plopbros...

plopbros...

i never thought Btards would be proven right

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Regardless he should get out of the way because he doesn't know the weight of the object, in the event it plops it could still tumble and crush him. Also this comparison is incongruent as the original example has the object moving from a place of gravity to a place of gravity. Realistically the amogus would be sucked into the vacuum of space as the portal functions as an open window or a port-al

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      wtf even is this image?
      the question at the bottom is like elementary when you study topics like relativity.
      instead of debating semantics on a mongolian basket weaving forum, just fucking go and study any physics-related degree man jesus fucking christ

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      disingenius
      inside a building has the same point of reference, it's not like in space where to unconnected objects have diferent points of reference

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      That's not how that works.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I love you amogus

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      He gets ejected because he's SUS.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      An Amoron made this image without even realizing it's a completely different situation

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I don't think you understand it. It's supposed to make Afags realise that they have no answer to this question because they are fruitlessly trying to determine the "objective" "absolute" speed of the cube. B, which only deals with relative speed, could easily answer what happens, because it's the same in every scenario. It doesn't matter which it is because they are equivalent from a physics perspective.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Bfags can easily answer because they base heir understanding on our understanding of physics, which is nothing but a meme founded upon our subjective perspective of reality.

          Achads know there is an objective reality that defies humanity's peabrained attempts to define it, resulting in scenarios that spit in the face of our grandiose "laws of physics."

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            a does follow the laws of physics though.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            bfags think that there are multiple "frames of reference" which leads to degenerate ideas of "relative morality." They believe that murder can be explained away by physics, that a killer can say in court "your honor, the victim was moving relative to my knife and not the other way around"
            Whereas achads recognize that there is only one frame of reference that matters, namely the frame that include God's Firmament and his crystal spheres, Amen

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The B box isn't floating in space.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >gravity makes things fly higher
        dipshit

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          It makes them plop lower.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      there's no wall to stop the room from moving. not the same thing

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Should I """solve""" Schrodinger's Cat by making a video game simulation where the cat is always alive too?

      You left it ambiguous in the first place retard, no definite answer.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >thinks Schrodinger's Cat is about knowing something that you don't have enough information about

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          That was my point retard. Are portals real?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            I'm making fun of your point by using
            >implication arrows

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Thanks for admitting to being a disingenuous retard who can't write a response.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Schrödinger's Cat is about the superpositional nature of reality, not what you think it is.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      it doesn't matter which object is moving, the cube will smash into him regardless

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    heh
    whoosh or plop

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Weird how the simulation with equations and physics that YOU wrote did exactly what you want. Were you also stunned to find that the superheroes won at the end of your favorite marvel movie despite the odds? You fucking retard

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      to be fair, what he wrote is how the physics would work irl if you think about it.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >if you think about it.
        what if i DONT think about it?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          then you argue about it on a somali spear chucking social media

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Not at all. He writes the physics such that the portal is imparting motion upon the box, because he's a dumb reddit posting pseud

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          oh youre right he did.
          he shouldve just made the portal keep the save relative velocity it had going into the portal

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            i think i had a stroke there.
            i meant he shouldve had the box keep the same relative velocity.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            i think i had a stroke there.
            i meant he shouldve had the box keep the same relative velocity.

            He does

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              no he doesnt that literally applies the portal velocity to the cube

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Velocity is relative.
                The only velocities that exist are box-entrance, entrance-exit, and exit-box, and their scaled multiples.

                Why is only the velocity of the portal accounted for, relative to the box?

                What about the velocity of everything else relative to the box?

                >Why is only the velocity of the portal accounted for, relative to the box?
                "Only" as opposed to what?
                >What about the velocity of everything else relative to the box?
                Such as?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                but the portal is a teleporter. the distance from the orange portal to the cube and the distance to from the blue portal to the cube are equal

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the distance from the orange portal to the cube and the distance to from the blue portal to the cube are equal
                ???

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                because it's a mirror. If you put your finger on a sheet of paper, your finger is only a few atoms away from the other side. it's not 40 fuckin miles away. The portal is a teleporter, not a tunnel.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So what? The portal is basically just a door. It has no velocity. It's just a theoretical warping of space. It's the same point. You're just being facetious. the box would plop.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >The portal is basically just a door.
                Only when the two portals are back-to-back.
                And in that case, B yields the expected behavior.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Both portals are effectively the same point in space, that's the whole idea behind them.

                The distance between then is 0.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                The platform it's on, which is not moving.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                What does your proposed set of equations look like? Be explicit.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Why is only the velocity of the portal accounted for, relative to the box?

              What about the velocity of everything else relative to the box?

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Christ, the number of times I've posted this exact equation in these threads.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      And yet the same simple physics equation also accounts for the beloved hoop analogy of Afags.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        yeah because the velocities cancel out. but the velocities shouldnt be applied to the cube at all. since the portal doesnt have mass, there is no "relative velocity". its just a hole

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        No you fucking dumby. The portal is a magic door that reduces the distance between two points to zero. Passing through a portal is the same as passing through a doorway. If you move the doorway toward you very quickly, you do not fly. You're so brain poisoned by reddit science that you fail to understand that not only is a portal incapable of moving, but it doesn't not transfer momentum or energy in any way.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

          >nice thumbnail dummy
          A doorway's entrance and exit aren't moving independant of each other. In the gif the "exit portal" is moving at the same rate as the "entrance portal" which invalidates it since the exit portal in question isn't moving. You're actually illustrating why the cube should be moving

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            No. Again your brain is poisoned. There is no scientific stretching force, there is no speeding up or slowing down there is no general relativity. A portal is a magic door coated in fake science that makes the difference between 2 points 0.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >there is no general relativity
              ???

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                hes right theres not. because there cant be relative velocity to a hole.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not sure what to say to something so stupid.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                He's right in a sense though. Objects have velocity, holes are an empty space that lacks an object - even though it is a location or set of coordinates that you can point at and call "the hole", to say it has actual velocity is like saying "this nothing is coming straight at me!"

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Take a hole. Jump over it. Walk around it. Climb into it. You moved relative to the hole. We don't need a metaphysical discussion about whether a hole is a thing or the absence of a thing.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >There is no scientific stretching force, there is no speeding up or slowing down there is no general relativity. A portal is a magic door coated in fake science that makes the difference between 2 points 0.
                His idea behind this is that the portal functionality acts as a teleporter between two spaces because if you introduce relativity to it like an object you introduce the fact that by travelling through a finite distance over an infinitely small timeframe you'd be travelling at close to infinite speed. The portal itself cannot act on an object or else the act of portalling itself would require infinite energy

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >The portal itself cannot act on an object or else the act of portalling itself would require infinite energy
                But then that's part of the premise. So what?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Because hitting something with infinite energy would instantly bring about the heat death of the universe?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Then why doesn't that happen in the game?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Because portals don't use infinite energy because they don't apply relativity because they are teleporters between coordinates, not objects

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Then why would moving portals be any different?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                They won't, so what?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So it seems to me that there's no problem.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You realize how wrong you are with the ending of Portal 2 and whenever Chell goes through a portal at a different orientation that she has to reoriente herself afterwards, right? If it was teleportation, you couldn't stand between the portals opening and exit.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                look at

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S85nudR6D-Y
                >jumped as he moved into the portal
                Moving Portals do not work when the object doesn't move. It just stops.

                The portal were originally intended to behave like A but the engine cannot handle it when the object doesn't move and the portal just stops. The dev themselves said they couldn't figure it out to make it work.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Bullshit.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

          See this helpful graphic on why B argues for nothing more than portals behaving consistently like a window.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            thats fucking retarded

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              It's nothing but the truth.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Dishonest. Note that you tards always completely negate gravity and so this magic floating cube continues floating but still also moving forward. It would be on the ground and not move

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Gravity just needlessly complicates matters. It doesn't change the basic facts of how portals operate. If you think gravity meaningfully alters the answer, you don't understand the question.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Do you honestly believe that B argues the cube will continue to fly in a straight line ignoring gravity? Do we need to update the original pic to show a curved trajectory?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            no.
            you saying that moving the portal quickly transfers energy to the stationary cube. The cube is the object that is moving in your image, not the portals. It would be like if I could click and drag the portal from right to left over the cube and it would suddenly launch the cube to the right.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              You're reading the image incorrectly. Look at the background. It was added for a reason.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              are you saying that wouldn't happen and this would happen instead?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

          >moves toward you without exerting energy

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            The return of the Jamiroquai guy, welcome back !

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

          Samefag hivemind.
          Doors are not portals. You do not see into a distance world going though your window
          The fact your in 3D means it cannot be a 2D position a | position b construct. It has a "space" between the front and exit. And if the entrance is moving onto you while the exit isn't moving at all, that entrance momentum has to be transferred onto you for you to even transition through that space to exit out the back of the portal.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

          >If you move the doorway toward you very quickly, you do not fly.
          Same thing happens with back-to-back portals under his model.
          It's even shown in the video, you colossal fucking retard.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Ok sir, can you please give us consisted mechanical formulation of A case, please?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Not at all. He writes the physics such that the portal is imparting motion upon the box, because he's a dumb reddit posting pseud

      And yet the same simple physics equation also accounts for the beloved hoop analogy of Afags.

      then write your equations, ploptard

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Portal on the N64
    Damn, that's actually pretty impressive.

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    B is probably the answer, but it's more fun to argue as an Afag because of how much Bfags seethe.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This. B is the only logical and sensible answer but because people can't comprehend someone being so retarded as to believe in solution A, pretending to be A gay makes for a great troll.

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Whether I argue for A or B depends entirely on how I'm feeling that particular day. For instance, today I'm feeling particularly devilish and troll-y and so I will ironically argue for B

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Whereas if you're feeling smart you'd do it sincerely?

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    B is how it would be in real life. A is how it would be in the game.

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    OP you fag this is just an ad for this gay's demake

  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    i can never tell whos trolling in these threads. anyway, portals work like a window. when you throw something fast through a window, it keeps going fast, but if you drop a window on something it doesnt suddenly gain velocity. the gif i posted should clear things up nicely. just imagine the window is in fact a portal on the front and back side of the falling house.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        fuck i had just typed out the captcha and you beat me to it

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      explained concisely in the video

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    And
    now
    in
    Portal.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >jumped as he moved into the portal
      Moving Portals do not work when the object doesn't move. It just stops.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >It doesn't do what we want it to do
        Bfags will use everything but the fucking game itself to justify their headcanon

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          The OP is not about the game. The game is wrong. It's like using a Atari game to justify if Unreal 5 is realistic. OP explicit ask what would happen based on the logic we have in reality.

          The game about warping reality just had shit coding that isn't accurate to reality, just a shitty "close enough" example of reality.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >the op is not about the game
            >uses portals from Portal
            >uses the companion cube from Portal
            >is not about Portal
            Now that's just being dishonest

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Here's a question, he has the setup but instead of using a cube he instead has the player character jump through the portal....I wonder why?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Guy who made this webm regrets it by the way. He's realised it doesn't actually prove A.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Btards on suicide watch LMAO
      >let me rewrite the game to fit my narrative real quick
      HAHAHAHAHA

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >has all the tools to replicate it exactly
      >doesn't
      what a fucking retard...

  11. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    ok Bfags, where does the cube get its momentum then? Say the portal slams down BUT STOPS RIGHT AT THE HALF HEIGHT OF THE CUBE causing one-half of the cube to stick out of each portals. Where is the momentum? SHouldn't the cube get 'sucked' out despite not entirely submerging it? Face it, with the frame of reference of the cube, the cube's velocity is 0. It doesn't go through the portal, the portal goes through the cube.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >SHouldn't the cube get 'sucked' out despite not entirely submerging it?
      yes. that is what would happen.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Face it, with the frame of reference of the cube, the cube's velocity is 0.
      This is always the case. Your velocity relative to yourself is always 0.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >where does the cube get its momentum then?
      Portals change the velocity of objects passing through them. This has always been the case.

      Let me guess, you think velocity is just a more sciency way of saying speed?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Portals change the velocity of objects passing through them
        They do not.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          see

          Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Velocity is defined with a direction. Portals changing an object's direction of travel is literally changing its velocity.

          You really DID just think velocity is a more sciency way of saying speed didn't you?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Velocity is defined with a direction. Portals changing an object's direction of travel is literally changing its velocity.
            only thanks to gravity

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Gravity is irrelevant, the velocity is changed as a result of the direction being changed, this is a property of even static portals

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >as a result of the direction being changed
                direction wouldn't matter if it weren't for gravity

                damn btards really are dumb

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              You can literally have an object moving in space and a portal would still demonstrate changing velocity by having direction. You are making it painfully apparent you think velocity is just another word for speed.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                without gravity everything would be moving at constant velocity. changing direction would not change the velocity unless by the influence of gravity.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >changing direction would not change the velocity
                IT LITERALLY DOES
                >these morons seriously think velocity just means speed

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >IT LITERALLY DOES
                thanks to gravity yes. if not for gravity the object passing through a portal would keep moving at the same velocity it entered at. gravity is what gives it direction

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                a change in velocity does not equal a change in momentum

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I know you're baiting at this point but fuck it.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                give me an example when speed is not equal to velocity

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                object A is moving left 10 m/s, and object B is moving 10 m/s right
                also, object A is stationary and object B is moving 20 m/s right
                also, object A is moving left 20 m/s and object B is stationary
                A and B have different velocity and in two frames, one object has zero velocity and thus momentum/kinetic energy

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                interesting enough, wouldnt this count as interference, as nothing travels in this way, w/o another force forcing it? (i wouldnt know)

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >thanks to gravity yes. if not for gravity the object passing through a portal would keep moving at the same velocity it entered at. gravity is what gives it direction
                Black WHAT are you talking about

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >thanks to gravity yes

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I remember you

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          See what I mean ? he is just spamming variation of it KEK

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Haha. Anyway you go back to posting variations of frogs you little rascal.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Of course I will. Though it's almost 1AM now, time to go to bed.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >frog poster, Europoor and an Afag
                Can't get more retarded than that.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I remember you

        you wouldn't even need the ball or tissue paper. in a, the air itself would stop the cube in its tracks since it has no momentum and can't push them out of the way.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Yes but Afags are bad at visualising all the variables so it helps to give them a visual cue

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Are you retarded? If it got stopped by air then it would even be a. Otherwise the original model would have it get stopped as well

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          That's not how mass works. You can't stop something weighing the weight of Earth with "air".

          Otherwise jumping is impossible by your logic since emerging out of the portal regardless of rate would be stopped by "air"

          You also implied in a vacuum like space it would be B then since there's no "air".

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The cube doesn't have "no force", numbnuts, even when sitting still. Objects are constantly exerting force on the ground and having an equal force exerted on them by the ground. When it goes through the portal, that force of pushing off of the ground would make it go a small distance before stopping.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >portal engulfs box at speed
      >box exits stationary portal at speed
      >box now has momentum as its moving through space
      if you stop halfway, the side that has gained momentum through motion will tug at the other side. throw a punch and stop halfway, you can feel it tug at your shoulder in the same way

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    B fags are asserting that the portal creates energy and transfers it to the cube.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      even stationary portals create energy. put one portal on the floor, and one on the celing so that an object falling into the floor portal exits the celing portal and falls back into the floor portal. drop a magmet into the floor portal and coil copper wire around the path of the falling magnet. the magnet will now endlessly fall through the coil and generate electricity in it.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >creates energy
      Yes, that's how it starts moving down onto the cube in OP's image, it's called "kinetic" energy.

  13. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Here we go, round 3

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >rewrote

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    MY bad, indeed I wrote too fast.

    Your logic is that the cube is moving fast towards us if we look through the blue portal, and yes, the cube look like it is moving fast towards us because the orange portal is moving, not because the cube itself move, therefore, when the cube end up outside the blue portal (or just not in contact with the orange portal anymore), it literally stop, because the orange portal stopped.

    The idea behind the camera is that you could do the exact same thing in real life with an open door and a camera and get the exact same effect and the same conclusion, the cube would just stop when reaching the blue portal, simply because what was making it feel like moving stopped to move, aka, the orange portal. There is no impact nor modification nor change made to the cube during the entire process by any of those portals, the only impact that the cube got was from the environment, that changed abruptly, but that change is made without any force being exerted by those portals, therefore, their speed are totally irrelevant, since again, they cannot impact anything.

    Thing about a slider on a bar on an UI, you can move the middle of the slider as much as you want, it want magically make the other side go haywire because of supposed relative that need to be match or whatever.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Except a portal isn't a camera, it's not just an image of the other side, it's a portal to the other side. The distance you see is literally your distance to those objects. And that distance is changing.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >an open door and a camera
        That distance changing change nothing for the cube.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Indeed, the cube would just continue its motion if it crossed the threshold.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            It won't because the origin of that "supposed" motion (aka the orange portal) isn't there anymore. The illusion of the "movement" is created by the orange portal, as soon the cube is on the other side, it stop (or i should say, start to change) his relation to the previous environment.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >The idea behind the camera is that you could do the exact same thing in real life
      I can point a radar gun at the portal and it would tell me that the cube is moving. Can't do the same with a camera.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        As if radar guns aren't complete fucking bullshit that are designed to let cops give out as many tickets as possible so the ~~*state*~~ can collect more revenue in fines.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The radar gun wouldn't tell you that the cube is moving, he would tell you that the distance is shortening (which may lead to the conclusion that the cube is moving, like a camera would do), but it is not the case, it's the portal moving, which make a big difference.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >he would tell you that the distance is shortening
          That's movement, by definition.
          > it's the portal moving
          Portal is right in front of me not moving an inch. Try again.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Portal is right in front of me not moving an inch. Try again.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Want to argue that when I'm standing on the blue side and pointing a radar gun through the portal it's actual moving? lmao

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                But nobody argue against that, I'm literally telling you since multiple messages already, that the movement is made by the orange portal, therefore there is a movement, of the orange portal. The cube doesn't move, the cube is sitting there approaching towards you because the orange portals is approaching the cube, like a camera moving behind an open door moving toward a cube.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >The cube doesn't move
                >cube is sitting there approaching towards you
                That's movement retard.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >There is no impact nor modification nor change made to the cube during the entire process by any of those portals
      the onyl way for the cube to not have the same relative motion out of the exit portal as it did going in is for there to be an interstitial space within the portal, which there isnt. otherwise, the box exits the portal at the same rate and the object in motion will remain in motion.

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Well?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      A fags BTFO

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It's already 16hours that I'm debating with those retards in this Portal thread, I'm starting to get the hang of it.

  18. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I think the worst argument for A is "B breaks conservation of energy". They both do. Not only that, but A uses up more energy, since it not only moves the cube through, but also stops its momentum.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Option B breaks the law of conservation of energy therefor it's not the correct option by default.

      lol

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It's so fucking obvious that portals inherently break conservation of energy laws in general that it's baffling anyone makes that argument.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah but they don't break conservation of Portal energy laws. Speedy thing goes in speedy thing goes out. Still thing goes in speedy thing, still thing speedily goes out. Just because still thing sped through speedy thing doesnt mean still thing isnt still anymore still thing remains still.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >Speedy thing goes in speedy thing goes out.
          Pretty much all other afags making that argument are referring to conversation of energy in general.

          Also an understanding of reference frames means portals already change kinetic energy, see

          Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Option B breaks the law of conservation of energy therefor it's not the correct option by default.

      Afags in charge of being the most predictable bitches.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >I predicted that someone would explain why B is factually wrong therefor it is not wrong
        The cope from Bfags LMAO

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          explain this if stationary portals don't violate conservation of energy

          even stationary portals create energy. put one portal on the floor, and one on the celing so that an object falling into the floor portal exits the celing portal and falls back into the floor portal. drop a magmet into the floor portal and coil copper wire around the path of the falling magnet. the magnet will now endlessly fall through the coil and generate electricity in it.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >electricity
            As I said before, your problem is that you don't understand what the conservation of energy is or that 'energy' doesn't mean electricity.
            B fags are so retarded.

            See [...]
            Why are you making such an obviously flawed argument?

            >Why are you making such an obviously flawed argument?
            So flawed that you can't form a retort around it.
            The force pushing the object down the portals is transfering energy, not creating it.

            I have no idea what this post means. If an object can free fall infinitely then there are a million ways to create a perpetual motion machine

            >another retard that thinks energy = electricity enters the fray

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              electricity is a form of energy.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >So flawed that you can't form a retort around it.
              "portals break conservation in general" isn't a retort?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >"portals break conservation in general"
                No because that statement requires an explanation that you have not given.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                It's literally inferred from the gif and the filename. Do you need it spelled out for you? Here's a hint. GPE stands for "gravitational potential energy".

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Saying three words is not an explanation.
                Something falling down a hole forever doesn't get energy from nothing. Something is applying energy to it to make it fall. You don't know what conservation of energy is. I repeat: YOU DONT KNOW what the conservation of energy is. You are STILL thinking about the problem as if it was about generating electricity not primordial energies of the universe. Your mind is simply not developed enough to understand the actual discussion.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Something falling down a hole forever doesn't get energy from nothing
                It's gaining energy from an infinite source. Conservation of energy laws state energy should be finite.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >from an infinite source
                therefor, it's not being created, it's being tansfered
                You guys are so retarded that you keep agreeing with me without even knowing lmao

                > For the water to flow down the portals, it needs energy applied to it.
                Hey Anon, you just learned about potential energy. Now guess what a portal above another does to the potential energy of the between the two portals.

                >Now guess what a portal above another does to the potential energy of the between the two portals.
                Nothing is creating energy, it's transferring it. You literally have no idea what conservation of energy is. Sucks to be you.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Anon before the portals the water had finite amount of potential energy. After placing the water has an INFINITE amount of potential energy. Are you aware that infinity is bigger than any finite number? Riddle me this retard, where does this energy come from?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >still arguing about this nonsense
                You are still not creating energy. You are still transferring it. You are retarded.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Transferring it from where? Point me to this infinite energy source.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >it's transferring it
                transfering it from where?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >transfering it from where?
                From the source. Whatever source you meant. You didn't mention the source so how should I know. But if it comes from a source then it is not created, it is transferred.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >From the source
                the same source of infinite energy that the cube in b gets its momentum from?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >therefor, it's not being created, it's being transferred
                GPE has been create by there suddenly being infinite. GPE is a valid energy source.

                >In physics and chemistry, the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

                The GPE couldn't have remained constant if it suddenly became infinite due to portals.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >infinite
                You are not creating infinite energy. You are making the object maintain the transfered energy to it an infinite amount of time
                You are clueless and and embarrassment.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                If you haven't created a source of infinite energy then how are you able to transferred energy from it indefinitely?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >how are you able to transferred energy from it indefinitely?
                Because there isn't a force absorbing that energy when it comes in contact with the object falling.
                Literal retard that doesn't even understand how your endless lopp system works LMAO

                I address literally everything you say and it now stands unrefuted.

                You addressed nothing because you are inferior to me intellectually and that makes you mad. I accepted your concession but I will do it again.
                I accept your concession.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You addressed nothing because you are inferior to me intellectually and that makes you mad. I accepted your concession but I will do it again.
                >I accept your concession.
                This is just getting sad.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Once again I'm accepting your concession.
                You were bested by a better brain (mine).

                Cope and seethe below this line
                __________________________

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                No it's infinite.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Something falling down a hole forever doesn't get energy from nothing.
                Correct, it gets it from gravity. The thing is, under normal circumstances you'd have to put in energy to get something back up to where you can drop it. With portals you skip that step, and this lets you create energy without putting in energy.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >it gets it from gravity
                Therefor the energy is getting transfered from gravity. Not created.
                >b-but it falls indefinitely
                So? It's still energy transfered. You are STILL so retarded that you are thinking about generating electricity. You are dumb.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                explain how a perpetual motion machine using portals doesn't violate conservation of energy but a cube gaining momentum in b does. either they both do, or neither does because they're both "transfering" energy instead of creating it.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >suddenly starts asking for nonsense the moment he realizes he's factually wrong
                HHAHAHAHHA
                I accept your concession.
                >a cube gaining momentum in b does
                Because nothing is imparting energy in the cube so it cannot get kinetic energy and go flying from nothing. While the perpetual wheelportal thing you came up with works because gravity is imparting energy to the object and making it fall.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Therefor the energy is getting transfered from gravity. Not created.
                You create it because you use the energy without putting in the requisite energy. Normally, energy is transformed. Now there is suddenly extra energy.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You create it
                You don't. It's a universal law and you are arguing about it. The cube can't get kinetic energy simply from existing in a certain area of space. Next.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You don't. It's a universal law
                Anon, that's exactly the point here. Portals break that law. You can't say "what I am observing to happen is not actually happening because it goes against the LAW". Laws of physics are derived from observations.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Portals break that law.
                They don't. Energy doesn't get created, just transferred. None of the arguments provided so far prove that energy is created.
                Give it another try.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                the energy of a hole isnt transfered to the thing going through it

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the energy of a hole
                ?
                >isnt transfered to the thing going through it
                Nobody is arguing the opposite.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                bfags literally are arguing that the energy of the top platform is transfered to the cube instead of the bottom platform

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                bfags are retarded, what does that have to do with what I said? (other than that they are retarded?)

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Energy doesn't get created, just transferred.
                Then how come it's infinite? Surely that should be a hint that you're in the wrong here?
                I've explained it already but one more won't hurt: to get energy out of gravity you normally have to put in the energy of getting an object to a higher point. This exchange maintains conservation of energy. This step is skipped by portals. You get energy out of falling objects without putting it in. Thus you get more energy out of the system than you put in. Thus energy is created. If you deny this by saying "you can't create energy" then you're arguing backwards.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >I've explained it already
                If you've explained it already and you are still replying to me then you are wrong.
                Gravity is still the sole reason the falling object has kinetic energy. Energy wasn't created, it was transfered.
                You are arguing that it will maintain that that energy endlessly while it falls while if there was no endless loop the object would hit a surface and once again, transfer that energy in from the object to said surface.

                >doubling down on his mistake
                Oh no, you aren't even being embarrassing anymore. Now you are just sad. I hope someday you'll learn some humility, friend.

                Not an argument. Try again.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >If you've explained it already and you are still replying to me then you are wrong.
                Oh, in that case, no, that part was entirely new. I mean, might as well be, for all the notice you took of it, huh?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >doesn't address anything I said in the post
                Not an argument. I accept your concession.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I address literally everything you say and it now stands unrefuted.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Therefor the energy is getting transfered from gravity. Not created.
                >You are STILL so retarded that you are thinking about generating electricity. You are dumb.
                I love it when people think that they are the smartest ones in the room and start calling everyone retarded and dumb all the while misunderstanding the whole thing and making a huge fool of themselves. The whole point is that the portals themselves already break the conservation of energy thing because they get their energy transfer from portal created infinity gravity scheme. But you were too quick to try smugly pretend to be the smartest guy in the thread and insult everyone else that you didn't think this through and now made the most embarrassing mistake a smart person can do: be in the wrong after first taking pride with huge bravado in your wrong claim. I couldn't live with myself after such showing, but I hope you'll get over it someday.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >all this wall of text just to not say anything
                Gravity is still transferring energy to a falling object in a endless loops therefor energy is not created, just transferred.
                Try again.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >doubling down on his mistake
                Oh no, you aren't even being embarrassing anymore. Now you are just sad. I hope someday you'll learn some humility, friend.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >another retard that thinks energy = electricity enters the fray
              I didn't mention electricity

  19. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Option B breaks the law of conservation of energy therefor it's not the correct option by default.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Stationary portals already break it. Try again.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Stationary portals already break it.
        No they don't. You don't know what the conservation of energy is or means.
        A cube having kinetic energy from nothing breaks the law of conservation of energy, therefor B is not the correct solution.

        I think the worst argument for A is "B breaks conservation of energy". They both do. Not only that, but A uses up more energy, since it not only moves the cube through, but also stops its momentum.

        This post is damage control because every single time you mention the law of conservation of energy, Bfags can't form a retort against it as there isn't one.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Increasing potential energy without putting any energy in breaks the law of conservation of energy. In extreme cases you gain infinite potential energy. See

          It's so fucking obvious that portals inherently break conservation of energy laws in general that it's baffling anyone makes that argument.

          .

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You don't know what the conservation of energy is.
            What is pushing the object down the portal? That force is transferring energy into the object, not creating energy from nothing.
            You are a brainlet that thinks this is about generating electricity because you don't understand that the law of conservation of energy talks about primordial energy, not creating electricity.
            >this is your average B fag
            lmao

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              I have no idea what this post means. If an object can free fall infinitely then there are a million ways to create a perpetual motion machine

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >there are a million ways to create a perpetual motion machine
                Perpetual motion machines still generate energy by transfering energy from one form to another. A water wheel would fall in that category and it's not creating energy. You are a brainlet.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >A water wheel would fall in that category and it's not creating energy.
                A portal water wheel does not require energy yet can generate it. A normal water wheel requires a power source, THE FUCKING SUN YOU MONGOLOID

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >A normal water wheel requires a power source
                The water wheel IS the power source, retard. You are embarrassing yourself in so many ways right now.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                No the water wheel converts energy.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the water wheel converts energy
                >convert
                There you go, good to see agreeing with me. I taught you something today.
                I accept your concession.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >thinks that I'm agreeing with a water wheel being a perpetual motion engine
                lmao, no learn to read bro. then rread some articles on conservation of energy.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                lol

                >A water wheel would fall in that category and it's not creating energy.
                A portal water wheel does not require energy yet can generate it. A normal water wheel requires a power source, THE FUCKING SUN YOU MONGOLOID

                >A portal water wheel does not require energy
                You are the guy that doesn't understand that without energy the waterwheel won't rotate.
                You are a literal retard so you are not in a position to tell anybdy to learn to read or to go read what conservation of energy is.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                With a portal you don't need to put in energy to get the water wheel to rotate. It will keep spinning forever. A normal water wheel stops when the sun doesn't evaporate enough water.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >With a portal you don't need to put in energy to get the water wheel to rotate
                Why are you doubling down in your stupidity?
                The water still needs to flow down the portals. For the water to flow down the portals, it needs energy applied to it.
                It's crystal clear that you are 50IQ and that's why you don't understand this extremely simple concept.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                > For the water to flow down the portals, it needs energy applied to it.
                Hey Anon, you just learned about potential energy. Now guess what a portal above another does to the potential energy of the between the two portals.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                gravity doesn't use energy

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >gravity doesn't use energy

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                The portals would run out of power before the water wheel could generate enough energy to keep the portals going. Try again retard.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >law of conservation of energy talks about primordial energy
              No it talks about closed systems. A portal can add energy to a closed system.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          See

          It's so fucking obvious that portals inherently break conservation of energy laws in general that it's baffling anyone makes that argument.

          Why are you making such an obviously flawed argument?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          A doesn't conserve energy either. If you were to move two portals together towards each other to squish a box against itself, you would get the same outcome with both A and B mechanics. Neither conserve energy since the cube is crushed for free since there is no direct interaction with the portals.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          There's no way to conserve kinetic energy with moving portals. Imagine one portal on a wall and the other on a panel on the side of a speeding car. If you stick your arm through the wall, the options are:
          1) your arm travels with the car, so it's suddenly gained kinetic energy
          2) your arm stays still, so you're suddenly pulled sideways with the same amount of kinetic energy

  20. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >drop cube
    >cube ends up passing through the portal at 100 mph
    >shoots out the other side

    >drop portal
    >cube ends up passing through the portal at 100 mph
    >???

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Cube is instantly flattened and then explodes violently.

  21. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >thread filled with salty A bros
    hahaha gays

  22. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    As others have stated, this is not "proof". This is someone who thinks A is correct making "an N64 Demake" of what he thinks is correct.

    This is regardless of whether you are pro A or B

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Ok, what equations and code would you use to make A work?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        calculate b and add a check for when an object finishes moving through a portal that sets its momentum to 0.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Well first I do B for the transition and add a check for when the object fully went through.

          stop bullying us, bfags....

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Why would you want your game to do that on purpose? Sounds like a game Sakurai would do to piss off Meleefags.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I have no real opinion on whether A or B is correct, because I fully admit I lack the understanding.I'm just pointing out the video is not definitive proof, just a rendition of the maker's logic of how it would work

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Well first I do B for the transition and add a check for when the object fully went through.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        m1*v1 = P = m2*v2, where m1v1 is the mass/speed of the portal and m2v2 is the resultant speed by mass of the cube

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I already explained this in round 1 16 hours ago, his code is wrong because he is calculating a data that should not be calculated.
        He take the data from the portal and apply this same data to the cube to explain why the cube would go fly like this, which obliviously is dumb as fuck, and of course, he is able to say that A could also work because, he also calculate the othe portal and also apply to it. Both situation are stupid, but they work simply because he cherry picked that equation. As proven by other demo, it's possible to make A or B work depending where you put your calculation.

        The biggest point is, A make sense because A does not take into account something that doesn't technically hold any values to the world. The portal cannot be blocked by something from the environment, cannot be modified by something from the environment, cannot be impacted by gravity, does not have his own speed, weight nor mass, therefore, we are calculating something from the portal that does not exist and we try to apply that to something that it should never interact with, aka the cube, that's why B is totally illogical.

        The portal in the game PORTAL is literally an "out of world" entity that cannot interact with anything that the rest of the world interact with, so why suddenly, you would want to apply his "supposed" speed that btw, it's not his own, but the one of the piston, to the cube ? for what reason ? it's total BS....

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >does not have his own speed
          You're literally talking about a problem which involves a portal moving.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >You're literally talking about a problem which involves a portal moving.
            The portal does not generate his own speed, his speed is automatically given from the object he is "sticked" too.

            >all this ESL babble
            >still no equation given
            lmao

            [...]
            And why exactly do you think this would make it shoot out of non-moving portals, instead of also plopping?

            Pointless to give an equation since most of you retards wouldn't understand it (as proven earlier)

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >I know the equation but I'm just too smart to post it, really!!!
              KWAB

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >his speed
              ESL aside, you've just confirmed that the portal DOES have its own speed by saying "his speed", that and the portal apparently has a dick.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                var idiot, caca;
                caca = 16;
                idiot = caca;
                Does idiot have his own value ?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, 16.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                GG you are bad at coding.
                Idiot doesn't have his own value, simply because if I change caca to 24, suddenly, idiot is 24 too.
                For the other idiots out there, caca is the piston and idiot is the portal.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >GG you are bad at coding
                No that's you, you hadn't explained how your coding language works, what did you think that shit is universal?

                I gave you the answer as it as you had set it up

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                he explained how it works by saying var and not const you retard

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                That makes no indication how defining variables would work in a given language.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                so it is a variable and therefore mutable.
                you proved yourself wrong

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah subject to change, how would depend on how the language works.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Do you think const variables aren't called variables? lol
                Tell me you don't code without telling me

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                he explained how it works by saying var and not const you retard

                so it is a variable and therefore mutable.
                you proved yourself wrong

                idiot is (you)

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Effectively, my bad. It's a copy that is made instead of a link. This what happen with you get spoiler with Webgl https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50840293/setting-a-variable-equal-to-another-variable
                Though, that doesn't change much since caca would have been updated no matter what in a normal game loop update. You still understand the logic though, the portal doesn't have his own value, and will only get update from what it is "sticked" too.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Retard

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                At least, compared to Btard, I can accept to be wrong when it's proven, which is a sign of intelligence. A word you may not be familiar with....

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >At least, compared to Btard, I can accept to be wrong when it's proven
                They'd have to be proven wrong first

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Admitting that you are retarded is not a sign of intelligence. Especially when you failed a basic programming task and called other people idiots who got it right.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Learning from your mistake is a sign of intelligence. Only idiots think they can never be wrong and should never learn from their mistake.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Keep learning from your mistakes and you too can be a Bfag

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Your mistake was being an arrogant little shit and you clearly have not intention to stop being one.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Not a sign of intelligence to be found.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You only see what you want to see

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >all this ESL babble
          >still no equation given
          lmao

          m1*v1 = P = m2*v2, where m1v1 is the mass/speed of the portal and m2v2 is the resultant speed by mass of the cube

          And why exactly do you think this would make it shoot out of non-moving portals, instead of also plopping?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            P is the change in momentum between one object acting on another. If nothing with mass impedes the velocity of the cube then it will maintain it's velocity, just like how if nothing with mass pushes a stationary cube its velocity will remain zero

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              You are still retarded, because by your equation P will always be zero. But the momentum DOES change, every single time, if only in direction if nothing else.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              so the stationary cubes velocity will remain zero, which means it wont exit the portal? or it will exit the portal and it will maintain that exit velocity?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                realistically, the cube would bounce when the platform vibrates from being slammed into, but the cube is heavy enough it makes it just plops.

                [...]
                [...]
                idiot is (you)

                my point was constants are immutable thats the whole point.

                bfags are retarded, what does that have to do with what I said? (other than that they are retarded?)

                sorry i thought you were a bfag i got replies mixed up

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >my point was constants are immutable thats the whole point.
                Irrelevant to the pseudo code "gotcha" and how the var keyword is generally understood.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >A make sense because A does not take into account something that doesn't technically hold any values to the world.
          This isn't true. Try actually writing out an equation for how you would program A like that anon was suggesting. You will need to track the movement of the portals and then move the cube relative them to get the right result. If you try to keep the speed 0, you will not get A. The mechanics of A are not only directly linked to the portals, but more so than in B since the portals continue to hold influence over the cube. At least in B, everything happens at the portal where it is more reasonable to expect something that doesn't match up with our current understanding of physics.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Are you sure you are not mistaking A and B here ?
            A doesn't take into account the portal, it only take into account the environment where the cube belong, that's why the cube just "plop" when getting outside of the blue portal.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              A takes into account when the orange portal stops.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                A clearly does take the portal into account since the cube changes position based on the movement of the portal. Again, try wring out an equation and you will see that the position of the cube is directly tied to the movement of the portals. I suppose you could also do some trickery by creating a copy of your level moving it over the cube, but that is still a movement that is tied to the portals and requires you do disable certain aspects of physics so things won't break during the movement.

                What you guys didn't understand with:
                >A make sense because A does not take into account something that doesn't technically hold any values to the world.
                Is that the the portal does not have any properties to itself to apply to the cube, all the "supposed" properties are inherited from the object it is sticked to. The portal moving toward the cube is nothing more than the piston moving toward the cube, and the distance closing from orange and blue is not seen nor impacting the cube. from the cube (or anything in this environment), nothing changed or moved in regard to the portals.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                your english is terrible lol

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I skipped the language class for the math one, guess some sacrifice was needed

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the distance closing from orange and blue is not seen nor impacting the cube
                My concern is the distance from the blue portal and up. You need to be able to define how the cube travels over that distance. In A, it is directly tied and linked to the movement of the portal. In B, something happens at the portal and then regular physics act from there.

                You need to explain that it's from the top down and there is no gravity involved. Which invalidates it for the purpose of A or B.

                Gravity isn't important for the discussion. The point is to explain how the cube travels through the portal, which will be the same basic mechanics in every scenario. The minor details about the plop or if it should be parabolic instead of the straight speed lines in the image are irrelevant and only serve as a distraction.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You need to be able to define how the cube travels over that distance. In A, it is directly tied and linked to the movement of the portal.
                Well, game logic wise, if I was coding a game that would have a portal system, I would just make 2 points that would be able to touch/.interact with objects that are part of a defined list of allowed objects to interact with.
                Then, everytime said objects touch a point it will automatically be copied on the other points, not only mesh wise, but physic wise (speed, weight, momentum, gravity etc...).
                So in the end, I would never have to calculate any distance nor speed of said points, they would act like a slider on a bar, that's it.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                If you do this and nothing else, you end up with the cube just sitting at the surface of the portal rather than smoothly moving out of it like in A. You end up with either what happens in the actual game where the cube can't go through the portal or the Gmod video where contact freaks out and launches the cube.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >you end up with the cube just sitting at the surface of the portal rather than smoothly moving out of it like in A.
                Why so ? All the momentum and previous physic values would be ported to the clone on the other point, the cube would just plop because of the change of gravity, but for the rest, everything would be duplicated, the only issue would be to make the synchronization fast enough to avoid the glitch where the collision would happen at a time where others calculation aren't finished yet (making the typical bounce bug we see so much in games)

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the cube would just plop
                How does it get to the point where it can plot? You just set its velocity to zero at the portal and don't plan to do anything else past that one special point, but the plop point is still some distance away from the portal. Are you planning to just make it appear in one frame without giving the appearance of motion?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Well first, I would say that globally (outside of this specific situation with A and B), all previous values linked to the cube would be duplicated, so therefore, the clone would be an exact copy "world" wise.
                >How does it get to the point where it can plot?
                The plop happen because the orange portal reach the ground under the cube (the plate), at this moment, the blue and orange portal is nothing more than a ground and the cube sitting on a slope is ready to fall on the ground, making the "plop".

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              A clearly does take the portal into account since the cube changes position based on the movement of the portal. Again, try wring out an equation and you will see that the position of the cube is directly tied to the movement of the portals. I suppose you could also do some trickery by creating a copy of your level moving it over the cube, but that is still a movement that is tied to the portals and requires you do disable certain aspects of physics so things won't break during the movement.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Are you sure you are not mistaking A and B here ?
            A doesn't take into account the portal, it only take into account the environment where the cube belong, that's why the cube just "plop" when getting outside of the blue portal.

            That graph makes no sense, it's not explaining anything. Neither A or B is represented there. That anon has a plausible explanation but the graph is wrong.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              What is wrong with it and how is it any different than A? People always say that A is like a room is falling over the cube. In my animation, I have a room swinging over the cube in a similar fashion. If you want to say that the cube will stop once it exits the portal, then that invalidates A where the cube travels one cube's distance before stopping.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You need to explain that it's from the top down and there is no gravity involved. Which invalidates it for the purpose of A or B.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >The portal in the game PORTAL is literally an "out of world" entity that cannot interact with anything that the rest of the world interact with,
          moron, it sticks to walls you fucking retard.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >interact =/= stick to it
            My camera have for target the main character of the game, it will stick to it and rotate around it, it doesn't mean it is interacting with it.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >he is calculating a data that should not be calculated

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >>he is calculating a data that should not be calculated
            funny post, but she's right.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              ywnbaw

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                bfags have no sense of humor confirmed

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Sorry, I meant "B is correct" not A.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I was about to sperg out at the video for the same reason too but if you watch the video he actually understands WHY it's B.

      He didn't just code the game deliberately to get the result he wanted. He coded the physics to work they way they should work and it just so happens that the result is B.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        AS I said, I have no opinion on which is correct, but he straight up says
        >You may be thinking "Well I just implemented moving portals to get the results I expect, and if I wanted different results I could achieve them".
        >Fair enough, but let me explain my justification
        So he had an expected result based on his reasoning and implemented them.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

        Just because the spike/dildo enters the scene quickly doesn't mean it will have momentum.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          so what happens when it makes contact with you?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          What do you think momentum is?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            It's the portal thats moving. Not the spike.
            Portals break the laws of physics so you will still get impaled by the movement of the portal and not the spike since the portal is essentially moving the universe into the spike.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              How do B fags not understand this?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Because B understands relative motion. The entire universe moving around an object is the same as that object moving.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        he explicitly programmed the cube to have momentum when it exits the portal

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          The relative velocity is maintained. Just like in the original portal. In the game, many puzzles depend on retaining relative velocity, the only difference is that they only happened to result in changing direction, if you move the portals, then the magnitude may change as well.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        This would happen in both A and B

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          In A it has 0 momentum, so it can't impart any force.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            See

            It's the portal thats moving. Not the spike.
            Portals break the laws of physics so you will still get impaled by the movement of the portal and not the spike since the portal is essentially moving the universe into the spike.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            you don't need momentum to impart force

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              The way a collision imparts force is through acceleration/deceleration, which requires one party to be moving, which requires said party to have momentum.

              See
              [...]

              At this point you're just handwaving it away by saying "it breaks physics anyways", implicitly admitting that B is more consistent with physics.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                the portal has momentum, the cube does not. B makes the assumption that momentum is transferred from the portal to the cube, which is retarded. they're not in physical contact, so no transfer can be made. the only force pushing the cube through the portal is the platform it's resting on, and that platform is stationary.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >they're not in physical contact, so no transfer can be made.
                Yet, despite not being in physical contact, the portal is more than capable of teleporting the object to a completely different position, so clearly this line of thinking is retarded immediately lmao.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >B makes the assumption that momentum is transferred from the portal to the cube, which is retarded.
                It's how it works in reality though. If a black holes flies into me as I "stand" at zero kinetic energy in space, at what point do I start "moving" to go further into the black hole once I pass the event horizon? From the perspective inside the black hole, I started moving towards the singularity from zero initial momentum.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                How did the cube's speed change in the final shot of

                Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

                ?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                https://www.britannica.com/science/law-of-inertia

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                So you define the portal changing the cube's velocity as a force then?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            you wouldn't even need the ball or tissue paper. in a, the air itself would stop the cube in its tracks since it has no momentum and can't push them out of the way.

            A has kind of unlimited force that comes from the movement of the portal that causes the cube's change of space without momentum on the cube

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              so you're saying any object that appears to be moving because a portal is moving over it doesn't exert 0 force on anything it comes into contact with, but infinite force?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

        Notice how these always use objects longer than the distance between the portal and the guy. Deep down Bfags know they're wrong so they have to resort to this shit.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

        plopfags BLOWN THE FUCK OUT

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

        >B fags change the scenario completely because they know they lost.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I was about to sperg out at the video for the same reason too but if you watch the video he actually understands WHY it's B.

      He didn't just code the game deliberately to get the result he wanted. He coded the physics to work they way they should work and it just so happens that the result is B.

      In any case, you got to love how whenever anyone puts enough thought into this thing to make something like this, they always end up being on team B.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        yeah, cause they're autistic people that have nothing in their lives besides arguing about nonsensical stuff with other autists online. The real sad part is that they're so autistic about it and yet still in the wrong

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >acknowledge they have thought about this more than you
          >"no they couldn't possibly that figured out something I haven't"

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            doing something more doesn't necessarily make you better at it. You should know that if you're posting on Ganker and actually play vidya.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              True in the sense that there are Afags who apparently still haven't figured out the problem with A after all these years when I figured it out within an hour of first thinking of the problem. Difference is that I then built an understanding that it's B over several years while I'm convinced most Afags give very little thought to the problem at all. Not to mention the observation of Afags is that the bulk of them eventually start to realise that A has problems themselves if you allow them to think about the problem long enough.

              The bottom line is it does take a considerable amount of arrogance to acknowledge that someone is more experienced than you and yet believe you know better than them. You would need to have an actual fucking reason to think they might be wrong regardless.

  23. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    B fags please explain, how is momentum transferred to the cube when the cube itself is not in motion?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Because portals inherently alter velocities. The claim that maintain speed is only true when the portals are not moving:

      Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        In this case the pole isn't so much gaining momentum as more of it is existing on blue end relative to the speed of orange end

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          So you think it's like top instead of the bottom?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Let's at to this.
        Afags, what happens if you suddenly stop the truck on a dime, BUT at the same time slice the pillar at the very edge outside the blue portal, does the rest of the pillar on blue's side plop to the ground?

  24. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Dude I hate it when someone drops a hula hoop around me from a great distance and I fly hundreds of feet into the air.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      is one end of your hula hoop moving at a different speed than the other?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Dude I love it when people don't understand what they're talking about and say some stupid shit like this.

      Oh wait no I hate it.

  25. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      C: the pole's end moves along with the portal and that's it. No acceleration beyond the acceleration of the portal itself. And this is the answer that's actually consistent with B in the classic portal problem.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        No it's not. Consider this: the orange is the one to move towards the wall again. In the case of C the pole would move along with the portal towards the wall getting crushed if the behaviour was consistent with your claim instead of going through the portal.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          No, why would it? Come on, this isn't rocket science. What's holding up the pole?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Wait I re-read your earlier reply and that's how I understood what B is in the image as wouldn't the acceleration of the portal also affect the pole's end as it's part of the portal's movement too

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, the end of the pole moves with the portal. But this won't exert any force on the pole unless it collides with something (okay, there's air resistance and gravity...). Essentially, it's like sticking your hand out of a car window. You're sitting still in the car. Outside the car, your hand is moving with the car. It's not going to get ripped off.

  26. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I had gay sex with an Afag once.
    He was a bottom.

  27. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I hate to break it to you guys but it's not just the portal moving at the cube. It's the whole world on the other side of that portal. And unless you are being launched into a vacuum, that's going to be a lot of shit suddenly rushing at you. Even air at that velocity will crush you to death.

  28. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Can any A-fags explain what forces are being applied here? If you say there is a force, you admit B is right.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      A-fags have no answer to this

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        We do, but we are tired to give the same answer to the same drawing (he is spamming this thread with the exact same situation but different graphics to make it new)

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          sorry you are tired to give bro

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            No you don't, why are you still here then? You know A makes no sense, you just want to troll.

            I'm here debating on this fucking thread since 16 hours already:

            It's already 16hours that I'm debating with those retards in this Portal thread, I'm starting to get the hang of it.

            So of course now I'm filtering the low bait question that is a slight modification of the same drawing spammed 20x times per round.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              I guess after 16 hours it's safe to conclude you won't realise you're wrong.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          No you don't, why are you still here then? You know A makes no sense, you just want to troll.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      When fully compressed, the space the cube can occupy is the floor beneath the cubes starting position and the wall on the other side of the blue portal.

      The portal places a zero distance gap between both walls to provide infinite force to crush the cube between the two walls.

      This means A is right.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Why yes the portal imparts infinite force in fact
        >A is still right tho

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Portal doesn't provide force.
          Portals can't provide force.
          But the portals can put an object in a space where two other walls are exerting force onto the cube.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            How would it do that? Wouldn't it just stop moving if it can't exert force?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >B fags making a new different scenario to defend their insanity

      Like fucking clockwork

  29. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    afags think an object can move from coordinate to coordinate in 3d space without experiencing inertia lol

  30. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >UFOs can simply stop all of their momentum while moving from a high speed
    >somehow a cube stopping while moving through a portal is impossible
    A is right.

  31. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >they don't know about option C

  32. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    1. Momentum is mass times velocity, kinetic energy is 1/2 times mass times velocity squared, and velocity is a change in position over a change in time.
    2. To exit the portal, the cube must changing position over time, so the cube has a non-zero velocity.
    3. The cube has non-zero momentum and kinetic energy as it leaves the portal as it has a velocity and mass.
    4. There is no force stopping the mass, velocity, momentum, or kinetic energy of the cube.
    5. The cube continues to move.

    Afags, which of these statements do you refute?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      2. it still has 0 velocity because its teleportation

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      They refute 3. A fags believe in "non-momentum displacement". They think the cube moves without having momentum.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        no, the cube has momentum, but its not the momentum of the top portal. if the cube moves at all its because the top platform hit the bottom hard enough it made the cube bounce

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Does this webm look ok to you?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            yeah, except when the orange portal goes back up the cube should go into freefall because its not attached to the platform

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              So you don't think that the cube should fly off as the platform stops, despite obviously having high speed?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                no because the force of the air resistance is keeping it pinned to the platform

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                ok

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Say you attach the cube to the platform with a couple of springs and a force meter, would it measure anything as the platform went back down and the cube stayed in freefall?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                depends on if the platform is moving away from it faster than its falling

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Why does the cube stay in freefall when it's attached by springs?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                because you said it did.
                its your hypothetical

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                My bad. Do you think the the cube would stay in freefall if it was attached by springs?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                no because its attached lol

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous
          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            bfags too dumb to realize that that the portal being stopped by the wall is exactly what kills the box's momentum

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Why would a change to the portal's movement impact the movement of the cube after the cube has already left the portal?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                exactly

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                ur just mad that you can't have a cool cube wand

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                it's the platform the cube is resting on that determines the movement of the cube. if the platform is moving, so does the cube. the platform never moves through the portal, thus it can't affect the cube's momentum.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                By that logic

                Does this webm look ok to you?

                would actually be accurate because you would apply the same logic to ever part of the platform going down to the part that ha4sn't gone through the portal yet.

                In the end movement is movement.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >moves the platform throught the portal

            Insufferable B gays continuing to change the scenario

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Why can't you cope? Doesn't it bother you that the explanatory potential of your theory is so limited? Do you think something else should happen here? And why? Are you going to come up with a new theory for every new situation?

              B can just apply the same rule to everything.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Are you going to come up with a new theory for every new situation?
                that's what scientists do. it's called physics friend. there's no catch-all solution. that kind of thinking is just naive

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >that's what scientists do.
                This would be the equivalent of coming up with new orbital mechanics for every planet.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                that's a retarded analogy and you know it

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                It's precisely what's happening. We're not encountering new phenomena. Just the same phenomenon in different situations.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                No, you're actually stupid. A lot of Bfags have some good points but you're just dumb as shit.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                lol did you have this ready to go or did you make it just now?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                It's exactly what you're suggesting.

  33. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    why does the cube only fly up the moment the portal hits the ground? shouldn't the cube start moving as soon as it goes through the portal?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      It does though?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      it does. you can see this by looking at the exit portal. you'll see the cube moving out of the portal. if the portal stops moving half way over the cube, the cube will keep moving with the momentum it already had.

  34. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Is this portal paradox the only thing that makes the otherwise fucking garbage game that Portal still kind-of relevant?

  35. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The ultimate brainlet test: explain how both A and B break the rules of reality. Just to be clear, creating infinite energy with endless falling does not count as breaking reality, if you're not a brainlet and think about it for more than a second surely you can come up with explanations as to how both A and B would fundamentally make reality crash with a blue screen of death, making neither better than the other in term of "this is how portals SHOULD work" since clearly, neither should. As a non-brainlet you should be able to permanently solve this false issue of two competing non-working ideas, with but a simple mental exercise. Go.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Just to be clear, creating infinite energy with endless falling does not count as breaking reality
      >what's 2+2
      >and don't say 4, give me a real answer

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      A is easy. It breaks fundamental logic by saying movement is not movement. The cube must exit the portal at the relative speed it entered.
      Haven't heard a single refutation of B that isn't grounded in a misunderstanding or the claim that moving portals requires infinite energy, though. I'd be happy to hear it.

  36. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Bfags are the saddest, most retarded fuckers on earth. You should literally have a nice day if you think it's B.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      you can literally see the cube MOVING out of the orange portal in this gif.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >you can literally see the cube MOVING out of the orange portal in this gif.

        And yet it doesn't fly because scenario A is correct you fucking mongoloid

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          it doesn't fly out because the a fag that animated it didn't animate it flying out. you see how weird it looks how an object that's obviously moving just loses all its momentum for no reason.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            What kind of spastic retarded autism do you have that suggests momentum should be imparted where none exists? The solution is right there before your very eyes and yet you deny it.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              you can see that the cube has momentum because it is moving. the real question is why in universe a the cube's momentum suddenly disapears.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >you can see that the cube has momentum because it is moving. the real question is why in universe a the cube's momentum suddenly disapears.

                Imagine not being able to wrap your fucking mind around the lack of momentum when it's clear that it doesn't have hardly any besides the portal moving around it

                Fucking flabbergasting

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                you can clearly see by watching the exit portal thatvthe cube it moving, and thus, has momentum.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Newton's First Law anon. If you've already acknowledged movement then the conclusion is clear.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Citing Newtons Laws doesn't mean jack shit when the problem shows that it follows the Laws precisely and fits into the A solution. There is no extra magic force being added no matter how hard you try to pretend.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              You've already acknowledged the portal created motion by conceding that the object moved to leave the portal.

              At that point you're left with Newton's First Law. The portal explains why motion was created, according to the law that motion doesn't not disappear on its own.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >You've already acknowledged the portal created motion by conceding that the object moved to leave the portal.

                And just like

                because the exit side of the hula hoop is moving at an equal and opposite rate. test it with a hula hoop where one side is stationary while the other moves. oh, you cant? then you dont have a comparable situation

                said despite being a retarded Bfag, the orange portal and the blue portal have an equal and opposite rate, thus canceling each other out and leaving you with what are essentially door ways or
                >hula hoops

                That function as such.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You're moving to a completely different conversation talking about a different scenario you idiot.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the orange portal and the blue portal have an equal and opposite rate
                in the OP, they don't. one is stationary

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        if you sit down on a dildo it won't fly up your anus and out of your mouth. yes it will penetrate your anus, but nothing more than that

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          and in universe b, if 2 portals are moving in exactly the same way as each other, they and one of them moves over a cube, the cube won't go flying out either. it only gains momentum when the portals are moving independantly of each other.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          It would if your insides were as smooth and frictionless as your brain.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          The cube isn't bolted to the platform moron.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Neither would it fly under B with back-to-back portals that move at the same velocity, gay.
          WATCH THE FUCKING VIDEO IN THE OP YOU STUPID gay RETARD.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        what determines how far the cube flies in B?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          The speed at which it entered the portal and the forces counteracting it such as gravity and air resistance.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          the same stuff that would determine how far it would fly when launched by an ordinary piston with no portals involved. how fast the piston arm is moving, the mass of the cube, the strength of gravity, and a few minor things like air resistance.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      the example would be best shown with an object attacked to the pole. as B always assume gravity wasnt holding the cube in place for 99.99999999% of its time pushing through the portal.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >B always assume gravity wasnt holding the cube in place for 99.99999999% of its time pushing through the portal
        Literally no. What do you think we're saying? It's not that.

  37. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Okay Bfags try this on for size:
    >You find yourself floating in a space station facing towards the exit which is open
    >suddenly God grabs the space station and swiftly pulls it behind you
    >you watch as the room you are floating in launches backwards and the door into open space flies towards you until you are no longer surrounded by the space station and are outside of it
    >God waves at you as you sit floating there where you were, except without a space station surrounding you
    Now repent.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      seriously repent

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        how does this refute b?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          godless bfags will say that astronaut should fly away from god. but god does not leave anyone.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Nope, your situation is consistent with B if the doorway were two portals end-to-end.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            according to b, both the reference frame of the astronaut moving away from the space station while it remains stationary, and the reference frame of the space station moving away from the astronaut while he remains stationary are equally valid.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              What is invalid here? The astronaut moves relative to the space station and vice versa, much in the same way a bird moves relative to a tree and vice versa, or a car moves relative to the road and vice versa.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            No we won't. You reject the truth of B because you misunderstand it. You reject God's creation in your ignorance.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I read couple of days ago the part in Revelation Space book, where the XO of space ship under 1 G acceleration gets into a fight with the weapons officer who throws the XO into an elevator shaft. While falling, The XO ponders the situation for couple of seconds, takes remote control of the ship's thrusters, makes a couple of G deceleration burn making the weapons officer a splat on a hallway wall while falling upwards harmlessly in the shaft before calming things down. Dunno how this is relevant, but that post just reminded me of it.

  38. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Anyone has the game open?
    Try this.
    >make two portals
    >get a cube
    >put it middleway through a portal and release it
    What will happen?

  39. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >bfag writes his own code to give the resul he wants
    >despite a simulation made in portal results in A.

  40. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >run a hoola hoop over an object at high speed
    >the object doesn't go flying
    >it will appear at the other side of the hoop at whatever speed you move the hoop but the object itself doesn't gain the speed of the hoop

    Literally testable in any backyard. literally confirmed in the final cutscene of P1. literally confirmed in P2. yall dumb af.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >yall dumb af.
      fr fr no cap

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      because the exit side of the hula hoop is moving at an equal and opposite rate. test it with a hula hoop where one side is stationary while the other moves. oh, you cant? then you dont have a comparable situation

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This, I used hoops to power my mining rig and used crypto to become a NFT millionaire. All because hoops are just like portals.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >run a hoola hoop over an object at high speed
      >the object doesn't go flying

      Bfags: BUT THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, IF YOU DROP A HULA HOOP OVER A CUBE, WHERE DOES THE MOMENTUM GO??

      We're all being trolled to death. Fuck Bfags.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        hula hoop: entrance and exit do not move relative to one another
        a/b portal problem: entrance and exit move relative to one another

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >run a hoola hoop over an object at high speed
      >the object doesn't go flying

      Bfags: BUT THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, IF YOU DROP A HULA HOOP OVER A CUBE, WHERE DOES THE MOMENTUM GO??

      We're all being trolled to death. Fuck Bfags.

      watch the video

  41. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Afags BTFO

  42. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Seriously euthanise anyone who utters the word "hula hoop" in a portal thread, fucking hell, there are molluscs more sentient than you lot

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >Seriously euthanise anyone who utters the word "hula hoop" in a portal thread

      Nah bitch, it perfectly describes the absurdity of Bfag's arguments and is the simplest, most obvious way of expressing why the cube doesn't magically fly out of the portals.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Face the wall please

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Good comeback you fucking mongoloid. Imagine thinking that the hula hoop argument isn't exactly encapsulating of Afag arguments regardless of whether you agree or disagree. Bfags literally denying reality again because they can't win.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Imagine thinking that the hula hoop argument isn't exactly encapsulating of Afag arguments
            Where are you gettting this? Of course I know this is the pinnacle of your understanding. Which is why you deserve the bullet. Is there seriously no ending to your misunderstanding?

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              It just exposes you as a biased retard is all.

              >S-Stop illustrating your point with the most obvious argument!!

              How about no bitch

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                No, it's
                >Stop illustrating your point with a flawed analogy that a dozen people have already trotted out before you in this thread alone, each receiving incredibly detailed explanations as to why they are utterly wrong in return
                Or, you know, don't, and just be considered a disingenuous retard

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        ?

        hula hoop: entrance and exit do not move relative to one another
        a/b portal problem: entrance and exit move relative to one another

  43. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I refuse to believe these threads are anything other than trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls.

  44. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I'm starting to get tired of those threads.
    I think every genuine misguided Afag was already converted, what's left are trolls that give the most idiotic answers they can come up with, so you get mad and give them a long-winded (you) explaining why they're wrong, which they'll purposefully misinterpret for more angry replies.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Damn, Bfags really have nothing else except Ad Hominem crybaby shit.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Very well, if you are not a troll, then prove it by earnestly answering the following question:

        Why do I think the right answer is B?

        Speculation as to my mental capabilities will not be entertained as serious answers.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >Why do I think the right answer is B?

          Because you misunderstand the forces of momentum and apply an inherently flawed understanding of physics to solve a question that shouldn't exist. In fact, Bfags frequently change the question to illustrate their understanding of the laws of physics while Afags basically never change the question. You're applying a misunderstanding of laws when the answer is obvious. There is no gotcha moment within the question, it was not designed by a genius, and there is no interesting payoff that can come to fruition when you apply your understand of physics. The real answer is boring and obvious, and it's A.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You failed within three words. You are not arguing in good faith.

            In fact I seriously doubt any Afag can answer this question, which is why I like to ask it. The only misunderstanding you're demonstrating here is your own.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Nah, you're a fucking retard mate
              That was a good faith argument and you're just a pussy who can't argue and projects his own lack of ability to communicate. Sad man. Leave the thread in shame.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >That was a good faith argument
                Now you're explicitly a liar.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >while Afags basically never change the question.

  45. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I'll be honest guys I'm just having fun drawing funny pictures. Nobody else may be laughing at them but I certainly am. The captain falcon one I was giggling the whole time.

  46. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >years later
    >B fags still bait
    >A fags still fall for it

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I wonder what that amount of smoke would do to such a small fairy

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Do you think that a bigger cigarette means her lung capacity changes? Are you a Bfag?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Well she would have a smaller brain so all that nicotine might fuck her up, kind of like how small girls get drunk faster than big dudes.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >he says, a few posts below an afag saying changing velocity doesn't change momentum

  47. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This whole discussion reminds me of the debate about the shape of Earth. Ancients debated about it and after some pondering came to conclusion that Earth is round. Flat-earthers conceded and all was well. Until some retards started trolling thinking 'wouldn't it be fun if I were to claim that Earth is flat and others would think I'm stupid?!'. And then some genuine negative number IQ schizos started really believing in flat Earth theory and spreading the meme. A fags are the flat earthers is what I'm saying.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      but the guy that made the video is a retard that applied the portal velocity to the cube. thats not how it works.

  48. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    My cock goes faster after it's penetrated your mom Afags btfo.

  49. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This is the way portals work in my head, therefore I'm right, and you're wrong. Your portal fanfiction simply cannot compete with my own.

    It's nothing personnel. Better luck next time, bub.

  50. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >I rewrote Portal from scratch
    The absolute STATE of Btards

  51. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    IT HAS BEEN 16 YEARS YOU gayS
    GET OVER IT NO ONE CARES ANYMORE

  52. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    B ros
    we won

  53. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    What's always funny to me is that despite this being a divisive topic, normally you get 2 sides which has funny memes to hurl to the other that underpin some major flaw that the other side can't get rid of.

    But there is literally not a single thing A fags can hurl at B fags that isn't rooted in fundamentally not understanding the problem.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      it's btards who can't understand the simple fact that the cube's speed is dependent on the speed of the platform. the platform doesn't move through the portal. it has no speed. whatever momentum the moving portal has is absorbed by the platform when it hits it. none of the momentum is transferred to the cube. and that's why it plops.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >cube's speed is dependent on the speed of the platform.
        yes, and the platform is moving relative to the exit portal

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Why is it dependent on the platform? What degree of contact does there need to be for things to be "connected"in shared inertial space? Gravitational field? Amount of points of contact?
        Your argument goes into the realm of

        ur just mad that you can't have a cool cube wand

        picrel

        >whatever momentum the moving portal has is absorbed by the platform when it hits it
        This is some looney toons cartoon logic. If I walk through a door and it slams closed behind me fast enough, it takes away from my inertia and stops me in my tracks? What?
        I feel like you talk about the platform just because it's an object in proximity to the experiment. What if we redid the experiment in space like this?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          My bad i thought this picture didn't have the platform. Remove the platform. Just floating cube.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            It’s always bothered me that Spock and Kirk don’t fly out of the teleporter when they get beamed up, Scotty.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Assuming, as you said, there's meant to be no platform:

          Top would result in B, because the box is moving. Similar to shooting a pullet through an open door or window.

          Bottom would result in A, because the box is not moving.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Okay. Next question: How do you tell what is "moving"?
            Anywhere in the universe in fact. You're allowed to play god and use infinite energy/ tools to try and figure it out. Even moving backwards and forward in time.
            How do you measure the "speed" of an object in space?

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Setting aside the image using speed lines to indicate motion?

              Relative to other objects, of course. A portal doesn't function as any object though, any more than the entrance/exist to a tunnel does.

              Something Bfags seem dead set on ignoring is that portals aren't bound by real physics; they reduce the distance between two physical points to 0. So if the portals are 2 miles away from one another, the distance between them, when traversing the portals, is 0.

              A portal also can't have velocity of any sort, any more than any other instance of empty space (inside of an open door frame, window, etc. What has velocity in the example is whatever material the portal is present on.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Something Bfags seem dead set on ignoring is that portals aren't bound by real physics; they reduce the distance between two physical points to 0. So if the portals are 2 miles away from one another, the distance between them, when traversing the portals, is 0.
                I fail to see why you think this is being ignored. Or why it's relevant.
                >A portal also can't have velocity of any sort, any more than any other instance of empty space (inside of an open door frame, window, etc. What has velocity in the example is whatever material the portal is present on.
                Semantics, really. Is a car window a thing or is it an empty space within the car? Does it have speed when the car moves or does only the car itself have speed?

                Don't answer those, they're rhetorical.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Is a car window a thing or is it an empty space within the car?
                Depends, if you mean the glass, then of course that's an object, and not what I'm talking about. If you mean what we might refer to as a rolled down window, then no, while the frame exists, inside of it is empty space which things can freely pass through.

                It's really not semantics, unless you're suggesting that "the absence of matter" has a speed.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know what you're trying to prove. That we can't measure velocity relative to a portal because it's not an "object"? Does that mean that a train doesn't have velocity relative to a tunnel entrance? It's going to go into the tunnel regardless.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Relative to other objects, of course
                So then you're saying it doesn't matter whether the portal is moving "onto the cube" or the cube is "moving toward portal" because it's the same thing? That's the B argument btw; all motion is relative.

                >Something Bfags seem dead set on ignoring is that portals aren't bound by real physics; they reduce the distance between two physical points to 0. So if the portals are 2 miles away from one another, the distance between them, when traversing the portals, is 0.
                No one is arguing this

                >A portal also can't have velocity of any sort
                Sure but if you have an object entering on one side of a door it exits the other side at the same relative speed, regardless if the door or object is "moving" (from a third person's perspective)
                B isn't arguing that the portal's invisible "matter" has velocity and is imparting some kind of momentum- no, B is asserting the object KEEPS its inertia as it transposes to a different moving frame of reference.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      That's what makes it so fascinating if you're interested in education. People talk about the different ways people learn, and this topic generates almost endless variations of methods of demonstration, misunderstandings thereof, and basic failures of communication.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Although there is a lot of interference from people being retarded on purpose, of course.

  54. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    A PORTAL JUST FLEW OVER MY HOUSE

  55. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Momentum IS transferred from the the moving portal to the cube. The problem is that the time frame where momentum is transferred is so incredibly narrow it basically has no effect on the cube. And that is why A will always be correct.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      You're making a lot of assumptions about the physics of portals but you're ignoring this basic fact: the cube must exit at the same relative speed that it entered.

  56. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Explain this, b fags:
    A portal goes down at 10km/s to an anal bead that is perfectly aligned.
    According to you, each of the beads is launched at 10km/s, then what's is the speed of the last anal bead to be launched?

  57. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Actually due to the conversation of energy a moving portal would require two exit points which would duplimate whatever goes through it, resulting in a shoedinger partition of both flying and plopping voxels (the upscale version of a cube/pixel)

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Duplicate*
      Sorry I’m a bit drunk

  58. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    why would passing through the portal give the cube extra speed?

  59. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Guys.
    it depends entirely on how fast[/spoilers]

    Dude it took me like 12 tries to salve this captcha.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The second line of your spoiler should give you significant pause as to the confidence you display in the first.

  60. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  61. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >I coded it to work the way I wanted it to

    Dumb fucking gay with stupid gay face.

  62. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    So if a moving portal flew over a non-moving cube in outer space it would fly out at the same speed it entered according to Bfags. Where is that energy coming from? Would the moving portal slow down as it passes over the cube? A transfer of energy has to be made somehow.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >So if a moving portal flew over a non-moving cube in outer space it would fly out at the same speed it entered according to Bfags.
      Consider the alternative: the cube exits at a different speed than it entered. A logical impossibility.
      >Where is that energy coming from?
      I don't care. If it's not there, portals don't work.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >it would fly out at the same speed it entered
      That's how hula hoops work, right?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        if you throw a bigger hoop over a smaller hoop does the smaller hoop start flying

  63. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Portals aren't real.

  64. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Neither A nor B.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >C-men
      It's demonstrable in-game that the force of gravity and therefore inertia does not pass through portals.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        agreed
        this is why their early tests always failed.
        they either had to brute force either A or B.

        An incomplete understanding of the situation resulting in a cop out

        the earth is no different from a hand pushing the cube towards the orange portal.
        the exception is gravity being considered or not.
        and most ppl forget the orange portal and the blue portal are the SAME location in space. they are not different locations.

        >when you're so determined to have a special snowflake answer both sides end up thinking you're retarded.
        A portal only changes an object's position when the object actually passes through the portal. Likewise it will only change an object's velocity when the object actually passes through the portal.

        so the argument "the object in motion" doesnt apply, since it has the magical power to stop an object in motion,a nd change it w/e rule you choose. therefor you cant circle back to "an object in motion stays in motion".

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >therefor you cant circle back to "an object in motion stays in motion".
          You can because that's the default rule to fall back on once the cube has left the portal, as then the factor with the potential to change the object's motion is no longer present. At that point you've already acknowledged the cube has gained motion in order to leave the portal exit.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            a "portal" is not an "object" its a location in space.
            Its like saying a Lightyear is a unit of speed, instead of distance.

            The cube is approaching a position in space.
            Does it stay in motion? or not?

            Also, the reason I said you cant circle back, is because you are both simultaneously saying the cube must stay in motion, and doesnt have to stay in motion, under the same rule.
            When a cube is half way through, and is going 100mph. Does half of it continue at 100mph, while the other half is ripped off, and stay behind?
            If the "portal" can change the velocity, how is it changed? if the cube is going 100mph before entering, and 100mph during, and 100mph after, where did the velocity change?
            if its ALWAYS equal to the original velocity, then why would u say it can break the rule of "object in motion"? in short, it never breaks the rule. ever.

            from the perspective of the box, it sees the same location in space having 2 different velocities in comparison to itself. orange moving 100mph, and blue not moving at all.
            this is where the issue lies, and will forever leave this in a stalemate.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >a "portal" is not an "object" its a location in space.
              I never said it was, the only instance of the word "object" in my post was used to describe the object travelling through the portal, not the portal.
              >saying the cube must stay in motion, and doesnt have to stay in motion
              No, I literally just said the cube must stay in motion on going through the portal.

              >When a cube is half way through, and is going 100mph. Does half of it continue at 100mph, while the other half is ripped off, and stay behind?
              Assuming you stopped the portal the moving half pulls on the not moving half.

              >If the "portal" can change the velocity, how is it changed?
              There's no point in questioning whether portals change velocities of objects, they literally do.

              > if the cube is going 100mph before entering, and 100mph during, and 100mph after, where did the velocity change?
              You're confusing velocity with speed.

              >this is where the issue lies, and will forever leave this in a stalemate.
              No. Literally no one but you has an issue with your perceived problem.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >I never said it was
                I was trying to convey an idea, but was also bringing this up, as how you mentioned a "location in space" had an effect on velocity, which makes it sound like something thats not a location in space. which in turn, means ppl forget the blue exit portal has different velocity from the orange entrance portal.

                >the moving half pulls on the not moving half.
                honestly the best question to really think about. how much pressure is applied? and how effective is gravity in holding it in place? i personally have no clue how one would begin to go about figuring out this hypothetical. (also because it requires an impossible paradox)

                >There's no point in questioning whether portals change velocities of objects, they literally do.
                youre mixing up two different things. a "portal" which has both ends in sync in regards to their velocity, and the paradox being called a portal in this very question.

                The 1st one, would have no effect on Velocity, outside of forces unrelated to the portal. such as gravity.
                The second, the one you suggest must be allowed to change the velocity, is only being allowed in assumption, due to the paradoxical nature in which it requires different velocities in the same object to exit, in order for itself to exist.

                Its only "they literally do" because the hypothetical portal cant exist w/o breaking the rules of how velocity works. which in turn breaks the answer of how velocity works.

                >You're confusing velocity with speed.
                if orange and blue are the same portal/location in space, then the velocity and speed would be identical, or am i misunderstanding something? (very much possible here)

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      An incomplete understanding of the situation resulting in a cop out

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >when you're so determined to have a special snowflake answer both sides end up thinking you're retarded.
      A portal only changes an object's position when the object actually passes through the portal. Likewise it will only change an object's velocity when the object actually passes through the portal.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >"wow i was sitting in a car driving when this child at the crossing suddenly flew at my windshield at 100mph!"

  65. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Afags and Bfags are retarded.
    Portals don't exist in real life and portals in game cannot move. Any simulation is just that, a simulation. Trying to make an argument using the constraints of real world classical mechanics mixed with theoretical physics is retarded because theoretical physics is itself retarded.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >calls others retarded
      >doesn't know the earth moves

  66. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >smash stationary cube with downwards momentum and force
    >yeah dood it'll totally fly upwards
    so, uh, where's all that kinetic energy coming from exactly? If the platform is stationary itself, the only force that could be put upon the cube is the smasher, and it can't even apply force to the cube because there's a portal in the middle of it. so why would it fly? that makes no fucking sense.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Where's the kinetic energy coming from when you use a portal to redirect a flying cube to a totally different direction in the original portal game? dumbass

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Not that anon but strictly speaking an object moving in the same speed in a different direction still has the same kinetic energy.

        Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

        proves that moving portals will alter an object's kinetic energy regardless.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >so, uh, where's all that kinetic energy coming from exactly?
      same place as the infinite potential energy you get when you place one portal on the floor and one on the celing directly above it.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >where's all that kinetic energy coming from exactly?
      Moving portals create kinetic energy:

      Portals are literally able to change the kinetic energy of an object.

  67. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This thread is posted almost every day and gays will still spend hours discussing the exact same shit every time
    What causes this? Is it really just autism?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      someone is wrong on the internet anon

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Unironically correct xkcd poster.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Why do you fags keep coming to these threads making the same obvious observation as if you're the first to realize this?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I could say the same to you, why do you keep replying to the same shit every time?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Why did you reply?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I think it's fun to argue hypothetical for their own sake. Although to be fair Afags do take some of the joy out of it because they're unworthy opponents.

  68. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    He subtracts box velocity from Portal velocity. He should subtract portal velocity from box velocity with a floor of 0.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      wat

  69. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This is genuinely the division. Just picture the exit portal side as the experiment happens. Picture a mote of dust floating in the space the cube will appear in on the exit side as the transfer happens. Picture any of these hypothetical situations actually happening.

  70. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Ganker - Video Games and Remedial Physics

  71. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The cube necessarily has to be moving to pass through the blue side of the portal.

      I was about to sperg out at the video for the same reason too but if you watch the video he actually understands WHY it's B.

      He didn't just code the game deliberately to get the result he wanted. He coded the physics to work they way they should work and it just so happens that the result is B.

      jej

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      if it plopped it would still go in his ass retard

  72. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Just once, in my remaining days, I would like to see an A see the light.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I've seen it. It happens once in a blue moon.

  73. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Please move here instead of making another thread

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *