Well?

Fuck physics and fuck you people. It doesn't fucking matter, None of it matters, literally who cares?

It would be A

they will never understand
leave with your sanity intact

>since the second portal is stationary while the first portal moves.
so?

Attached: B fags really believe this.jpg (800x600, 34.11K)

B just like the other one since the top one is moving it must transfer its force going down onto the block making it shoot upwards

as usual A fags are retards

Skub

>bfags think there a portals in OP's pic
the absolute state

Attached: 1606043659775.jpg (640x480, 47.96K)

There could be and it would make no difference.

So can someone explain how its B in the original then?

I thought it was A but actually wouldn't it be B cause the portal moving at that speed would cause air suction or something?

quit while you're behind

kek

It isn't. A portal is functionally identical to a hole, just the ends are at different points. Everybody who tries to contextualize it with the fragments of physics knowledge left over from high school is a fucking retard.

Here's the thing, portals BREAK our physics. It's A, everything else is bait or pseudo intellectual cope.

In this example, the piston is moving through the world, in the original, the world is moving with the piston (via a portal). Put yourself in the shoes of the cube, in OP's example the world behind the cube isn't hurtling towards you, it's allowing the piston and hole to move through it. In the original, you would see the world on the other side of the portal hurtling towards you, and I see no reason for your momentum (relative to the world you're entering) to suddenly stop.

here. This is the exact shit I'm talking about. Have you ever heard a physicist (or anybody who knows what they are talking about for that matter) talk like this? It's A.

Not an argument.

Dude, you don't know shit about physics and portals aren't real. It's a hole and therefore it's A.

The problem is made way more obtuse because the piston stops. if the first portal and piston continued at a set velocity there would be zero confusion about B. If the piston slows down as the cube enters then it would no doubt be A. Anyone arguing bad faith about muh phd or air suction or whatever is the same type of retard who can't understand how 2 / 2(2+2) = ? is bad form.

If we are going to throw physics and logic out the window, then B is the better choice since it would make for a more entertaining game. Why argue so strongly for something that you can't justify beyond saying that it breaks physics that is also the most boring answer?

>If it's not fun, why bother
objectively the best answer

>B is the better choice since it would make for a more entertaining game
But this never happens in the game.

Getting PTSD from thermodynamics

You're not even showing where the portals are, you fucking idiot.

Then you're no longer arguing about the video games Portal and Portal 2, and as such fuck off not relevant off-topic.

>pseuds seethe uncontrollably at shit that breaks the laws of physics
>unless you call it an SCP
you niggers are fucking pathetic holy shit. i mean fucking look at this drivel...

In the original it doesn't matter if (1) the ground+cube is stationary and the portal is moving down or if (2) the portal is stationary and the cube is moving up (all the forces and momentums are the same), and the second case is the same as a typical situation you see in the game – throw something in the portal, it flies out. Therefore, same would be true for the first case – cube will fly out.

Conservation of momentum. If both portals are moving at the same velocity, the cube's momentum will remain zero. However if one portal is moving and the other isn't, the cube has to gain the opposite momentum when passing through the portal to compensate.

0.25 btw

>It isn't. A portal is functionally identical to a hole
Except for all the important parts like both sides of the hole not moving at the same speed and the clear denial of conservation of momentum and energy.

Please god let this be the new sneed.

Ive seen this get debunked both ways for the past 10 years I'm ready for a new meme

Attached: 1462160492915.png (850x575, 603K)

>ur wrong cuz muh physics
You're not actually explaining anything or countering my arguments. Stay mad, brainlet.

In the other image you can see the cube moving on the side of the stationary portal, which shows that the cube has momentum applied to it. An object is made up of particles, and assuming that an object holds it's form as it passes through a portal, the particles that go through the portal have to be pushed out of the way by the row that come next, or else they'd exist in the same space, which would go against the assumption made before that objects hold their form. Since the portal left is moving downward at the same speed that the cube is moving through the portal, it's not impossible to say that the part of the cube on the left side of the portal doesn't appear to move as its particles are stationary, where the cube on the right side of the portal is moving because its particles have momentum. When the entire cube passes through its entire makeup will have momentum, and since the previous assumption has to be right for answer A to exist, that makes A logically impossible.

You can't think of this scenario like having a window placed over you, there's no real world equivalent to having one of the portals move while the other is stationary. You literally have to think with portals

>space-time portal in a videogame doesn't make sense
woah there buddy i think you're onto something

Attached: 1550272784644.jpg (765x897, 67.89K)

What if the platform (and by extension, the earth attached to it) simply absorbs all of the force due to its greater mass? As per 's example, if a doorframe were to fall on top of you, it wouldn't send you shooting upwards precisely because of this. Also, the gravitational pull of the earth attached to the platform is far more influential than the gravitational pull of the frame; the frame is falling at, say, 5 mph to hit the ground, not the ground rushing towards the frame at the same speed.

Fuck I'm choking

I know it isn't possible. I'm just saying in a hypothetical game where this scenario showed up that maintaining rate in=rate out would open up more gameplay potential. I'm assuming we are debating this with the assumption that it will eventually be in a video game.

I'm not actually saying that we should disregard that logic. Only that B would be the better answer if we were to give up on logic and pick any answer because portals break physics like that other user was suggesting.

rate in=rate out is literally necessary for the cube to not be stretched or crushed by portals moving. Afags are just retarded