What happens?
My vote goes to A.
Neither, portals can't be placed on moving surfaces
Depends on how rigid the surface of what the portal is colliding with.
How does a pole change into a hill?
I don't understand the picture at all.
>>7686397
Portals, there is one on the falling plate and one on the slope.
>>7686381
Sack.
>>7686381
I vote A as well. The portal should impart no velocity on the cube.
>>7686381
You get banned from /sci/
Reported/Saged/Hidden
Is teleportation through these portals absolutely instantaneous?
Not enough information.
If you are so pedantic it would be B.
If you are the type who would complain about my intelligence, then A.
>>7686381
A. The platform doesn't have momentum.
the cube doesn't move, the space between the portal does. i vote A but i may be wrong.
>>7686381
Some scrambled thoughts from a couple of years ago. I'm not a physicist so I couldn't figure out how the Type A Physical implementation could work.
it's neither A nor B. the orange portal hits the platform and "teleports" the cube to the blue portal. However, the platform is still right below the orange portal and so the cube can still rest on it.
Depending on the magnitude of the friction between the cube and the platform and the angle of the surface that the blue portal is on, the cube will either just stay on the platform (and in the middle of the blue portal) or slide down the platform and onto the ground below the blue portal.
>>7686390
depends op, which reference frame am i in?
>>7686390
See portal 2, when cutting the NEUROTOXIN lines.
It's always been B. Any other answer is wrong.
Don't think of it as the cube going through the portal. Think of it as the cube suddenly being on a sloped surface a little bit away instead.
>>7686555
Lol, take your inertial frames and fuck right off.
As the portal moves, it's forcing atoms of the object to overlap with the existing atoms and those atoms will, correspondingly, adjust to re-align to its default state, creating energy waves going throughout the object at the speed of sound of the object. This would be roughly the equivalent strain of the object hitting an object that has no give to it at the speed the portal is going only the energy will be distributed differently. If the object is brittle it'll be shredded apart. If the object is strong and/or elastic, it'll vibrate violently. It'll fly a little bit, but most of the energy in one direction will be canceled out by energy in the other direction, so its direction and speed will be unpredictable. Something like an object would behave under extreme reverberations.
>>7686381
It is unambiguously B, see pic.
>but portals aren't real, hurr durr
yeah it's called a thought experiment faggot
>>7686591
Think of the moving portal as a big tube moving down towards the platform.
>>7686681
The blue portal is the end of that tube tho
Remember the portal on the moon? Even atmospheric pressure(atoms) transfers. So it's definitely B
You guys are incredible.
I see in this thread autism.
But when some bigheaded analyzes problems like this and make 2 papers about that. You are like "hurr literally autism durr"
Fucking low IQ bitches.
>>7686591
lol
>>7686757
>PS Yes. This result does not follow the conservation of energy
>Retarded because my impossible answer isn't your impossible answer.
lol
>>7686779
Portals don't exist, pal
>>7686381
I vote B. the entry and exit portals are two separate frames of reference. Exit portal B is stationary to the observer therefore the observer must see the cube moving. A is nonsensical, neither the portal or cube is moving therefore all momentum has disappeared (to where?)
>>7686790
So how can either answer be right?
>>7686710
no you tard, Portals do not change momentum, The block has no momentum to stay with so it would just flip on the ground
>>7686800
Momentum = mass * velocity
Block's mass is constant, initial velocity relative to the first portal is non-zero (there is no absolute frame of reference, all motion is relative). So assuming the portal doesn't decelerate it in some way, the block's momentum is constant and non-zero. Thus it comes out with some amount of momentum.
It's no different than if you threw the block into a stationary portal.
>>7686691
In this specific situation. The fact that the other portal is the end of the "tube" is because the other end is slanted.
>>7686827
Oh god it happened again.
The only thing that happens is that the cube casually rolls off the slope of which the second portal is placed.
>>7686734
>low IQ bitches
>speaks in broken shit english
Yea you are either a troll or straight up pants on head retarded. I dont care if english isnt your first language, its by far the more important one and you cant speak it properly.
>>7686381
Very odd problem.
I'm thinking this as a multi-frame superposition problem. I'm also assuming the speed at which the arm approaches you has no affect accept for the amount of time it takes to transverse the portal. Much like if there was a hole in the arm, and you are in the middle of the hole. The arm would slam around you, but give you the object no energy. I'm also assuming homogeneous density of object.
In the first frame gravity is acting down and in purely natural force (Fn=mg). This continues even after the cube starts entering the portal. The portion of the cube that is affected by this force becomes smaller.
So over time the equation becomes Fn(t)=((m-xt)g) <-- equation assumes homogeneous density. x=density no longer affect by first frame Fn. t represents time.
,
On the second frame of reference, the cube experience a 2 dimensional Fn.
Fn(t) = (xt)gsin(theta) ihat + (xt)gcos(theta) jhat
or break that down into to two equation..
Horizontal force Fn(t)=((xt)g sin(theta))
Downward force Fn(t)=((xt)g cos(theta))
Now positioning these two forces simultaneously acting at the same time over the differential of the surface.
Effectively, on the first frame side, you have a string pulling down at (mg) in relation to the blue portal that force would pull it back through.
Simultaneously, you have the second frame where blue is facing yet another force that is pushing it back though the portal while simultaneously being down the ramp.
jeesus. It would suck to be this dice. Experience simultaneous change in force across the body while going through a portal with both forces pulling you back through the portal while another flips you down a ramp. Ugh.....
Basically what this say is going through an up portal to a diagonal portal isn't safe, and a really bad idea.
Horizontal portals Good. Fn never changes its relationship with the body. It's perpendicular and therefore no fucks given.
Velocity is relative. This situation would be identical to the bottom platform moving up towards the other portal. If you say A, then the cube would be crushed perpendicular to the plane of the portal because the back half of the cube would be entering the orange portal faster than the front half is exiting the blue one.
/thread
>>7686836
No, momentum and mass are conserved, so velocity in = velocity out.
>>7686863
Momentum and mass of object through the portal or Momentum and mass of portal?
Does the portal have mass?
What happens?
All who chose A are tards, the situation would be exactly the same as when the portal was on the frame and the cube was propelled by the piston, because the cube enters the portal at speed, it will exit at speed(if you think otherwise play the fucking game).
>>7686869
speed of cube will be the sum of the speed of the pistons when exiting blue
>>7686548
It really depends on how you define it.
If we were to say that from the cubes perspective the portal is moving towards it, then what you have described "should" be what happens.
But if we take the reference frame of the portal, the cube and platform are moving toward it, and so when the cube enters the portal, the platform will be stopped (as it is too large) and the cube would continue moving.
However, since portals are from a game. And since portals have never been depicted as moving, we must assume that a portal cannot move. And that the OP picture is a representation of the cube moving towards the portal, in which case B.
>>7686870
?
Nothing like this would happen in the game, because the physics engine doesn't allow for it
>>7686870
>
If you want to game logic, go to a gamer board.
If I built a board with a hole in it and then place it on a rotating arm and stood in the path of the hole and turned the machine on, it would have no affect on me what so ever.
Even if you consider it's relative velocity to me, the only thing that it affects on me as the object is how much time it takes me to go through the hole.
That's it. It governs transverse time alone and bestows nothing else. To bestow momentum, that object must have mass. If a portal has mass, then I would not be able to transverse it. It would just be a wall that crushes me.
>>7686905
In your scenario the exit side of the hole is moving at the same speed as the side you entered. If the exit is stationary but the entrance is moving you have velocity imparted equal the the difference in velocity between the entrance and the exit.
>>7686912
>>7686912
(for giggles)
For my example technically, the portal each time would move me the length of the board because they are moving at the same velocity.
You raise a good point.
Once again, I must ask. For momentum to be transferred from the portal to the object mass must be present in the portal.
If mass is present in the portal, then going through it is impossible. The only mass present in the exchange is the object.
The only momentum going though a portal regardless of the situation is only dependent on the object because the object is the only thing with mass. Momentum is defined as velocity x mass.
If the portal has velocity, it can impart no momentum because it has no mass. Momentum given by a portal equal zero, because it has no mass. If it had mass, it's not a portal; it's a wall of death.
>>7686932
It doesnt matter if the portal has mass because it never directly interacts with the cube. Do you count the mass of the wall? Dark matter has mass but doesnt interact with regular matter in any way except gravity. But it doesnt matter, because of the first statement in this post. If its A, the cube gets crushed perdendicular to the plane of the portal because the back half of the cube is entering the orange portal faster than the front half is leaving the blue one. Velocity is relative, this situation would be the same as the bottom platform with the cube moving towards the orange portal. Would A happen then? No.
>>7686969
.. I meant Orange=//=Blue @all t
>>7686969
You say it only changes the time it takes you to go through a portal. If you come out of that stationary blue portal at 200mph why would you just stop once all the way through?
vote for A
>>7687043
It isn't a vote. It's B. It's already been settled.
>>7687037
Because you guys keep confusing velocity with mass over time.
look look....
Mass/time is how a portal works.
Not length/time.
I came out of the portal at mass/time. not 200 mph.
If a portal comes at me at 200 mph, yes my Mass/Time would be exceedingly high as I transferred through the portal, but I had no velocity to begin or end with.
But once again, I'm thinking differently than the rest of you. I see portal as Mass/time while the rest of you see this ridiculous velocity/time which would allow light to exceed the speed of itself.
>>7687054
Frames of reference. Portals conserve momentum, this is not up for debate its a law of the game. The orange portal can be considered stationary. Whos to say it isnt? Then the momentum is the speed its moving (relative to the cube) x the mass of the cube = not stationary.
>>7686865
I meant the mass of the object, and its momentum RELATIVE to the portal. Portal may or may not have mass, but that should be irrelevant.
What would happen if you fired a gun into a portal? Would the bullet fall to the ground at the other end (in which case A is correct) or would it keep going (in which case B is correct).
>>7686865
>Does the portal have mass?
The portal is just space
If I had one of these, but with a portal instead of a net, and the other portal is on a stationary wall.
If I were to hit someone over the head would their head violently fly off at a speed simmilar to that of a car on a highway?
threadly reminder that these discussions are usesless as actual portals would be spheres and couldn't be fixated on moving surfaces.
>>7687143
Why would their head fly off?
>>7687149
Because according to these B-elievers, The head on the other side of the portal would have the same velocity as my swing.
>>7687143
Apparently yes.
Everyone in this thread thinks that moving portals are instantaneous human cheese graders.
Essentially any and all portions of our body go from 0 to some instantaneous velocity(depending on the velocity of the portal). Meaning instantaneous infinite Acceleration and therefore instantaneous infinite force.
By there own logic, they are still wrong because the molecules in the dice would be shredded as soon as the moving portal starts transporting it.
>>7687152
>The head on the other side of the portal would have the same velocity as my swing.
And indeed it would, but why would it fly off?
You're all forgetting the normal force that results from the striking of the platforms and that's gonna act on the block and do B
Fucking morons
>>7687164
>instantaniously accelerate
There is no acceleration involved with option B.
>>7687171
Relative to the body of the human there is.
>>7687175
No there isn't.
>>7687178
Is too.
>>7687161
>>7687161
>>7687161
>>7687161
I'm not misunderstanding, I'm merely stating the consequence.
If someone is halfway through, then one portion of their body is at zero velocity with gravity actively acting on their body. The other portion is now moving at an instantaneous velocity.
Let me give you a hint, the shredding wouldn't start happening at the halfway point, it would start immediately.
>>7687181
>enters portal at velocity V
>exits portal at velocity V
gee, looks like no acceleration
>>7687188
The body doesn't enter the portal.
Also the upper half of the cube in the normal setup enters the portal after the top half, That means that at the very instant the portal is in the middle of the cube, it would be effectively torn in half, if you count the top half relative to the bottom half.
>>7687186
Yes you are misunderstanding. To help you picture it, just forget about the orange portal for a minute. Let's say it's in a different room, and you're in the room with the blue portal. Now look into the blue portal. What do you see? You see a block approaching the portal at velocity V. And passing through at velocity V. And then continuing on at velocity V. There is no acceleration and certainly nothing that would cause it to rip apart.
>>7687201
Now what if it stops just after the head? Then you have a body that is moving at 10^6 km/h.
Which would still be completely still within the other frame.
>>7687198
>The body doesn't enter the portal.
Why not? Because you stopped moving the racket? Then that's just the same as stepping halfway into a non-moving portal.
>>7687209
Not really, no.
It would be more like me driving a motorcycle into a stationary portal. To suddenly have half of me stop in 1/100 of a second.
>>7687208
>Now what if it stops just after the head? Then you have a body that is moving at 10^6 km/h.
>Which would still be completely still within the other frame.
If the portal stops halfway through the object, then the part that is already through maintains its momentum (like anything else would) and the part that isn't through loses its momentum. It wouldn't be instantaneous, of course, since the portal couldn't come to a stop instantaneously. What would happen in that case depends on the acceleration and the tensile strength of the object. Either it would continue on at a velocity proportional to the mass that is already through, or it would break apart.
>>7687201
IF only one side the portal affect the object, I would AGREE but!
There is a superposition going on here.
The object that I see is at rest going at no speed.
Off course from where I'm standing I see a cube rushing towards me.
However as soon as the object starts going through the portal at the speed relative to Mass/Time.
The Mass dx/dt on my side instantaneously picks up to the speed of the portal on the other side.
But cube on the other side doesn't move. Nor does it get sucked in.
I would see the cube and then I would start seeing the cube disappear. Most like turned into high density radiation which would kill me.
>>7687218
Now how about this.
What if half the object is through the portal but the other half isn't.
The part that has passed through would have certainly continued travelling at X velocity.
Yet the other half would still be completely still in the other frame.
And this happens for every single atom.
>>7687221
You are being teleported through to different frames of reference. You start at the blue portals frame of reference (stationary) and are teleported to the orange protals frame of reference (moving) no acceleration has occured.
>>7687221
What happens if you go through the blue portal then?
>>7687234
This would still cause the object to completely disintegrate though, would it not?
>>7687236
No? These portals are from the game portal. Google it, the laws of these portals are fairly clearly defined. They also arent supposed to be able to be placed on moving surfaces but barring that, everything points to B.
>>7686381
The cube is moving from the perspective of the yellow portal. Since the blue counter part is not moving the cube will inherit the motion of the yellow portal once it gets through the portal.
There is a bit more going on, but I believe it summarizes the significant part of what is happening. Obviously outcome B.
>>7686797
good job, you have a talent on imaginary physics. im sure a lot of imaginary physics departments will be glad to have you as an imaginary student.
seriously though, abstract thinking is sort of a talent, try mathematics
>>7686381
A
Unless we're not talking about the physics the video game presents.
I doubt that angle is enough for it to plop over though. It would remain sitting in the original platform, poking through the blue portal.
>>7688398
I agree with A.
If it shoots out, at what point is it shot? When the Orange portal first touches the cube? Half way? When it slams onto the platform?
>>7686381
>speedy thing comes in, speedy thing comes out
Since the cube is not speedy when it goes in, it will not e speedy when it goes out.
>>7688398
Actually the game doesn't allow stationary objects to travel through portals.
>>7688826
That is true. Only moving objects can travel through portals
>>7688431
The cube is speedy relative to the portal when it enters
>It's all about how momentum is conserved, or more correctly, how it is not
or w/e they say in the game
Actually it's been proven to be A in game.
While the game will not allow stationary objects to travel through the portal...
They tested it with the player. The player was below the portal moving down, and before getting hit the player would jump into the portal, so that the portal would work.
The player exited the other portal with the same velocity as the jump upwards. Meaning that the solution is A.
Imagine two standing people holding hula hoops above there heads.
These hula hoops act as portals. One holder has the portal facing his head, the other has it facing the sky.
the first holder lowers the hula hoop down to his neck, causing his head to poke out of the other holder's hoop.
Now instead of lowering the hula hoop. let's say he dropped it. physicially it would be more intuitive that he would remain standing (on the ground) through the portal above the other persons head.
Rather than be propelled at any amount of force.
>>7688979
>choose choice B universe
>do hula hoop test
>lower hoop to neck quickly
>conservation of energy cause head to be ripped off and shot like a cannon out of other hula hoop
or
>causes rest of body to propel forward with neck, exponentially increasing speed, launching body into space
Choice A masterrace
>>7689004
literally what
>>7689015
I don't see why a cube can be launched but a head cannot
>>7688948
Playing the game so much, and being acustom to its physics, a cube being propelled like Solution B shows would be surprising, and probably part of a Bug Report
>>7689019
We've been over this before. See the rest of the thread.
>>7688410
When the portion of the cube that moves out of the blue portal has enough momentum to lift the rest of the cube.
>>7689028
>being propelled like Solution B
It's not being "propelled," it's just continuing at the same velocity.
Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out.
The cube is moving in relation to the portal, therefore B has to be correct.
>>7689064
But the cube is not moving, your perspective is.
>but muh conservation
>but the energy is transferred
>but I passed my first year physics course
I'm honestly only going with A because B would cause the atoms to be torn apart.
>>7689074
I agree with your choice but not your reasoning.
>>7689069
Honestly, this entire thing works as bait, because it is something an experiment cannot be conducted for.
You can model either option correctly.
>>7689074
>cause the atoms to be torn apart.
You are an idiot.
>Run towards object
>quickily stop in front of it
>objects decides to collect your "energy"
>instantaneously hits you in the face
>>7689069
>But the cube is not moving, your perspective is.
I bet you also think that if you'll slam into the back of an airplane if you jump while you're inside it.
>>7689080
I can agree with this.
/thread
/sage
>>7689092
The original question is based around the game.
>>7689094
Well, in the game the portals can't move.
>>7689094
Answer the question, don't dodge it like that.
>>7689092
The game doesn't allow stationary objects to move through portals.
I'm thinking the developers only considered moving objects, as in the portal acts as a wall to non-moving objects.
>>7689101
Which seems irrelevant because there is no way for a non moving object to enter a portal.
Can it be forced by moving the portal into the object? I doubt it, the essence of a portal seems to include interacting with it
>>7689101
>as in the portal acts as a wall to non-moving objects
That's not true.
You can fire a portal below a cubeand it will start falling straight down until it passes the portal.
>>7689114
Your right I missed that.
Wish I can explain this with gravity moving it down through the portal, but I wouldn't know how.
>>7689119
That's all you need to say. Gravity is always "pulling" an object down, not much so other directions
>>7689124
Explain a still cube falling out of portals placed on walls.
>>7689127
Idk, Perspective. Gravity pulls down, initial momentum causes cube to topple out of portal on wall.
>>7688948
Sadly the game is wrong according to its own set of rules. Apparently the developers just made the game's physics work for their planned use of the portal mechanics, not make it actually follow the set of physical rules that are implied to exist in the game.
>>7689069
If the platform were small enough to fit through the orange portal you would see the cube on top of said platform flying out of the blue portal at a speed equal to the orange one. Now stop the orange portal/platform what happens to the cube?
>protip: its B
>>7689542
nothing, because the platform is not actually moving, the perspective changing portal is
>>7686381
portals don't make any sense at all. You can place one portal above the other and get infinite energy. Gr8 physics m8
>>7689581
First off, this is all hypothetical. Yes, Portal is basically "Troll Physics: The Game," but it's a fucking game, and a good one at that. Also, I haven't really read much about Aperture Science shit but you could make a stretch and say that the energy that apparently comes from nowhere in the portal systems we come across in the game actually comes from the gun. Similarly to the way it maintains the portals active, they would provide the energy necessary to compensate for what's happening between the portals. The gun would have to have a massive energy storage unit of some kind and also be able to transmit that energy into the system instantaneously, but that shit is probably entangled to the portals in some way, so that would be possible.
One another note, one thing nobody pointed out and that I've been thinking about is what it would look like to be facing the blue portal once the orange one hits the platform and stops completely. It's impossible to have that in-game due to the lack of moving portals that get stuck on a wall (or the floor, in this case).
a
>>7686428
it took about 1.3 seconds for the portal to reach the moon in 2 so I think they travel at c
>>7686397
Actually go and play a game
>>7687086
this example isn't the same as the OP example. The box isn't moving at high velocity through the portal, the portal is moving at high velocity towards the stationary box.
>>7686870
The velocity of the cube was 0m/s so it would be 0m/s when exiting.
The portal isn't a physical object pushing the cube so it's should be A.
>>7686869
Assuming no gravity, and that the portals have equal velocity, the cube stays where it is.
>>7689882
>The box isn't moving at high velocity through the portal, the portal is moving at high velocity towards the stationary box.
Those are the same thing, as we have known since the 16th century. Velocity is relative.
>>7689903
>The velocity of the cube was 0m/s so it would be 0m/s when exiting
Incorrect, the cube is approaching the portal at high velocity. If you looked into the blue portal before it passed through, you would see the cube flying towards your face.
is this in reference to a game or something?
>>7689969
Yet the cube won't take the properties of the portal, it retains the properties it had.
>>7689974
>the properties it had
Such as moving towards the portal at a constant velocity?
>>7689983
I'm supposing that the portal does not have mass so the cube isn't moving toward it.
>>7686381
>having a "scientific" discussion on something that is science fiction
this fucking thread
>>7689993
It's a thought experiment.
>>7689989
>the portal does not have mass so the cube isn't moving toward it
Huh?
>>7686643
Huh. I never though of it like that. I always thought it would be the space around the blue portal that had momentum rather than the cube.
>>7686869
Cube gets stuck halfway inbetween the two like if there were two portals on the ground
>>7690069
Like the air around a bullet, perhaps?
>>7690065
Meaning that if 2 objects have mass, the objects are moving toward each other. I am moving towards Earth and Earth is moving towards me, because I have mass. Thus I suppose that the portal is moving toward the cube, because the cube has mass and the portal does not.
>>7689611
but only options is a and b retard
>>7686381
The box is stationary on the platform but moving in the world past the orange portal. The box is still moving when its gone through the portal. From the outside of the blue portal the box seen through the portal is moving. It should still be moving when its gone through.
The box must gain new kinetic energy to do this but considering you are actually physically altering the geometry of spacetime to move the portal I don't see it as much of a stretch to say that you are expending a lot of energy (some of which parted to the cube)
>>7686869
What happens? :^)
>>7690172
Cube falls down and both portals miss it.
>>7686381
Why wouldnt a portal moving X down towards a block the same as a block moving X up?
>>7690172
Considering through each of those portals comes a cube (The same cube, but nonetheless), it crushes itself.
>>7690172
The box is crushed just as if there were no portals on the plates.
>>7690172
Two portals coming together is the same as a 1 sided wall smashing into itself.
>>7690172
From the cube's perspective, there are other cubes flying towards it from both directions, each with speed S = the combined speed of both pistons. Behind each of these cubes is a string of more cubes, each moving faster than the last, such that they all overtake each other at the same instant in an endless collision. The cube is crushed by itself and expands laterally until it extends beyond the portals and stops the pistons from moving farther.
Torn apart by tidal forces at the event horizon.
>>7690191
>/thread
the question is which frame of reference the portals measure momentum to.
Me jumping into the air is not the same as the earth moving from underneath me in the sense that my position in space will be different for each scenario, but relative to the surface of the earth, the cases are the same.
>>7690280
Yep, and if the jumpers movement was interrupted and stopped short of its destination, the energy would be transferred to the earth and it would move down away from the jumper
>kek
I always viewed portals in a way where unless the object moves, the object is still in its Original location, only being viewed at a new location
What do I know though, I study math not fictional physics
>inb4 its called a thought experiment pleb
Okay
>>7690232
where does the energy to crush them come from?
>>7690718
>where does the energy to crush them come from?
Portals have never conserved energy, so it doesn't really matter.
>>7690726
Do you have any interesting/cool ideas where the energy comes from?
I was thinking some kind of cost for using the portals, like every time something goes through the portal draws more energy from whatever created it. If the object requires too much then the portals fizzle out.
>>7689903
you fucking stupid asshole, the object HAS a velocity relative to the portal. How the fuck can people visiting /sci be so stupid?
OP asks about how a game feature would behave in real world.
>>7686905
>If you want to game logic, go to a gamer board.
Kill yourself asshole. your comparison smells like ass, and all you're saying is completely bullshit. It's about portals, not about fucking holes in a fucking board.
>It would just be a wall that crushes me
yea please crush yourself.
But lemme explain:
>If I built a board with a hole in it and then place it on a rotating arm and stood in the path of the hole and turned the machine on, it would have no affect on me what so ever.
indeed, but if that hole was a portal you would have a relative velocity to the portal
>Even if you consider it's relative velocity to me, the only thing that it affects on me as the object is how much time it takes me to go through the hole.
What the fuck are you saying? It's not a hole you can go through and nuffin happens, its a fucking portal, meaning that the hole is connected a frame of reference in a room (where the other side of the portal lives), when the portal moves, the whole fucking room on the other side moves relative to you.
>That's it. It governs transverse time alone and bestows nothing else. To bestow momentum, that object must have mass. If a portal has mass, then I would not be able to transverse it. It would just be a wall that crushes me.
hurr durr look at me using expensive words for no reason. The portal is just a 2 dimensional link between two rooms, when a portal moves in room1, room2 moves relative to room1. If you enter a moving room you will not magically lose all that momentum going on. FUCKING ENERGY CONSERVATION FUCKING RETARDS.
>>7692144
you dumbass if you drop a hula hoop over yourself from a height you don't launch up
portals work the same way did you even play it
speedy thing goes in speedy thing comes out
but its not even moving
its the ring that's moving
just cuz its a portal doesn't change it
i didnt read your post too cuz it looks retarded and angry but your wrong anyways
>>7692163
>speedy thing
Relative to what inertial reference frame? Of course the cube is moving. The earth is spinning and falling, the universe is expanding, etc. Velocity is always indeterminate unless given relative to a certain frame of reference, in this case to that of the portal.
>>7692163
>you don't launch up
Yes you do. You accelerate upwards relative to the reference frame of the hoop at 9.81 m/s^2 until the ground hits it.
>>7690172
A diamond made of metal.
B assuming portals could be put on a moving surface.
Why? Frame of reference. It doesn't matter if the portal or the cube is moving, as long as one has velocity.
Come on /sci/ I dropped out of high school and I could figure this out.
>>7692163
I'm assuming he means real world physics, not taking into account the games shortcuts to make portals work.
Hasn't anyone tried this in garys mod or something?
>>7693220
>real world physics
>teleportation of matter across large distances
Choose one
>>7693353
what if the portals acted as wormholes?
guess portal3 would have to change the 2d elliptical portals to spheres
