you can create a perpetual motion machine. You all put a portal above you and one on the ceiling, and saw as you gained speed. Where did that kinetic energy come from? It came from the potential energy differential that you magically gain when exiting the ceiling portal.
When you put on portal on the floor and one on the wall, where did your horizontal velocity come from? Where did the vertical velocity disappear? No forces were applied on you to grand you a spike in acceleration.
>cont
This is basically the same. Because the movement of the cube relative to the portal is the same. In both cases, mine as well as OP's, B is the right answer.
>>709008733
That's like both portals moving, and in the same direction.
That's not what's happening in the OP, retard.
>>709008629
An object only has momentum relative to another object. If the portal is moving relative to the room and the box, then we can treat the system as if it were the box and the room moving relative to the portal.
>>709002949
Niggers
>>709008756
Instead, when you stand next to the exit portal and look inside, you see the object moving towards you horizontally, affected by its own side's gravity, until it exits the portal in the same velocity as you SAW it moving, which is horizontal.
>What happens if you stand right next to the blue portal when the orange portal is on a moving platform?
Like I said, the moving platform is as if stuck to the blue portal's surface, and instead you watch the whole other room (with the static platform and the box) move towards you at the opposite speed of the actual moving platform. It's the relative speed to the moving platform. From the blue portal's side, the box is hurtling towards the window, and it'll continue to hurtle out from the window when it exits the blue portal, because that's how portal physics work.
It's B.
>>709008833
Like this dude said.
>>709008833
It's not the same at all you fucking retard.
In one the box has momentum in the other it doesn't.
That's the difference, it's also why it's A
Explain why the box would just shoot out the other side.
>>709008684
And I'm saying that the answer CANNOT be A, and I think I've explained thoroughly enough why.
>>709006677
Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out.
>>709007036
WITNESS ME
Now what?
>>709008931
Momentum is relative, as I've explained 100 times already.
An object only "has" momentum relative to another object, and in both cases the box "has" momentum relative to the portal.
Can't someone just make a level for this in portal 2 and test it already?
Pretty sure you can't put portals on moving objects so OP is a troll
>>709008756
That one level fucked up so many "what if " arguments
>>709002949
I don't get it
>>709009179
You can in portal 2. You put a portal one a moving wall and it moved to cut some gas pipes.
>>709009183
>>709009250
Well never mind then continue with the discussion
>>709006677
/thread
that was amazing
>>709008948
>>709008833
This leads me to believe that physics (as we know it) can only be applied to situations involving portals when
1) Both portals have the same inherent energy
2) That energy doesn't change asymmetrically during the experiment
This means that if one portal is moving, the other must be moving at the same speed. It also means that one cannot stop moving, while the other continues to do so, when an object is half way through the portals.
If these conditions aren't met, the experiment doesn't make physical sense.
>>709008756
A BTFO
HOW WILL A-FAGS EVER RECOVER?
A portal isn't the same thing as a fucki ng door or hula hoop. Imagine you are the cube. As the portal comes down towards you what do you see through it? You see the world behind the door rushing towards you. This is because, unlike a door, only one side of the portal is moving and so the world behind the other side of the portal is also moving towards you. Don't think of it like the cube gained momentum as it went through the portal, think of it like the rest of the world had momentum relative to the cube.
The answer is b faggots
>>709009356
Unfortunately the fame itself invalidates that theory, as there are levels in which portals can be placed on moving surfaces.
>>709008756
stop using in game occurences to justify theories. The source engine is not an accurate physics simulator. If you think it is then you should try doing fluid simulations in minecraft.
>>709009490
The game has no bearing on this or any other portal/physics related question. The game does not abide by real world physics. This is because it is a game.
>>709009111
Pretty obvious that the cube will exit at twice the speed of the piston, and thus explaining why the B answer is true: it will exit at the same speed as the piston.
>>709009637
man FUCK YOU
>>709002949
It's neither, Piston portal is larger than the platform thus the block and platform would go through.
Answer is A
Imagine the piston with the yellow portal suddenly stops when it has covered half the cube.
Half of the cube would still be on the platform and half of the cube would be sticking out of the middle of the blue portal.
If you continue to press the piston down, the cube will pop out and fall like A because it can't re enter the portal because it is effectively blocked on the other side
The portals momentum does not matter, the portals point is to take information from point A and move it to point B. if the cube has no momentum at point A, it won't have any at point B
>>709010359
Also, consider the scenario proposed with the piston suddenly stopping halfway on the cube, does the portion of the cube at point B "pull" the rest of the cube at point A through because it has momentum?
The answer is no because the cube doesn't have momentum
>>709010359
>the cube has no momentum
It's travelling around the sun at a ridiculous speed. It most certainly does have momentum.
>>709002949
You prove B correct...
>>709010709
so is all the apparatus. It is a closed system, and has no momentum.
>>709008931
you're one dumb motherfucker. Portal A is a direct connection to portal B. When portal A speeds with 100km/h relative to cube, cube has a relative momentum to portal of 100km/h, no matter how you'd turn it around. And now comes the fun stuff about portals.
The world inside Portal A, which is moving at 100km/h relative to the cube, moves also 100km/h relative to the cube. when cube enters portal A, it enters the world in portal B which is moving 100km/h relative to cube - thus, the cube must fly.
>>709010709
>>709010849
Consider
>>709010669
German Engeneer reporting in,
its B since in physics it doesnt matter if the portal or the cube is accelerated, the result is the same.
imagine claping your left hand to the right or the right to the left, the result is the same.
its B
>>709002949
>nimrod
How come the english language uses so many hebrew terms like "Nimrod", "Schmuck" and "Geraffel"?
Are you a jew?
>>709010849
No momentum relative to what?
>>709011068
he means relative to the apparatus. little does he know that relative to the world behind the moving portal has momentum instead which makes it look like cube is flying when actually everything else does.
>>709010955
What makes you think it's possible for one portal to accelerate relative to the other without tear the universe apart?
>>709011210
Let me rephrase my question
If the yellow piston is travelling downward at a speed of 100 km/h and suddenly stops when it is half way down the cube, what happens at the blue portal?
Does the entirety of the cube fly through it or no?
This is what A fags actually believe
>>709010963
>engineer
>doesnt understand conservation laws
Yeah, sure bro. We all believe you.
>>709011714
You're still assuming that portals can accelerate.
Let me ask you a question: what happens to the air between the portal and the box as the portal descends?
>>709004358
Kek at attempting to apply Newtonian physics to this
Such simple minded argument. I might as well say there was obviously a force as the object was displaced.
>>709012005
At least he understands that momentum and velocity are relative. A-fags still can't seem to wrap their heads around it.
explain this B fags:
if you drop a doorframe over a ball, the ball doesn't go flying into the air
why would it be any different with portals?
>>709005670
>Speedy-thing goes in, speedy-thing comes out.
Red portal is speedin. Cube Goes in speedin. Comes out speedin.
>>709008666
Deviltrips is truth.
>>709011834
thank you for that.
>>709012440
Read the fucking thread retard. If one side of the doorframe is the orange portal and the other is the blue, then in your analogy both portals are moving, which clearly isn't the case in this thought experiment.
>>709008863
Lol, you are a retard.
Yes, you can treat the entire room as if it's moving relative to the yellow portal. However, the ramp with the blue portal is ALSO part of that room.
Let's say the orange portal is moving down with speed X. Relatively you could see that as the platform moving upwards with speed X and the yellow portal standing still. That's true. But the ramp and the blue portal are also moving upwards with speed X, meaning there's a net speed diffference of ZERO between the platform and the ramp with the blue portal, resulting in no launch velocity at all.
>>709009571
I didn't talk about the Source engine. Portals are not a real world thing. You can't test this shit in real life, if you didn't notice. The only thing we can do with answering theoretical questions is to deduce how things operate in game when introduced with the portals, and extract the mechanics of this physics-breaking phenomenon from those instances. I didn't go to the engine to do this >>709006677. I looked at Portal levels which are designed to show you how to work and interact with portals, and made as much real world sense as possible from them.
Besides, since we're talking about an occurrence proposed in a game running in Source engine, based on something created in and for the Source engine, which can only be officially observed in the Source engine, using the Source engine to justify answers regarding this question sounds more and more viable as I write these lines.
>>709012244
Goes through portal at it's speed relative to the portal, the air doesn't just magically gain 100km/h by being passed through a portal
>>709012440
This.
>>709002949
We know two things.
Portals preserve momentum
Portalsdo not interact with the objects that pass between them
So given the velocity of 0 for the cube and it's inability to gain energy from the portal it has to be A.
>>709006677
1. Portal wasn't programmed for this scenario.
2. This game isn't portal and has it's own programmed laws of physics, thus the point is moot in the first place.
3. The argument is trying to determine, IF portals were real, how would they behave in this scenario according to real world physics? The way a simulation in a game handles it is not relevant.
>>709012625
And why exactly do we treat the blue portal as part of the room instead of as part of the orange portal?
From the position of the box peering through the orange portal it looks as though the blue portal and everything around the blue portal is travelling towards you quite quickly.
>>709012484
Cube is stationary, not moving.
>>709012695
>>>709012244 (You)
>Goes through portal at it's speed relative to the portal
How fast exactly?
>>709012741
idiot. Dropping a doorframe would be like having blue portal placed ON the red portals back. nothing happens.
better analogy would be dropping the whole fucking house on the cube. relative to the house the cube enters house with the speed the house is falling down.
use your brain, you dumb little shit
>>709013033
Not stationary relative to the portal.
>>709003661
You can portal on moving platforms
https://youtu.be/dqwy1cwfVWo?t=36s
>>709011834
Notice how not a single Atard will respond to this?
They know they're wrong, that's why.
>>709012848
>1. Portal wasn't programmed for this scenario.
Yet here we are.
>2. This game isn't portal and has it's own
>programmed laws of physics, thus the point is
>moot in the first place.
It IS the same engine, tard.
>3. The argument is trying to determine, IF
>portals were real, how would they behave in
>this scenario according to real world physics?
>The way a simulation in a game handles it is
>not relevant.
Since portals indeed does not exist, then this example is no less valid than anything else theoretical.
>>709012848
Portals, by definition, break real world physics, and therefore cannot exist. At least not in our scale.
>>709013090
The airs not moving, or if it is it is an a very small rate, the piston is one moving and the portal along with it
So to answer that: about 0 km/h
No please stop deflecting and answer my question
Piston comes down w/ yellow portal at 100km/h, there are two blocks set up that stop piston and portal approximately halfway down the cube, what happens to the cube? Does it fly through or remain stuck half in the portal?
>>709013364
>the air travels some distance at a speed of 0km/h in finite time
Genius.
>>709013269
Notice how a single b tard hasn't answered this question yet?
>>709010669
>>709013560
I'm not B I'm anti-A.
You're a retard if you believe scenario A is valid.
>>709002949
>nimrod
Bugs bunny called Elmer Fudd "Nimrod" because he was a hunter and was poking fun (like the hunter nimrod from the bible). It doesn't actually mean stupid, but contextually most think it does.
>>709013278
Portals really were not programed for movement. Apparently they did not function correctly when doing so. It's why they did not in the game itself as mentioned in one of the developer commentarys.
Regardless of this threads answer that webm isn't particularly useful other then a bit of a kek
>>709013657
If it isn't valid then answer the question I've been posing
Piston Is travelling at 100km/h, stops when portal halfway down cube, what does picture look like? cube flying out at 100km/h or cube sitting halfway in portal?
>>709010669
The cube is pulled through yes. If it's stopped half way it will travel through at half the speed that the portal was moving at.
>>709002949
Α. No kinetic energy given, only gravity
>>709013824
Burden of proof is on you, retard. Prove it's valid by responding to >>709011834
>>709013846
So you're saying if I punch my arm through a portal at 20mph, it will pull the rest of my body through at 20mph?
>>709002949
b. the cube exits the blue portal at high speed, therefore it must build up momentum.
>>709006677
I can't watch webm on my phone. Someone plz tell me what happened lol
>>709013980
Almost. You see, when you punch through a portal you arm has this thing called "momentum". If you do nothing to stop your arm from pulling your body through the portal, it will pull your body through, just not at 20mph since your arm does not weight the same as your body. At least, that's what happens in real life when you punch through a doorway.
>>709013560
I'm a B fag. Both answers don't make sense, but B makes "more" sense. It's more natural to assume that as soon as the cube passes through the portal, it will take on properties of the "new" universe, not before it passes through. For example, pic related doesn't make sense.
>>709013980
Literally high school physics lol.
>>709013935
The block in that scenario you posted has momentum, the block in this one has no momentum, congratulations
At portal does not exert force on an object, it only maintains the objects original force from point A to point B
>>709005366
but consider this you retard:
what about when the portal is halfway down the box? are the 'atoms' in the top half of the box moving faster than the atoms in the bottom half? the portal platform transfers all of its energy out in the form of impact force once it hits, so where is this box getting its momentum from?
learn 2 science
If a doorframe falls around you, do you rocket away through the other side? No?
Then A.
Stupid fucking moron.
>>709002949
Depends on where the other portal is placed.
Conservation of angular momentum must be observed as well. For example, putting it higher up in the Earth's atmosphere would create a greater 'lever arm' and it's motion would have to bend back towards the Earth to compensate.
>>709014411
Your argument is that momentum is conserved, right?
So a block travelling at 1000mph going through a portal travelling at any other speed will exit a stationary portal at 1000mph, right?
>>709014217
B-answer confirmed in the source engine.
>>709014546
Orange is placed on the platform lowering onto the cube
Blue is placed on wedge thing.
>>709002949
A the plate thing isn't moving and when the portal hits it there's no energy transfer since (portal offers no resistance) so it would just plop down the energy would be transferred to actual table holding the metal square
>>709014217
Seriously you guysssss
>>709014755
correct
I hope this ends this idiotic discussion.
/thread
>>709014635
Thank you! Here's a pic
>>709014693
My bad. No, the actual geographic location of both portals must be considered. Torque is added by the Earth as well, and the Sun etc...
If you slam an oprn door frame on the ground around an object does that object shoot upwards?
No, so A
Portals are just doors that open to a different place than they are
>>709014478
Consider the box floating in mid-air.
It travels through the portal at speed (how can it travel through in finite time without speed).
How does it lose it's momentum?
>>709014861
Stupid analogy. One portal is stationary.
>>709011834
That's just accurate with portal physics and compatible with the right answer, A.
The momentum that the cube has doesn't disappear through the portal.
Imagine the portal as just the frame of a window and you'll understand, it's a direct space connection not a machine that materializes on one side what comes from the other.
>>709014820
GTFO
>>709014580
And the block in this scenario has no momentum
>>709015054
But how does it work exactly? There's a period of 1 second when the cube is passing through the portal. Does it traveil 1m/s, 1000m/s, accelerate from 1m/s to 1000m/s (decelerate from 1000m/s to 1m/s)?
The real question is, what is the speed of the cube WHILE it's passing through the portal
>>709015054
The cube accelerate instantly? Impossible, therefore A is wrong.
>>709014820
I like this.
>>709002949
It's A. The cube has no kinetic energy before going through the portal, so has no kinetic energy after going through the portal.
>>709015164
So momentum being conserved only works in the special case where momentum=0? Is that what you're saying?
>>709010941
>>709010963
>it doesnt matter if the portal or the cube is accelerated
great high school level interpretation, except if you weren't half a retard and took a decent university course you would know that newton's third law only applies to bodies in motion, not the movement of space relative to an object. the cube is an isolated system and just because it the portal around it moves faster doesn't mean the cube changes speed
imagine a portal falling thats chasing a cube thats falling as well, but the portal is falling faster. as the portal catches up and consumes the cube, is the cube going to just magically suffer an elastic collision with space and shoot up out of the blue portal? no because that would be fucking dumb
>>709015338
So if the cube has no momentum going into a portal travelling at 1 mph, it will have no momentum coming out of a moving portal
BUT if the cube is travelling downwards at 1000mph and the portal is travelling downwards at 1001mph, the cube will go through the stationary portal at... What speed?
>>709002949
>Not understanding basic physics.
i hope you really enjoy your Autism at this point.
>>709002949
At first I thought it was A; reason being "an object at rest stays at rest"
But now I believe it's B; because the object that WAS at rest is now MOVING the second it enters the portal. The object doesn't just "appear" on the other side. It's moving AS it's going thru. "An object in motion stays in motion".
That's just my two cents.
>>709015193
>>709015200
Well, I had to think that again and you're right.
That image is wrong, but the answer for the first question is still A.
>>709015792
Where does the kinetic energy come from? It can't be B, energy has to be conserved.
>>709015887
Doublethink.
If you drop a hula hoop on the cube it won't fly away so it's A.
>>709015887
You know in A the cube is Accelerated instantly too?
>>709015909
I understand that, that's what got me thinking it was A. but you can't say their is no movement AS it goes thru the portal.
If you were standing by the exit portal, the object is moving. And I believe it'll keep that movement. Oh well.
Physics fag here. I won't answer the question, because some of the presumptions are wonky (actual physical term). I'm just going to lay out why I think you're all full of bullshit.
- If portals can't be placed on moving surfaces, they couldn't be placed anywhere. Earth is moving, the solar system is moving, the continents are moving, etc.
This leads to the conclusion, that portals can only be placed on surfaces with a relative speed of zero within the same reference frame.
- Conservation of momentum in portals is bullshit. If anything is conserved, it's the *absolute value* of the momentum, since the direction can be changed, height can be changed (and thus energy can be changed and is not conserved). So obviously, Newtonian Physics do *not* apply for Portals!
Whether under these assumptions the question asked is still a valid one, is up for discussion. I don't think the experimental setup is even valid until proven theoretically under consideration of above objections.
Have fun being faggots.
>>709015762
>cube is travelling downwards at 1000mph and the portal is travelling downwards at 1001mph
>hurr durr
im going to assume you meant that the portal travels 1mph less and that your severe mental disability just made you accidentally forget how to add
the momentum is conserved on cube so it ends stuck between portals because it tries to fall through the blue portal but cant escape the orange
>>709015338
>>709015762
>>709016538
We have a new contender!
>>709016469
"Portals can't be placed on moving surfaces" actually means "portals must share an inertial reference frame".
>>709016655
Which is what I drew as a conclusion, yes.
I just noticed many fags are not exactly clear on this.
>>709016655
This is why A and B are both wrong. Placing two portals on non-zero relative velocity breaks everything.
>>709016635
>basic physics...
>no even...
>>709016655
>>709016792
Actually, an addition:
Portals must share an inertial reference frame AND have a relative speed of zero to each other within that frame, see >>709016898
You are all super gay cause the reason OP says B is because the principle of conservation of mass, not momentum, or collision forces. As if you had a piece of butter that unmelted in a speed of Delta x / solidity function. The finished stick of butter would then progress to a state different than the original stick, prior to being melted. Thus giving it a new internal pressure state. And making it lift and stretch.
>>709016538
The cube is below the portal. My numbers are correct.
I actually know this from experience as a fine butter connoisseur
Eventually the butter you melt becomes your body fat, but it happens so slowly, that it actually makes you slower due to the chaos of mass distribution and energy dispersement over time as a fixed reference delta t.
There is nothing in op's picture that changes the cubes potential energy to kinetic energy. Orange portal will simply change the cubes coordinates to the blue one, regardless of the speed of the portal. Then gravity will take over and "plob" the cube on the ground. The orange portal is not an object that interacts with the cube, causing any kind of change from potential energy to kinetic energy. No collision, no physical interaction.
>>709017710
The top most portion goes through first, right? Therefore it becomes the bottom most portion. And once the Orange portal receives any more data, the top most portion to go through must change it's location to become the top most portion... And so on, until everything that passed through had been displaced into an upwards vector, with a coefficient property of elasticity/bounciness. So in essence some substances will end up flat on the other side, and then appear as A, but not B, though all solid objects that react expectedly in the portal will bounce and change to averaged norms of a vector perpendicular to the portal on the right.
>>709003678
You're a fucking imbecile.
>>709015338
what the fuck are you doing at university when you don't even get relativity
gtfo
