Well. I'm stumped

Don’t start this shit thread again. Everytime, its goes nowhere because it is impossible to accurately determine the correct answer. This shit is all theoretical in its entirety, and no one is able to solve it. Either the portal is just a doorway, or it is a separate place with its own velocity. No one can know. Stop shitting up the board.

oh cool
another "i don't understand relativity" general
it's B btw

Attached: 1543998116338.jpg (246x242, 9K)

Portals may not be real but pure logic still dictates the answer is B, provided we accept the premises of moving portals existing.

Guess what? Neither do you, brainlet. Its all guesswork. No one can prove anything about it conclusively. Because, and here is the real kicker, portals are not fucking real.

Horrible thread, it's A, anyone saying otherwise is stupid

Gmod has proved B, but thats with a simulated physics system, and well its Gmod. I stand by A because the cube has no momentum.

A sort of real-life example would be you holding a door frame and running at a crate, the crate would pass without any additional velocity. I'm using a door frame as an example because that's basically what a portal is.

I don't know anything about physics beyond basic college comprehension.

Once it crosses the portal it is subject to the gravity of the blue portal, so of course it will slide
>For the cube to immediately fall down with no momentum
You utter retard, what is gravity?

>I stand by A because the cube has no momentum.
see

is everyone here fucking retarded? this is exactly what would happen so far as the portal falls

Attached: 222.jpg (809x509, 73K)

Attached: 1543456102889.png (809x509, 19K)

According to relativity, lets assume that the orange portal is actually stationary while the platform with the cube as well as the rest of the world is the part moving - This means the cube has momentum and as a result, option A.

>You utter retard, what is gravity?
What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Do you not understand the posts you were responding to?

That the fucking point though. You cant “accept the premise” of entirely guessing, and then say that a is completely wrong. There is no absolute logic to either answer because we know no concrete constant about its relativity and if it actually has velocity.

>Once it crosses the portal it is subject to the gravity of the blue portal, so of course it will slide
That is not the issue.

the correct answer is portals don't exist cause they break every law of physics you fuckign retarded neckbeard man child.

stop applying science to something that is so unscientific

pathetic, go argue about your favorite waifu or something

This

I’m less concerned about the cube and more about the pillar it’s setting on. Wouldn’t it jut through the blue portal and propel the cube like the plunger on a pinball machine?

- wall cums at you
- wall has cock hole
- you jump through cock hole
- a the other side of the wall, you suddenly gain 100 miles per hour

Retards: ???

The thing is that both sides of a door frame necessarily move with each other, whereas with the portal problem, that is exactly the part that is different. So what does it mean for the crate to "pass by" the portal? How could a stationary cube pass a stationary portal?

oh cool
another I don't understand abstract physics general
it's A btw

Attached: 20190312_100947.jpg (246x242, 27K)

You don't understand what a portal is it's just a hole to another point. If it was a fucking door it wouldn't suddenly go flying into the air once it passes through the door.

wanna know how I can tell you're American? :)

Relativity is relativity and so it has relative velocity.

reddit spacing

t. no fun allowed man

"A" is not the "abstract physics" answer, it's the "I learned about momentum in high school and nothing will change my mind" answer.

...

do you not understand how gravity works?

Either portals are literally just like a door, or they are not. No one can say because its all theoretical and not worth arguing because no one is right until portals can actually exist. Which they can not.

American education.

>Picture is literally the proof by contradiction that portals cannot exist
>retards argue about it
It's obviously C.

Portals work like hoola hoops but with more distance, right? So If I were to swoosh a hoola hoop over a basket ball, it doesn't fly out.

Now what happens?

The object isn't moving.

Of course you can not really give an answer because portals don't exist and break the laws of physics
But if we are speculating
At the beginning I thought A was right but now I think its B and this images kinda explains my reasoning

if the pole at B starts extending and suddenly stops I think everyone agrees that it will send the cube flying, thats how throwing things up in the air works and it would be exactly the same if no portals were involves and it was just a platform on a telescope.
So if you do that but only stop after you "portaled" the cube the same should happen

Its all about whenever or not you think the cube gains any momentum when leaving the portal

You do realize that a force must be exerted on an object so that it can move? There is no actual movement, rather the space in which the block stands is transplanted elsewhere.

Hard mode. What happens now?

Attached: 2937642354.png (886x509, 144K)

You don't understand the posts you were responding to. Gravity has nothing to do with what they were saying, other than as a reference for the cube's velocity.
A portal is not like a door. A door does not drag the entire universe along with it.

For the cube to immediately drop, its movement exiting the portal would have to be very slow. This contradicts it passing through a fast moving portal. Thus it would be moving fast. It would have relative velocity.

what do you think you see when you look through the blue portal in OP's image?

>Portals work like hoola hoops but with more distance, right?
where did that dumb idea came from?
No they do not

So much this.
Every A fag comes with the same damn argument.
>Hurr conservation of momentum because Newton said so, even Glados agrees
They don't step back and think about how this falls apart with portals.

Attached: B.webm (356x200, 182K)

Isn't this checkable in the level editor

I....I don't know

but that isn't sitting on a raised platform

My brain tells me it's B. If the universe on the orange side is moving because the portal is moving at say +10km, and a static object, the cube, is introduced to it via the orange portal, it's 0km becomes -10km once it has passed over the threshold, even though it's still 0km according to its previous universe.

obviously this is bullshit but using a basic understanding of phyics mixed with a totally bullshit idea, this is what should happen.

Honestly, not sure. I guess that's how I can comprehend it the easiest is by thinking the portal is a door. I still think B is far fetched, assuming the portal acts as a doorway, The way I visualize it is sort of like Swiss cheese, just a hole. But like you said its hard to really apply that to a portal because we just don't know how it would actually react.

If any of you actually took a physics class, draw a free body diagram with all the forces acting on it.

You need to do it from both reference points (blue and orange portal) and in 3 diffrent time "snapshots" (Before entering portal, in the middle of the portal, fully exiting the portal)

Forces to consider:
Orange side: Gravity(O) and the normal force of the platform
Blue side: Gravity(B) and the normal force of the platform

Come to your own conclusion and get back to me because this will be graded.

What difference does that make?

it's A. if it wasn't blatantly obvious to you, you are confirmed retarded

Moving through a portal takes zero concious effort. A step is a step no matter how far apart the two portals are. So no matter what, it's like going through a hoola hoop.

Depends. When am I looking through the blue portal?

Hey, it's the bait thread again.

Remember: The more you pretend to believe that A is correct answer, the more entertaining it will be to see Bfags explain why you are wrong.
And as an Afag you are not here to be correct, you are here to be entertained by Bfags.

The cube doesn’t move.

retard

it's practically forced to fly out of the portal because there's no space for it

>And as an Afag
>The more you pretend
Yeah, you're smart enough to know that it's B, so no need to argue

seconds before the cube reaches the portal

>You don't understand the posts you were responding to
You sound awfully condescending for someone without a basic understanding of high school physics

If a door falls on you, are you going to fly, you brainlets?

You're literally just going "you're wrong I am right" without expanding on the shit you are spouting

Reminder that to make either work you need to break a different law of physics. The simplest solution is to let the portal transfer energy to preserve momentum, situation B.

the cube has no momentum, ergo it would just drop to the floor

How fast is the piston and how far away is it from the platform? "Seconds before" it might not be moving yet.

As established in the Portal franchise, no, you don’t.

Velocity is frame-relative

Thread over

Everyone who isn't convinced its A do me a favor:
Find something cube shaped in your house. Now find a hula hoop or any sort of big ring.
Slam the ring downard around the cube and tell me if it flies up to the ceiling because "its exiting the other side of the hoop really fast".

Attached: 536396_1.jpg (630x630, 61K)

The platform fits through the portal, so the platform will just go through and come out on the other side at an angle, causing the cube to slide off

You’re pretty much ignoring how portals work in the game and making shit up. We’re assuming the portals work as in the games Portal and Portal 2.

Good demonstration.
OP's scenario is for all intents and purposes exactly the same as this. The only thing that matters is the velocity of the cube *relative to the orange portal*, which is the exact same in both pictures.

You can obviously tell B is true for this example, so B is true for the original question too.

ok let's say from OP's image onwards
split hairs again and it's confirmed you're baiting

>URRR ME NO UNDERSTAND PHYSICS
the easiest way to understand is to imagine your riding a train with a hole at the front.
when a fly goes through the hole from the outside, even though the fly has always been stationary, in your reference frame, the fly is moving fast, past you.
the answer is B

But hula hoop isn’t a portal

It also is moving.

There's a reason they don't let portals go on moving surfaces relative to one another.

Jesus Christ. They're opposite scenarios. Think about it in terms of a normal door.

>Yea Forums unable to answer this

Truly stumped

It is as the portals in the game work exactly like that. The portals in the game don’t suck stuff in, they act as doors.

I DON'T SEE YOU TRYING

I would see a cube.

The viewer and the cube are stationary in this example

The fly in your scenario didn't get a momentum boost from the trains velocity, and would only APPEAR to be moving faster because of your point of reference. Congratulations, you just proved A.

moving towards you really fast.

Ah, but B is what happens when the portals function like a doorway. Just a doorway under particular circumstances. It's like jumping off a moving train. From your perspective, who was just on the train, it may seem as if you were only going at walking speed, but when you hit the ground outside the train, it feels like you were going a whole lot faster. Conversely, when you try to jump back onto the moving train, it feels the same way, even though you're going the other way around. Moving portals work similarly, except the train is the entire universe, and the ground outside is also the entire universe.

>what is relativity

Attached: 1552399697774.png (809x509, 19K)

Attached: 95745537-AD24-4583-9C27-F87895CEEEA1.gif (500x364, 67K)

Better question

Attached: 1552398800030.png (809x509, 38K)

Attached: portal.png (952x795, 23K)

Imagine sticking your head through a wall and having it come out the ceiling. Would you get a blood rush to your head and black out like you do if you're suspended upside down for too long? I feel like it would happen eventually

masterwork bait, saving this

How fast is it moving? Is it slowly creeping up or does it move quickly then abruptly stop

>doors function the same as an entity that moves the entire universe

Attached: 1541355034706.png (900x900, 232K)

Logically it should be A, since there's no reason a portal should transfer the moving platform's momentum to the cube considering they aren't even touching, but apparently some bullshit about reference frames makes the answer B? We've had this thread fifty million times and that's the conclusion every time.

you are the outside person looking at the fly entering the train. (outside the portal)
as soon as the fly enters the train, you are sitting inside the train because the reference frame (inside the portal).
go read a book or something brainlets.

>Another A and B fags argue low hanging fruit while long winded but sensible explanations get ignored because everyone would rather argue to piss eachother off

>Transform frame of reference to follow the blue portal
>Suddenly the cube's momentum depends on whether or not the orange portal stops moving right after the cube has passed through it

Brainlet animation.

This actually shows how ridiculous A is. It makes no sense for the cube to instantly stop.

It doesn't "move the entire universe" that's some "I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE XD" shit. And even if it did the rules by which it moves the entire universe dictate that A is correct. Someone did it in game, go find the video.

>Me running into a car is the complete opposite of a car running into me at the same speed

Attached: flat,550x550,075,f.u1.jpg (454x550, 32K)

The platform on which the cube rests is gaining the same momentum as the cube when the portal falls down on it. There's no way in hell it will spring flying like in B. Thus it has to be A since the receiving platform is tilted

B.

Either the cube is destroyed or it presses up against itself, preventing the platforms from completely pressing together.

A, and that orange portal is so big it's going to push the entire stand through the blue portal which also isn't going to move.
Well the cube will move since the stand would be poking out of the blue portal at an angle, making it slide off.

The most common objection raised against B is "where does the force come from", but the same objection can be raised against A. So, first, let's assume that a stationary object being moved out of a portal doesn't shoot out of it, because it is stationary. Shouldn't you extrapolate this logic to every individual atom that makes up the cube? If not even a single atom can exit the portal, how does the cube enter? What force is preventing it from entering? Or, if it does enter, but does not exit, does the cube get entirely spaghettified like if it entered a black hole? Pretty heavy stuff for something that has no forces acting on it.

So that's obviously not what's happening. Instead, the cube objectively moves out of the portal... and then, it suddenly stops. How? Why? The cube doesn't "know" that it's not supposed to have any momentum. At this point, the only observation you can make is that, somehow, it moved. That is the one thing both sides must agree on. So if you say A, you then say that there is another force that stop the cube from moving after it moved through the portal. Where did that come from, then?

B requires the least amount of assumptions and produces no further inconsistencies aside from the ones inherent in portals.

In this schizophrenic analogy, I can only assume the fly is the cube since that's the only thing that makes sense, and it didn't gain any momentum from entering the train. So A. How about you go read a book, or better yet observe literally any type of movement happening.

Bait?
Is that what we're calling visual explanations now?

The entire universe moves relative to the cube dumbass. That's what that means. It's physically identical to you moving. Relativity.

Not really, the human body would circulate the blood in your head back to your body which is feeling normal gravity.

The worce that would happen is you'd feel really bad vertigo because the part of your body that senses orientation is in your head while your body would actually feel gravity normally.

There is no sensible explanation for A, all they do is come up with different ways to describe hula hoops

>B-B-B-BUT MUH INACCURATE GMOD SIMULATION
youtube.com/watch?v=ltg0U6mxH40

/thread

either u favor "it enters at x speed, exits at x speed" or you favor "it has no momentum, so it retain nor gains any momentum"

since the example in the picture isnt possible w/o breaking either rule, the closest comparable RL example, would be to instead have an entire "room" fall onto the cube, and inside the room, have a camera.

next would be if the room "stops" once the cube enters, or if the room swallows up the platform too, and keeps moving until it hits the ground.

those are the only answers that come close to solving the paradox the OP is asking.

Why does Yea Forums always go full retard on these threads

practically, both scenarios are exactly the same
only the frame of reference changes
therefore it is impossible to get two different outcomes

The right answer is portal swallowing both the cube and the pedestal you fucking retards

Imagine that you are looking into the blue portal, and the orange end is attached to a plane. Despite you being perfectly still, you see the entire world behind the portal move. If the world isn't moving, then are you? If you are, then it follows that you also move on your way out of the portal.

I'm still skeptical, but I'll take your demonstration into consideration.

So you have to know that a car isn't a door, and the portal doesn't actually make contact with the cube, so you may as well have made a food analogy. Running into a car at 10mph and a car hitting you at 10mph are exactly the same, no one gets any magic bonus inertia. So you've proven that A is correct and that you can't read.

It is exactly the reason the cube doesn’t move.

based

Why hasn't this been tried in real life yet?

Attached: 1552398800030.png (409x251, 17K)

does the momentum beat the forces of weight and gravity?

B-rainlets BTFO

Because Yea Forums is full of retards, and physics especially makes retards think they know what they're doing.

I have a engineering degree. It’s A retards.

it does matter you fucking retard, in reference frame of the train, the fly is moving towards you.
you are thinking in terms of the reference frame of the outside seeing the event.
please dont be this fucking stupid you fucking moron.

call elon musk

The cube essentially enters a wormhole, its space is transplanted elsewhere, no forces affect it, and without any initial force there is no movement.

We had this discussion when portal was new fucking 12 years ago!!!!!

Fuck you!
Speedy thing goes in
Speedy thing comes out

>Uses a game that doesnt run on source to prove a theory about a game that runs on source.

>the particles that compose the cube are moving as they exit the portal
>ergo the particles have momentum and thus inertia
>they suddenly stop because ???

SEETHING

If Source is the bible on how portals function then holy fuck nothing makes sense

There's no force to stop a cube mid-portal, but I understand your argument. The thing you're either missing or don't believe is that since the distance between two portals is truly 0, and portals themselves have no mass or volume, the cube doesn't need a force to stop it mid teleport; as far as its atoms are concerned, they're in the exact same place they were. That's the magic of portals.

>It makes no sense for the cube to instantly stop.
When did it start?

Too busy making Haydee and catgirls irl

Is there a single in-game instance of a portal just magically imparting momentum onto an object that didn't have it before entering the portal? If not then that's what makes this so confusing, B goes against everything we see portals do in the game.

You fucking retard the space itself is being moved not the five, there isn’t any force stopping the cube from A moving it’s simply falling due to gravity

seethe, Beta

(Assuming falling portal stops at platform otherwise user has obvious answer above)
We can also change the problem WLOG so that gravity is irrelevant (suppose the portal falls 10m at 100000m/s, in that time the cube could only move 5 nanometres from gravity, while still only having a gamma factor of ~1.00000006!)
So now gravity is out of the way. Air resistance is also complicated so fuck that. No one has brought that shit up here and I don't think anyone will argue it is relevant.
>OPTION A:
You are the cube.
You look straight down at the platform.
Nothing moves.
A ring passes over the top of you.
No forces act on you from above or below.
You don't move. -> A
>Option B:
You are the ceiling above the blue portal.
You see a cube coming towards you at 100000m/s.
It passes through a ring.
No forces act on the cube from above or below.
The cube carries on flying towards you at 100000m/s.
It hits you. -> B

The point is that given the exact same logic you come to a contradiction, meaning that somewhere along the lines your assumption was wrong. We can rule out special and general relativity WLOG, so it must be in Galilean relativity/invariance.
The axioms for that are: "There exists an absolute space, in which Newton's laws are true. (An inertial frame is a reference frame in relative uniform motion to absolute space.)" and "All inertial frames share a universal time."
I think we can all agree that the time is the same on either end of a portal here. However, we see that although both of those frames described above should be inertial, they disagree about motion after the portal has passed over the cube, therefore the existence of portals is contradictory to the existence of an absolute space. So this CANNOT happen and all conclusions that don't refer to "but this happens in the game" are completely moot.

PLEASE RESPOND

>cube that isn't moving is a "speedy thing"

>engineering degree
Like clockwork

Option A theoretically is being moved by gravity in OP's pick

is much more clear in what the debate should be.

>a engineering degree
>a engineering
>a
>calls people on Yea Forums retards

you're forgetting this is a paradox.

but to humor your question, if you're afloat in space, and the universe around u is moving (which it is) it would look like YOU were the one moving.

(And by definition, you're both moving)

now, if you were moving, and were to slowly increase you speed at roughly 1% every second, you'd feel the increase in momentum.
but
if the universe increased its speed by 1% every second, you'd feel no increase in momentum.
(only thing you could feel, is air molecules/gravity, if near objects with those things.)

Momentum is a thing.

From what frame of reference do you determine whether an object is speedy or not?
As far as the orange portal is concerned a speedy cube is coming towards it, so by its own internal logic a speedy cube must also exit blue

OP is a faggot. Here, I saved you the trouble of a 500 reply thread.

youtube.com/watch?v=S85nudR6D-Y

If it is B portals are going to be fatal if you try to use them somewhere like earth where everything is already screaming by at several km/s.

I mean technically if the portal isn't moving fast enough, gravity kills the velocity

How does that prove anything right about A?
It shows that it doesn't matter who is moving, what matters is how fast they move into one another relatively. Same with portals. Whether the cube moves into the portal or the portal moves into the cube doesn't matter, as long as the relative motion is the same.

>cube is moving as it exits the portal

No, the way the cube moves and the way a body moves are identical. If one moves the entire universe then they both do. Either way its A, and you KNOW its A but you're too deep in your own ass to admit it at this point.

`the reason the OP doesnt use this example, is because its TRYING to be a paradox.
just like the people who post pic related. its a paradox.

Attached: 1543929089484.png (390x345, 8K)

Oh no, I'm not missing anything. The cube indeed moves through the portal, unimpeded, and then what? Well, it's true that the cube doesn't accelerate, as far as its atoms are concerned. It's more like it just keeps on moving. It's not in the exact same place, but on the same trajectory.

It's stated in the game that -the object's- momentum on entering the portal is preserved.

The cube entered with no momentum.

No one is discussing how ones frame of reference is affected by portals, this is a different argument.

Stop bringing gravity into this. It is not at all a problem. Imagine the experiment taking place in outer space and tell me what you think the outcome would be.

Imagine the portal isn't a magical portal, it's just a hole. The platform is a piece of cardboard with a hole cut in it, falling on the cube.
Does the cube go flying upwards through the hole? Or does it just end up on the other side, still not moving?

Does an object at rest begin moving when no outside forces act on it?

You should be able to solve this.

>the cube entered with no momentum
only from the cube's frame of reference

Nah that ain't a paradox, not even a hard question.
Try out THIS hard question.
"If I roll infinite dice infinitely many times, is it guaranteed that at least one of them always rolls a 6?"

Are you trying to say Gordan Freeman in power armor DOESNT weigh about 5 bricks?

/thread

You are talking to illiterate retards and obviously trolling idiots here, good luck.

I think the only reason that simulation works because of the game engine taking account for the collision between the cube, and the plane which the portal sits on, so essentially the flat plane is "pushing" the cube because of janky collisions.

>portals moving across a plane
Even if you want to dismiss this the cube has no momentum. This is basically the equivalent of a goku vs superman thread.

I don't think your option A is what will happen though, is the thing. You will move. But it will be like you had been moving all along.

what's the answer

33%
-X
X-
XX

Ah, I see. Your heads in the wrong place, friendo. The distance between two portals is 0 and the portal itself exerts no force on the cube; they don't interact. So the car analogy is truly an opposite set of circumstances, and the results would be opposite as well.

look up the paradoxs name "boy and girl paradox"

your question can't be determined, as its an infinite set and cant ever end to get absolute results.

the frame of reference for the cube and the oberserver is the same

That image is stupid because it's assuming you are guaranteed a crit to begin with.

Of course not, you could theoretically roll them forever and ever and never get a single 6, let alone have one die always roll 6.

for the dice I mean

They say portals only work when stationary, but what I think they mean is they need to have the same general velocity.
So in theory you could have a "moving" portal if the other end had the same velocity but the things around the portal on one side had a different velocity.

That's a lot more thought than anyone making the game gave though, in their minds it just being on a wall means it is not moving even though it is actually moving quite fast around the sun, which is also moving.

From the cube's the exit portal's and all other frames of reference except the single where it isn't, which is clearly the one where the point of reference is the thing moving.

The cube has no momentum.

>ITT: People who believe in absolute momentum arguing with relativists

I didn't know Yea Forums was in the 1900s

Zoomers and dropouts, please understand that your understanding of momentum is limited as all hell.

>Option A theoretically is being moved by gravity in OP's pick
That's not the issue here. We can all infer that the force that makes the cube *plop* is gravity and not some quality of the portal. But the thing is that happens after the cube has come to rest. If it exits at great enough speed, it should be launched.

So the answer is that the game doesn’t know? Damn

trying to watch Bincels justify their retardation is like watching someone explain how inverted aiming somehow makes more sense

>A game running on the same engine as Portal is inaccurate, but a completely unrelated VR game is not

Attached: 1468908239024.png (491x585, 56K)

see

The order doesn't matter, it's 50%

Right, and this is why, when you exit the portal, you will be launched, but you will not feel an increase in momentum.

Why do people assume there is any space between the portals and they aren't exactly like passing through an open door?

It has to be B. The cube has to pass thru the portal as fast as the panel slams down on it. Each millimeter of the cube is pushed thru by the next millimeter. It wouldn't just magically come to a complete halt after rapidly passing through the portal, it would still have momentum.

>"At least one is a crit" is the ONLY point of the question
but the original question was related to a man named mr smith having 2 kids, what are the chances of 2 boys.
the original question, if phrased right, could only have 1 answer. if phrased wrong, has 2.
this version was made even easier to have 2 answers. (and intentionally so)

Speed is relative to the system.
For portal's perspective, it moving towards the cube is exactly the same as the cube moving towards the cube

imagine looking through the blue portal and tell me what you see

But each atom is still connected to the other atoms in the cube, there's no need for the ones behind to "catch up", since nothing is really moving. The cube can exist half in, half out of a portal as well, which supports the idea that a cube doesn't need to be on either side and doesn't need to move to get there.

25%

To get 2 crits you must roll them both. The part about 1 of the 2 guaranteed a crit does not impact the chances at all. The outcomes and their chances are:

>Noncrit, Noncrit - 0%
>Noncrit, Crit - 50%
>Crit, Noncrit - 25%
>Crit, Crit - 25%

50%
The first one doesn't matter. You're asking if "both hits are crits", but we already know the state of the first one, so you're really just asking what the state of the second one is. Its chance of being a crit is 50%. So it's 50%.

This is like saying
>I flip a coin and it lands on heads. Then I flip it again. What's the chance of it being heads?
The first result is irrelevant information for the question.

gmod doesn't natively support portals so whoever made it had to come up with their own thing from scratch, probably sneaking Betacuck ideology into it

t. never took a probability class

lets say you put ur head through the outbound portal and see the cube.
to you, is the cube still stationary or is it moving fast towards you?

Okay you're right for the wrong reason. If I roll a single die infinitely many times, I will eventually roll any arbitrary combination of numbers you could decide on assuming it is possible. The probability of getting at least one 6 in infinite rolls is 100%, because if you don't get one keep rolling. Also because (5/6)^n->0 as n->infinity.
In that case, my question to you is: If I roll infinite dice infinitely many times, is it guaranteed that NONE of them always roll a six?

>there's air in space
retarded opinion discarded

as another user pointed out, portals dont change ur position in space.
retaining momentum was something added in portal for puzzles.
the question is attempting to get 2 different answers. dont think of the question so simply.

>I failed probability theory, the post

>sneaking Betacuck ideology into it
based and orangepilled

oh ok we didnt had this thread in a while i guess

Attached: 1525967718576.jpg (700x4989, 649K)

adding to this real quick to prove B beyond a doubt

Attached: 1538905145923.jpg (809x509, 53K)

>but we already know the state of the first one
We don't. We only know it is impossible for both to be noncrits.

It's A. If you think it's B you're retarded and you should feel bad.

50%

It's right because the normal force sends the cube flying.

Then we know the state of the second one. It's the same thing. Forget I mentioned the order, we know the state of one of them, so there's only one that's up in the air. It's a 50% crit rate so the chance of that crit is 50%. The one that's already confirmed has no bearing.

>I didn't read the question, the post

>This is like saying
>>I flip a coin and it lands on heads. Then I flip it again. What's the chance of it being heads?
Wrong. Because it says one of them is a crit, not the first one is a crit, which makes a mountain of difference. There are 3 scenarios in which at least one crit happens, of which one where both are crits.

This is what I thought of when people talked about relativity in this thread.

It's all relative. In fact, this would be a bigger problem for A, because the moment you'd step through even a stationary portal, your "actual" momentum from revolving around the sun would cause you to fly off into space.

Infinite sets definitely can get absolute results. Like, if I roll a die infinitely many times, the probability that I get a 6 at least once is 100%.
The probability I roll ten 6's in a row is also 100%, and so on for any arbitrary sequence of rolls. That's why the question is hard, because it involves competing infinities.

Jesus, are you in the 10th grade?

>no u, the cope

absolutely retarded

33 percent

25% is correct if it didnt already establish someone observed one of the 2 hits had landed a crit, but wont tell u which one.
so the 0% chance one couldnt have happened.

no, a better example is if you flip 2 coins at the same time, but dont look. (blindfolded)
someone tells u one of the coins landed tails, but not which one.
was it the left or the right one?
since u dont know, u calculate the possibilities of it being either, write down all possibilities, and then the max number of possibilities is what X is out of.
(X/3)

That would mean the cube can accelerate though. Which it can't in OPs image.

Based Blet

Anyone that ever played kerbal space program will tell you velocity is always relative to something. Speed relative to a planetoïde is differt than to another ship in orbit. They don't have to correlate. So B is correct, since block-to-gate speed is kept stable

user, he is one of the illiterate retards or obviously trolling idiots. Especially because he's repeating what all the others are saying and which has been debunked countless times as if it's a new insight.

>The distance between two portals is 0
If this is an analogy for the door, then it's only valid if the two portals are static. The moment you move one of them, the rules change, and it's no longer merely a door. It would be like a door with an expanding hallway.
>the portal itself exerts no force on the cube
It doesn't have to as long as the portal's motion is stable
If you were in a zero gravity environment, you wouldn't feel a thing as the portal approached and transferred you to the exit

>Because it says one of them is a crit, not the first one is a crit, which makes a mountain of difference
No. It makes no difference. There are two attacks, one is a crit, the rate is 50%. But the one we already know about is irrelevant, because we already know it's a crit. It's just asking what the crit rate of the unknown attack is, which is 50%.

There is no scenario where the crit attack isn't a crit. Because we already know it's a crit. The only variable is the other attack, which has a 50% chance to crit. The answer is 50%.

I don't give a shit what the cube thinks it ain't moving

OH NO NO NO NO NO HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAH
youtube.com/watch?v=SNs6n1fkO4c
B-RONIES LITERALLY DISPROVED BY PORTAL 2 ITSELF
A-LPHAS A-LWAYS WIN B-A-BY

Attached: 2ec.png (600x580, 572K)

how does the pedestal move through the portal?

>no fun police

Attached: 1546542700120.jpg (449x447, 96K)

WHO AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE

>The distance between two portals is 0 and the portal itself exerts no force on the cube; they don't interact.
Right, it's like stepping through a doorway. Except in this particular case it's like stepping through a doorway to another universe that's identical to yours except it was moving at great speed relative to the one you previously inhabited.

There is no force on the cube except gravity. All that changes for it is the gravity switches to the blue side, making it fall

/thread

just leave while you still can

Ok, I was wrong.

How is this a question?
Is Yea Forums this stupid?

>people argue about the rules that fictional magic spells follow
>magic that the creators of did not even give consistent rules

Attached: 1548626507131.jpg (325x270, 21K)

Neither would work. Portal's disappear on moving surfaces so the scenario would not even occur

Not my image, but the pedestal would fit through.

YOURSELF user, BELIEVE IN YOURSELF.

I dunno, who is?

>but the original question was related to a man named mr smith having 2 kids, what are the chances of 2 boys

25%. The chance of a girl then a boy is 25%. The chance of a boy the a girl is 25%. The chance of two girls is 25%. Maybe I don't understand what's supposed to be paradoxical.

>portals are impossible in real life
Thanks for insight, Einstein.

Alright you fuckers last call.
Let's have a vote.
strawpoll.me/17594772 problem in real life
strawpoll.me/17594775 problem in game
strawpoll.me/17594780 coin flipping problem from

This

This
Basically the easier answer is that applying real life physics to a situation where real life physics don't work iskinda retarded.

>B-BUT MUH MOMENTUM
>THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING B-ROS

They did, they said they can't move. OP is breaking the fictional rules.

>if near objects with those things
good reading comprehension.

>if we measure the distance between 2 points, and cut the distance in half, then cut it in half again, and keep doing this infinitely, somehow this eventually means we cut the distance 100%.

there is no guarantee it will land, thats why the question says infinitely, since they know we all know the likelihood is practically impossible.
but to measure the actual percentage, we need to do what i just suggested. keep cutting the chance down infinitely, w/o ever reaching 0 or 100%

It observably is moving. You can't handwave it by saying it's not really moving.

Well why isn't A correct, since cube-to-platform speed is kept stable?

chAds:
>the cube isn't moving so it won't suddenly start moving
B-eaners:
>IMAGINE IF YOU WERE THE CUBE, WHAT WOULD IT FEEL LIKE FOR YOU TO SUDDENLY START MOVING
>YEAH WELL IF YOU STUDIED THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY YOU'D KNOW THAT THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MOVING AND NOT MOVING
>OK BUT WHAT IF THE PEDESTAL WAS MOVING INSTEAD OF THE PANEL
>BUT THE PANEL IS GIVING FORCE TO THE CUBE, SOMEHOW, TRUST ME

And then they moved it in the game.

>strawpoll.me/17594775 problem in game
the answer is

>portals dont change ur position in space.
I don't think that's right. Isn't the whole point of portals that they do?

the portal is moving
do you have brain damage?

if you drop a cube out of a plane mid-flight will it fall in a vertical line or will it consider the sudden change of acceleration and momentum?

BUT WOT IF YOU WERE A CUBE, Yea Forums?

That's called a continuity error.

no one is going to admit you're right

NOOOOOOOOOOO B-ROS WE WERE SUPPOSED TO SUDDENLY START MOVING AND GET GFS, THIS CAN'T HAPPEN

I vote "the question is a paradox" for the coin flip problem.

Attached: plop.png (809x509, 31K)

This is a cop-out. The premise is that the portal moves. You've observed the inherent contradiction. Now deal with it instead of blathering about the required energy.

the mr smith one isnt a paradox.
what was a paradox was that the question didnt make it sound like 1 father/man, and people then said it was possible to pull a man out of many men, only if the father met the conditions.

in the example i gave, the question wanted real world solutions, but the creator of the crit version used video game logic, knowing real world solutions wont limit the possibile ways to solve it, and it gave multiple anbsers.

aslo, 25% is wrong in both, since its established that "at least one is a crit"
in the case of mr smith "at least one is a boy"

there cant be a scenario where its 2 girls, if we already have confirmed one is a boy.

OKAY GUYS BUT WHAT IF YOU WERE LIKE THE CUBE DUDE

*hits bong*

kek fucking retard

>brainlet doesn't understand Zeno's paradox
The point Zeno is makes is that it would take infinite steps to reach the end.
We literally have infinite steps.

Why is it always Afags who reply directly to the OP without reading the thread?

>ywn be a cube

>but the same objection can be raised against A
gravity
>If not even a single atom can exit the portal, how does the cube enter?
it does exit the portal on the other side
> What force is preventing it from entering?
The portal it just exited? The platform, on the other side.

>Instead, the cube objectively moves out of the portal... and then, it suddenly stops. How? Why?
The cube does not move. The portal moves. It does not move besides falling to the floor because objects at rest remain at rest, unless outside forces (such as gravity) act on them.

This isn't hard at all to understand. You are confusing yourself.

Only true answer.

Prove me wrong. You can't.

But what if YOU were the cube?

>Be Cube
>Want love and affection
>Get stuck in infinite turmoil about how I go through portals, being deduced by sweaty meat-bags
>Lonely testing ensues for an eternity.
>Just want a hug.

Guys when you walk through a door do you go flying?

based.
Alphas win again.

>Call out and prove that it's bullshit
>"How dare you not solve the bullshit"

t. braindead moron

Okay well you're a retard and you can get the fuck out of my thread.

Because threads are always chock full of Bfags writing 2000 character dissertations and autistic infographics that completely miss the point, that objects at rest stay at rest and the cube is at rest. There is nothing you can say to refute this and A is correct.

It isn't a cop out.
It just means that the question is impossible with real life physics and logic.

If you wanna look at game physics and logic, look at the videos from:

n-no... this cant be B-ros...

Attached: 5243BF86-BC59-4FE5-889D-BF54E7281E3E.jpg (540x405, 32K)

>strawpoll.me/17594780
wheres the coin flip problem?
i just saw random answers.

the general theory of portals in science is that space moves to you, but your position in space remains still, so as not to harm you if you were to attempt moving at extreme speeds (which are theoretically impossible)

also in portal, the person only moves, if something acts upon them, and mentions ur position in space is always the same.

Me after initial penetration

this though
this whole thread is beaner cope

and its possible to infinitely never get the result.
gamblers fallacy
the prior step doesnt effect the next step.

WHO PAID YOU TO GRAB WHEATLEY

but the cube is accelerating because the momentum of the press is transmitted

Kek

This only proves B you fucking moron.Go back to school user.

so on what the hell are we basing this answer on? reminder that the game physics still make sense(ish) as long as the portals dont move, which in face they arent. except that one example which was brought up in the previous pic

False, in Portal 2 you have to use a moving portal with a laser going through it to cut the neurotoxin tubes.

Also, all portals are always moving because everything in the universe is constantly in motion. The earth orbits the sun at 90 miles a second.

Would you shoot a cube before throwing it out of a plane?

The cube is moving, though. If you deny that you're already wrong.

Stand up, and drop a ring around your obese frame, do you go flying?

But what IS movement, exactly?

>B-BUT OBJECTS CANNOT JUST GET MOMENTUM OUT OF NOWHERE

Checkmate, A-theists.

Attached: Momentum.png (1816x1048, 20K)

I understand the example, however in that same example both coins flip right? Then your buddy tells you one of the coins was a heads. It doesn't matter which one, you have now simplified the problem to just one coin with a 50% scenario. I think the paradox of the question is not in the question, but the fact that you cannot actually "observe" that one coin will be a flip in this scenario realistically, only hypothetically

>Warp the entirety of spacetime to make a hole that breaks energy conservation and only pays lip service to momentum conservation by "conserving" the absolute momentum
>Move the hole around
>Argue using momentum conservation

Noether's Theorem, retards. Conservation laws only exist fully when your system has symmetries corresponding to those laws, and any system with portals fucks up position and time symmetry. That's the baseline we're arguing on BEFORE you introduce portals that move.

Can someone post the hoopfag image?

No it isn't, all the momentum energy of the tile with the portal converts into warmth or deformation of the pedestal as soon as they collide.

He's not calling anything out, he's avoiding the issue entirely by declaring it impossible. Yeah, we know. Portals are themselves impossible and yet we can speculate about hypothetical scenarios involving them. Making them move independently of one another is just another layer of difficulty. In fact he got close to giving an answer and then just said "WELL THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE IN CURRENT PHYSICS SO THERE IS NO ANSWER" instead of following the premises to their logical conclusion.

pls how can a person be this retarded.
imagine you are looking at the cube within the portal.
it is stationary because "DUR IT HAS NO MOMENTUM" or is it moving towards you?

Ok, tell me more

Attached: .jpg (1019x985, 112K)

Can someone state where in the game they say the portals have literally even an atom of space between them?

HULA HOOP

the answer is b. from the exit point it makes no difference if the cube is moving toward the portal or vice versa. basic physics and logic.

Fake, Source engine doesn't support portals on movable platforms. Nice try.

I just wanted the hoopfag image user

If i stand above you and watch the hoop fall through your obese frame do you come flying at me?

No force, true, but the velocity of the cube is still relative to its frame. From the point of view on the left, the cube is not moving in its frame of reference. However, from the point of view of the orange portal (and, subsequently, the blue portal it's coming out of) it appears the cube is moving towards the portal with an equal but opposite velocity to that of the portal-holding platform in the left-side's frame of reference.
In other words
>Cube frame of reference
Portal-platform = X meters per second down
Cube = 0 meters per second
>portal frame of reference
Portal-platform = 0 meters per second
Cube = X meters per second up

The portal stops at the cube and the cube can't move through it until momentum is introduced to the cube to get it through.

>This isn't hard at all to understand.
Ironic, you obviously don't understand a single word of my post and the only person confused by it is you.

Its B. To all you brainlets saying "the cube itself doesnt move" tell me how it gets from halfway through the portal to fully through the portal? By fucking moving. Its pushing itself out of the portal at the speed of the piston. I would make a drawing so you brainlets could understand but im too lazy.

Where is it stated it takes any force to pass through a portal?

this is nothing to do with gamblers fallacy you sweaty ponce
How about this then: you roll an infinite number of times and you didn't get a single six.
That means you didn't roll it an infinite number of times, because the next roll could still be a six.
The converse is I rolled a billion times, and got a six so now I can stop rolling because I have gotten at least one six in finite rolls so the infinite extension trivially contains at least one six, whereas you cannot finitely extend not rolling a six into never rolling a six

But it's not at rest. It exits the portal. This is the point you keep missing.

You can't pass through a portal without moving in the game, the only place they exist.

THE CUBE IS PUSHING ITSELF GUYS

>this is how Bfags think
OH NO NO NO NO KEK

Attached: portalp.png (809x509, 63K)

see

We will never know

>reason

We still don't know if wormholes are even possible IRL wise, in theory they are probably possible, but not IRL.

This. The only way for A to happen would be if the second portal moved backwards at the same speed as the piston to reveal a non-moving cube.

I bet he would know

Attached: 1BFF0AE6-1B98-4E59-94E4-2F172B7F9A0A.gif (200x234, 2.85M)

>universe fall on cube
>universe stops falling on cube at one point
>bfags think the cube acts as if the universe kept falling

If you were attached to the hula hoop as you dropped it, I'm afraid you're going to get a face full of user.

Thats not related to anything i said user.

you need a force to generate momentum in the other reference frame

A or similar because he would have skipped any time the cube could have been launched into the air to cheat and prove Bfags wrong

you're making an assumption both coins are equal.
so let me try this again.

in the same scenario, you flipped a dime and a penny.

your friend says one landed on tails, but doesnt say which one.
you calculate it based on the idea the penny landed on tails, whats the chance the dime landed on tails?
but find out after, that it was the dime that landed on tails, and u had to guess if the penny did.

in cases of probability, you write down all possible outcomes, and exclude all outcomes not possible.
you dont exclude outcomes that seem similar.

in this case the maximum number of outcomes are;

H / T
T / H
T / T

since its possible the other coin was the one that landed on tails.

you dont discredit the 2nd option of T/H because the 1st option appears similar.

Attached: 1516211170814.gif (504x282, 17K)

Why do you think this is at all relevant? You're the only one mentioning it.

brainlet answer

Thank God someone said it

Nope, it's absolutely 25%. The problem only says "one of the two is a crit", it doesn't tell you which one is, nor does it guarantee the first will be a crit.
Try the program out for yourself:
pastebin.com/igvrrUju

Attached: crit problem solved.png (802x476, 26K)

>A rigidly and uncritically sticking to a presupposition
>B literally viewing the problem from multiple angles and employing hypothetical scenarios to come up with a sound answer
Really showed them.

>Arguing for a logical solution to an impossible question

Portals literally break science and there is no point in arguing over them since you can just make the rules up like you want to.

>instead of following the premises to their logical conclusion
Because it has none in real world physics. And if we follow game logic it's A.

If you make up your own illogical hybrid out of game logic and real physics than it might be B, you moronic fool.

The fallacy is in the wording of the question. If you say one of the hits is guarenteed, then if you don't crit on your first one, then you HAVE to crit on your second one. The people saying 33% are saying lets take the entire pool of odds of 2 consecutive coin flips, and then simply eliminate the non-crit/non-crit percentage which would leave only 3 options and a 33% probability. This is nonsensical though because we literally cannot have that scenario. This is something in statistical practice that cannot be shown or replicated reliably in the real world when we are looking at the conditional probabilities of something

rs.io/the-boy-girl-paradox-explained/
You must suck at programming

>retards thinking real life works on literally impossible portals
please tell me how to use my brain to fly next Yea Forums

It exits the portal because the portal is moving. But it is at rest.
If I took a hula hoop and put it around your head, then pulled it down your body, and let it hit the floor, you have entered the hula hoop and exited the other side, without moving.
The only reason this confuses you is because portals are magic holes in space that connect distant places, instead of just regular holes that connect adjacent spaces.

I can see the retardation in your program from a mile away.

>That means you didn't roll it an infinite number of times, because the next roll could still be a six.
"could" being the key word there that disproves "guaranteed".

no one is arguing the likelihood.
we all pretty much "know" that its going to happen based on probability.

>hur dur i have no argument
>ooga booga me no understand science

How did you get it so that noncrit/crit was twice as likely as crit/noncrit and /crit/crit? It shouldn't be. You did something fucky.

>making it a debate about epistemology to defend your retarded position

>instead of following the premises to their logical conclusion.
Because there is no logic, it's pure fantasy you fucking retard

He literally made it so that if the first roll is a non-crit he doesn't roll the second and designates it as a crit, which is why non-crit crit is double crit non-crit.

The program follows all the rules of the problem. If you think it's retarded then tell me where and let's see you do better

>noncrit, crit occurances: 4973
>crit, noncrit occurances: 2523

>Because it has none in real world physics.
We've already established that the cube both moves and not moves relative to you. Well, you can also see that the not-movement happens outside the portals, and the movement happens through the portals. Logically, what's going to happen when the cube exits the portal, is that it keeps moving. That's the answer you get from following the premises to their logical conclusions.
>And if we follow game logic it's A.
No it's not, that's if you follow what your high school physics teacher said about momentum, which portals already break.

>portals
>science
user...

Both coins are equal though cause we are asking for the scenario that BOTH of them land heads, so it doesn't matter if the Dime or Penny is what is being told to me, cause the other one simply has a 50% chance of being heads as well. In this scenario, there literally cannot be a case where both landed tails, so it makes no sense to take in to consideration the 25% probability of that happening, and then remove it to get 1/3.

Since the plate with the orange portal apparently stops as soon as it sits flush with the surface of the pedestal on which the cube is sitting, the pedestal cannot accelerate out of the blue portal in order to propel the cube. So A is what happens, the cube just sort of rolls off the now-slanted surface of the pedestal onto the ground.

nah, you're just bad at programming :>)

>This is nonsensical though because we literally cannot have that scenario.
Yes you can. Hit twice. Observe results. Ask someone the probabilities.

If the first roll is a non-crit you don't just make the second roll a crit. You still have to roll, then at the end discard all double non-crit results.

an interesting way to phrase that.
since its based on real world outcomes, a scenario like it can occur.

>blindfold flip 2 coins, friend says 1 of the 2 was tails, doesnt tell u which.
>now using real world probability, what are the chances both were tails?

but, the point u make does show that it requires something that doesnt happen w/o intention.

>tfw there's a house fire and you try to run out the front door to escape, but because the door is moving towards you from a relative standpoint, your house flies in the other direction at the speed of a sprint and destroys the house behind you in a fiery explosion

Attached: 1200px-LetterB.svg.png (1200x1200, 19K)

>Check if the first hit is a crit AFTER already rolling the second hit

Attached: X7fQkrX.jpg (1200x1000, 166K)

We've been having this exact thread for years now. I wonder if the only reason these threads live is because Yea Forums is constantly filled with newfags or if people never get tired of arguing over this dumb shit.

Maybe its just the boredom because there is never any exciting threads on this board anyways besides during big gaming events or announcements.

>It exits the portal because the portal is moving.
I think you forget that the portal it exits is not moving.
>If I took a hula hoop and put it around your head...
Wow, hadn't heard that one before!
>The only reason this confuses you is because portals are magic holes in space that connect distant places
No, the only reason this confuses you is because you're still thinking that hula hoops are appropriate analogies for portals that move independently of one another.

Yes, because two noncrits is impossible, meaning any time you roll a noncrit the first time you are guaranteed a crit the 2nd time
No, that isn't how things work. You do not discard and redo impossible results

I just like getting people angry by saying it is B even though I know it's wrong going by the game and does not exist in real life at all.

Those things are not mutually exclusive. The scenario is hypothetical, but the premises are given.

and here is the obligatory "I'm an oldfag" post

Put a portal is a hula hoop, they are literal fantasy magic, so why not.

It wouldn't be any different if the 2nd roll was within the first if statement idiot

>cause the other one simply has a 50% chance of being heads as well
There is no "other" w/o a prior.
This statement alone backs up it matters which one it is, in order to get to the endresult you and i both agree with.

In that same real world scenario though, when the friend tells you that one of the coins is tails, it is impossible to get the outcome of Heads Heads because he already told me one is tails, see how this can't actually be replicated in real life?

it just works

I just like getting people angry by saying it is A even though I know it's wrong going by the game and does not exist in real life at all.

This. Imagine when the cube is halfway through the portal. Say the cube is one cubic foot. If the portal moves down by one inch in a tenth of a second, in that same tenth of a second, one inch of the cube will have to emerge out of the other portal, moving that half of the cube by one inch in that time.

It’s trivial too see that the cube has to leave at the same speed it enters, meaning when it has entirely emerged from the portal, the momentum will keep it moving quickly.

>meaning any time you roll a noncrit the first time you are guaranteed a crit the 2nd time
No you aren't you fucking brainlet. You only know one of them was a crit after the fact. If this is bait, then good job I guess.

thats the point of the question...
that you remove the heads/heads example.

or do you mean the crit version, where ppl use "guaranteed crits"?

The fact that you do roll one crit is the premise, but not the rule for rolling. The rule is that a hit has a 50% chance to be a crit.

Attached: 1543479476285.jpg (507x377, 34K)

Both and neither. It's a paradox. From Orange's perspective the cube is stationary, but from Blue's perspective the cube is moving towards it.
I came in here to post this and was plesantly surprised to already find it.

Yes you are retard. The problem says "ONE OF THE TWO IS A CRIT". You cannot get an outcome of two noncrits. If you get a noncrit the 1st time the only way to satisfy this condition is to be guaranteed a crit the 2nd time

That analogy makes no sense. The first portal is moving but the second one isnt, hence the cube in the first picture isnt moving but the second one must be.

I was hoping for something clever but you're literally just repeating yourself after I refuted your hula hoop analogy.

>Sees thread
>Knows he won't like the contents
>Opens thread anyway
>Clicks post reply
>Writes 3 sentences
>fills out captcha
>clicks Post

Wrong, the portal itself is exerting a force. If the cube is halfway through the portal, when the next inch goes through the portal, the volume already through the portal has to be moved outward by one inch. This movement has to be caused by force

this is why i kept asking people if the platform under the cube was swallowed up or not.
i guess this is a better example, despite the fact the dick is attached.

instead, put something on his lap, not attached, then ask the same question.

>Logically, what's going to happen when the cube exits the portal, is that it keeps moving
So, tell me where do you get that logic from?
You ignore game logic.
Real life logic doesn't work.

the whole thing is impossible and has no right answer you are overthinking bait

Portals are more fantasy than weebtrash

m8, you're trying to act like you're smart, but you're not. You think that by overthinking it and making up some conclusion you believe no one else has ever had, you have revealed some new knowledge and discovered the truth. Instead you're just making things up for the sake of wanting to think about it more.

The problem is already solved. The cube doesn't move except by gravity because gravity is the only force acting on it, so in terms of the portal games, A is the correct answer. This can be understood through basic physics but also proven through simulation.

Any other minutiae you want to try and argue over, like atoms and black holes, are just flaws in the very idea of portals, because news flash, they're science fiction.

Protip: The OP image is a troll image, B was always a troll answer, the point is to pretend you believe B to troll people, and trick retards into actually siding with you.

Anons the real problem with this question is that one portal is moving and one isnt. So if a moving portal is combined with an unmoving cube then the outcome would either be a moving portal and an unmoving cube or an unmoving portal but a moving cube.

Hence its B

>You cannot get an outcome of two noncrits.
No. You didn't. That's something else than you cannot.

Unironically made me into an A-fag.

Someone call Bill Nye!

Not him, but why is crit-non cirt producing a different result than non crit-crit?

WHAT

HAPPENS

IF THE PORTAL

STOPS HALFWAY

This is the same as thrusting your dick through the portal. If you thrust a cube through the portal it would fly off since it isnt attatched to anything.

>turning A-fag
imagine being in the wrong side of history.
disgusting.

>Both and neither. It's a paradox. From Orange's perspective the cube is stationary, but from Blue's perspective the cube is moving towards it.
Ah, but whilst the cube can be observed from two frames of reference, it still only objectively exists in one. Before entering the orange portal, it is in the one where it is stationary. After exiting the blue portal, it is in the one in which it was moving.

the portal moving doesn't matter at all. Portals connect two locations, if one is stationary then it remains stationary, there's no special effects on the momentum of things that pass through them.

If you can't wrap your brain around it imagine it like this

then half of the cube is on each end of the portal, if more weight is on the blue side it sides down to the edge of the portal

>10/10 B-fags can't answer THIS question!

>You ignore game logic.
Where did I do that?
>Real life logic doesn't work.
Logic is logic, it exists on a purely rational plane.

i posted that for the (you)s and it worked like a charm. Nothing works better than peak contrarianism

>Noncrit, noncrit occurances: 0

Attached: 1502949120601.jpg (177x219, 18K)

actual factual result

Attached: 1552398800030.png (809x509, 63K)

the answer is the same you fucking moron there is not change.
the truth, the only truth is B

Think of the probability tree for this problem. A 50-50 chance, with another 50-50 chance beneath each of the first's results. It's impossible to get one of the results on one of the paths. So all the 25% of rolls that would have been noncrit-noncrit go into noncrit-crit

good job user!

Attached: 3B21D717-B6FF-4D11-B26D-884F550427D4.jpg (1024x378, 34K)

>problem says "one of the two is a crit" (assuring it's impossible to have two noncrits)
>durrr ur stupid for having 0 noncrit, noncrit results

So it will be sheared apart at the atomic level as the part not yet through the portal remains stationary while the part emerging through the portal has the momentum of the moving portal applied to it?

>The problem is already solved.
Yes, it is, but in favour of B. You need to understand relative movement. Although at least one simulation also showed B. Guess what, it depends on how you simulate the physics because video games aren't real, so that's not a conclusive answer. But logic is. And that says B.

>imagine it like this
but that proves my point? The cube must be moving to leave the second portal in the first place.

arguing the exit portal is stationary is something most ppl dont catch, but the reason it doesnt matter if the end portal is moving or not, is because the entrance portal and exit portal are the same thing.
This is a paradox to begin with.

the hula hoop example is perfectly fine, because the "exit" can be stationary to the entrance by comparison, or stationary to us by comparison.
but in reality, the earth is moving in both cases, and the exit portal is never actually stationary.

if the cube entering is being compared to a stationary exit portal, than its safe to assume the "exit" of a hula hoop is stationary in comparison to the entrance part of it, and everything else is whats moving.

you'd have to apply the logic twice, rather than just once, and ignore the other.

Bless you.

>logic with magic portals

why don't they go into crit-non crit as well?

What if space time is stretched

God bless terry.
Terry is speaking to you o' lost one.

One half of the cube is obliged to keep moving whereas the other half is obliged to remain stationary. Depending on the cube's structural integrity it would either pull itself apart or be ejected from the blue portal at reduced speed.

That's still wrong.
Since you've already rolled both, and you always just check the first for when it's guaranteed not for both to be crits, you might as well not check.
The right thing to do would be to randomly choose a roll to always return a crit.

You flip two coins 100 times. Out of those, 25 are both heads, 25 are both tails, 25 are heads-tails, and 25 are tails-heads. I secretly jerk off during one of the sets of flips. After all the flips are done, I tell you that when I jerked off one of the flips was heads. What is the probability that both flips in the set were heads?

Portals apply momentum to things that pass through them. If a portal was on an airplane and the other on the ground and you stepped into it from the ground you'd be accelerated to the speed of the plane, you wouldn't step through then immediately be splattered against the back wall of the plane.

Because they don't have a noncrit as their first roll. Look at the source and you'll understand

>This is the same as thrusting your dick through the portal
Except it's not since your dick has no velocity and according to b your dick would just fly off your body since it would gain a bunch of momentum out of nowhere while the rest of your body won't.

That example is intended to show you exactly why it matters that the portal moves.

if your dick doesnt have momentum, how does it go from 1 cm through the portal to 5 cm through the portal? It HAS to move to leave the second portal.

>Portals apply momentum to things that pass through them.
No. The momentum of things that pass through them is preserved. Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out. Stationary thing goes in, stationary thing comes out.

I don't even know why I'm still explaining this, the question was answered by Portal 2 anyway. It has moving portals and proves B wrong.

Terry was too good for this world

Attached: AE7DAD1A-F8B4-4A31-9094-D0200E1C1DEC.gif (222x162, 1006K)

At least one of the crits != The first roll is a crit user.

refer to again.

You're abusing the reference frame. Relative velocity doesn't mean you get to arbitrarily choose where momentum comes from, it means that you have to observe carefully. You can accurately claim that relative to the portals it can appear the cube has momentum, but relative to basically everything else the cube has no momentum, and the portals (per Portal 1) does not affect momentum.

It's not. Read the problem again. Nowhere does it say that one of the rolls is predetermined a crit, it only says that you cannot roll two noncrits

>So all the 25% of rolls that would have been noncrit-noncrit go into noncrit-crit
This is where you go wrong. No, you simply cross out that part of the tree and tally the rest. 1/3 possible outcomes are the desired one.

>how does it go from 1 cm through the portal to 5 cm through the portal?
It doesn't because A fags dicks are all under 5cm long

Yep. It's dumb. You have to calculate them all separately. That's the entire reason this retard has 2x the NC than he does the CN, because he rolls a N and decides that the second is always a C, and it's not. We're only concerned with results that have a C, but that doesn't mean that every single time you roll a N for the first roll you're going to get a C for the second. It's still 50%. Basically the dataset he's produced is flawed from the start because he's an idiot, and you are too.

But logic dictates that moving through a door, even if that door is moving, has no bearing on you.

stationary is relative. Your argument makes no sense whatsoever with relativity and the plane analogy perfectly proves that.

>it only says that you cannot roll two noncrits
No it doesn't, all it says is that that didn't happen in this particular outcome. Read the question again carefully.

The entry portal moves, and passes the location of the cube, causing it to appear on the other side. The cube, now on an angle due to the location of the exit portal, falls to the ground due to gravity.

Problem never states that.
No you do not.
>That's the entire reason this retard has 2x the NC than he does the CN, because he rolls a N and decides that the second is always a C, and it's not.
It is. The problem assures it. Reread the problem

Two videos have been posted on this thread that show how it works in game. That's the correct answer techinically.
The question is kinda paradoxical so assuming any answer is silly.

What are all of the vertical lines on the top left area? Why are there two blue portals and only one orange one? What does A. and B. mean?

No, that's the beauty of it. It will behave as if it were moving all along, which is consistent with the frame of reference it's in. Because it's all relative and the cube is exiting the portal at the same rate as it enters, every part of it will maintain its relative position to the other parts.

>Normies find out about him
>Terry gets more paranoid
>Dies
I fucking hate Normies so much.

>causing it to appear on the other side
see this is the part that you dont understand, it HAS to move at the speed of the portal to even "appear" in the first place.

>The problem assures it
POST FACTUM you idiot, not beforehand. The rolls are INDEPENDENT of each other. Answer , now.

>if your dick doesnt have momentum, how does it go from 1 cm through the portal to 5 cm through the portal?
It goes from 1cm to 5cm thanks to the portal moving, it's like a fucking hula hoop. Where would your dick's momentum come from when no force is pushing it?

It's a speedy thing going in because the blue portal isn't moving.
Frame of reference goes by the thing that isn't moving - it makes more sense if you think of the box coming out of the blue portal, rather than going into the orange one. Put literally any object that would fit in your palm, raise your palm quickly and then stop. What happens to it? It would leap out of your hand. That's essentially what's happening, assuming the orange portal is moving fast enough.

I read the problem. The issue is you're forcing the results to match the outcome, rather than taking the results relevant to you, dumb dumb.

I've read it over many times. "ONE OF THE TWO HITS IS A CRIT" Are you now saying this doesn't mean it's impossible to get two noncrits?

"ONE OF THE TWO HITS IS A CRIT" guarantees you can't get two noncrits

But the portals coming in contact with each other would kill the portal. It would just be A, but with the portals poofing on contact. The piston doesn't touch the cube, since the cube goes through the portal. THIS is where the hulahoop comparison comes in.

>normies
Yeah you normalfags are a blight on this world

MOVING PORTAL + UNMOVING OBJECT RESULTS IN EITHER

MOVING PORTAL + UNMOVING OBJECT (Left)

OR

UNMOVING PORTAL + MOVING OBJECT (Right)

See Its B.

But at least someone else carried my torch and showed everyone the light. It could've been you.

No, dude. If you cut a hole in a piece of paper and move it over something, the thing didn't move, the paper did. Yet it appeared on the other side. Whoa, how is that possible, the thing must have moved! No, the PORTAL moved. I really really hope you're not serious and just trolling me.

its not the normies who killed him you fucking retard.
also what Yea Forums and others did to him, such as catfishing him was more damaging to terry than what normies ever did to him.

>the hula hoop example is perfectly fine, because the "exit" can be stationary to the entrance by comparison, or stationary to us by comparison.
But not both, as it is with the portals in the problem. And that is why it doesn't work.
>but in reality, the earth is moving in both cases, and the exit portal is never actually stationary.
The issue is relative movement. This is why A becomes an even bigger problem if you think about it. With B this is not a problem.
>you'd have to apply the logic twice, rather than just once, and ignore the other.
That's exactly the point. You have to recognise the cube is both moving and not moving relative to the portal, depending on which side you're looking from.

It assures it beforehand though.
>answer this
25%

the hula hoop analogy doesnt work because a hula hoop cant be moving and not moving at the same time like our portal in our example is.

when is that ever established? if you tried putting a portal on a plane it wouldn't be able to stick because the plane is moving and the only thing in the entire series that you shoot a portal at that is moving is the moon

I'm not forcing anything, the problem's conditions force it

How would that work on Volvo's Sauce engine tho? Did anyone ever managed to recreate this scenario in-game?

Attached: thinking.jpg (1920x1080, 157K)

Nice try, faggot. Give me a (You) and I'll entertain your bait.

Portals disappear on moving platforms

How can it be 25% when it's 25/75?

>Stationary thing goes in, stationary thing comes out.
This is a logical impossibility unless both portals are moving.

But what transfers the momentum from the portal to the cube?

Are you fucking retarded? Our portal is moving AND not moving at the same time. Your paper/hula hoop analogy doesnt work. It would only work if the second portal was also moving. see

...

Did you ever manage to read the fucking thread?

Relative to everything else on the other side of the portal, which is as much "everything else" as the other "everything else", the cube does have that momentum. Your problem is you don't look beyond the portal.

Portals don't seem to work on moving surfaces, so I guess it's impossible to test

Nothing. Portals don't transfer momentum. They are no different than a doorway.

>It's a speedy thing going in because the blue portal isn't moving.
No
>it makes more sense if you think of the box coming out of the blue portal, rather than going into the orange one
this is what you're fundamentally misunderstanding. The box is not actually going in or coming out of anywhere, it is not in motion. The orange portal and the platform it's on is the only thing that moves. The box changes positions because portals are holes in space that lead from one place to another, so when the hole moves past the box, the box appears on the other side of the hole - but the box did not experience any motion. No forces acted upon the box, except gravity which makes it tumble to the floor once it finds itself at an angle on the other side.

Does this make sense with real life physics? no, obviously not, because portals are science fiction. But if you want to know how it works in the game world it's A. There's nothing else to be said about it

Apply that logic to a door that's both moving and stationary at the same time, see how far that gets you.

the cube pushes itself. One atom of the cube is through the portal and is being pushed forward by the next atom coming through the portal. The cube is speeding up the moment it passes through. Easiest way to imagine it would be if it was 2 cubes stacked ontop of eachother. Once the first cube is through it gets moved by the second cube coming through and gains speed

>t. too stupid to read the first reply

But it doesn't. The cube isn't moving in that image. The portal is.

>No you do not.
Well, YOU do not, but that is why you are wrong.

>This is a logical impossibility unless both portals are moving.
orange portal falls down, covers half the (stationary) box then stops
Half the box is now sticking out of the blue portal, still stationary
Stationary thing went in, now it is coming out
Can you explain this? Of course not, because you don't get how portals work.

I mean, you're the one making a velocity measurement from a moving platform.

A doorway cant have 2 different velocities at the same time. It doesnt work like that.

It gets me standing on the other side of the door. Since the moving side passes over me, it leaves me stationary fully emerged on the stationary side.

B is like saying if you were in a room being lowered over a cube through a hole in the floor, the cube should fly upwards when you stop because it looked like it was moving to you.

No, because it doesn't say "one in two hits is always a crit". It's giving you information about one set of two crits.

Please be trolling
the cube is not moving in that image, in either case
It's fucking made to prove A
please be trolling

>b fags

Attached: 1524262429982.png (2000x700, 30K)

Man you're literally ignoring what people are saying to you and repeating yourself. This is either Baitsville, USA or I'm talking to a real black-hole brainlet. Good job making yourself look like an idiot I guess.

Yes, you also can't seperate their entrance/exit without extending the distance required to pass through them. A portal is just a doorway where the entrance/exit are in two different spots, despite taking the same effort/distance to pass between those spots as if it were a standard door.

Wrong. There is the kinetic energy of the bottom half of the cube trying to enter the same space as the top half. Given that it enters the space at x speed, that means it gets pushed at x speed, therefore it has that much kinetic energy.

If you have a ball, and you move you forcibly pick it up and move it to a new spot very quickly, then let it go, it goes flying.

I never suggested the cube wasnt moving relative to the portal.
(The exit portal is moving towards the cube as much as its not equally.)

So if the exit is moving towards the cube, and not, at the same time, then the cube is moving towards the entrance portal, while also not, at the same time.

This is where the paradox is.
They would cancel eachother out equally.
Moving portals are an even bigger absurd abstract idea, than portals are to begin with. Actual warping to locations isnt done through portals in real life examples.
Plus the atoms are technically in 2 positions are the same time, to begin with, so is it really warping?

back on track, its a paradox, saying A or B is retarded, since there needs to be some made up rules to extrapolate off of.

How can B-eta's ever recover?

/thread

This is the collapse of the wave function and thereby achieving probability of 1.

A portal is creating an aperture in space-time across two points. It's velocity has absolutely NO BEARING WHATSOEVER, on the object IT is interacting with, IF the object in question has no momentum whatsoever.

As such, in said pic, B is the correct answer; because you can interchange the colors at any point and the end result will be identical.

>portals are sci-fi
Congratulations, you now understand why all the B-tards arguing about relativity for the last few hundred posts are braindead.

They can, but I don't think it's explored if they can move on the axis they are facing. Portal 2 has a puzzle where you have moving squares to cut down pipes of neurotoxin with a laser I think, but those portals are moving on the same plane as the wall they are on.

B? more like BTFO

It's B.

What happens when another object (or in this case, part of an object) tries to enter the same space as another extremely quickly?

They collide and the first object (top portion of the cube) collides with the other object (bottom half) trying to enter its space, and by the laws of physics, either compression happens, or energy is converted to kinetic.

Refute this, or you're a retard.

>At least one is a crit
And this is to be decided at rolltime, not post-rolling
You're making a modification conditional by only correcting after rolling. The modification should be there from the start.
Even if we go by the premise that the roll wasn't predetermined, imagine that you heard a sound that plays and doesn't repeat for a while when you crit. You know that your double attack scored a crit, and so if hit 1 was the crit, there's a 50% chance of the other one being a crit too and vice versa.

this.

Cube have no kinetic energy

But nothing is moving the cube. This goes back to Hoolahoop ville all over again.
>There is the kinetic energy of the bottom half of the cube trying to enter the same space as the top half
At no point does the cube magically try to implode into itself. If you put a cube halfway through a hoolahoop the cube doesn't suddenly rocket off into space.

What object is colliding with the box.

>fold the universe up like a piece of paper to connect two points
>weird shit happens from the perspective on things stuck only seeing the sheet of paper

You can't just say "it is stationary, therefore it is stationary, explain that". If the cube is sticking out, then it moved out of the portal. If we ignore for a moment that B would've already taken place at this point and catapulted the cube (perhaps, in this instance, the portal wasn't moving quick enough), then NOW the portals are both stationary and the cube is at rest halfway between them and it acts just like it normally does in such a situation, that is, no, of course it doesn't move any further. I don't know why you thought this would stump me.

>The cube literally cannot exit the portal if it doesn't move out of it exactly as quickly as it went into it.
You're right. And it went in with no momentum, so it exits with no momentum.

if the doorway has 2 velocities at the same time, then so does the object going through it.
Remember, its also in the same world as its entering into.
This is the paradox.
Both the portal and cube have 2 different velocities.

Why don't you answer where the dick's momentum would come from? There's no force pushing it when it goes through the portal that would shoot it into the sky.
If you hold out your arm and let a moving portal go around it your arm wouldn't gain a ton of momentum and rip off your body. It would only be affected by the gravity on the other side of the portal

You should have let him have his moment of glory

But in that image B portrays a similar result to A from the original problem, but ignoring the gravity on the other side.

>The box is not actually going in or coming out of anywhere
>portals are holes in space that lead from one place to another
Afags can't help but contradict themselves because they are trying to describe movement whilst denying that it is movement.

Wouldn't the portal be big enough to take the pillar too

So you're saying that if we put a point of reference at the top of the cube, and it MOVES through space at 10m/s, it will just magically stop at some point?

An object moving through space is a form of energy. You can't refute this. How does the object moving through space at 10m/s not constitute as having energy?

Silly third dimensional beings trying to understand portals

/thread.

Attached: Proof for B.png (809x509, 36K)

You're using words without understanding them.

strawpoll.me/17595132

>If the cube is sticking out, then it moved out of the portal.
No
The portal moved.
>If we ignore for a moment that B would've already taken place at this point and catapulted the cube
Ahahaha holy shit you can't be serious. Come on now, for real. You're just putting on, right? You think that a portal that moves halfway down a cube, then stops, would have already "catapulted" the cube out the other side? Have you ever played Portal? Please, explain what force acts on the cube to propel it upwards like magic to escape the gravity keeping it on the platform. I need to hear more.

Attached: 1347584932856.jpg (3840x2160, 688K)

Both happen and now you have two cubes. You never seem to quite see the moment it happens, though.

What does that have to do with the stationary cube in this problem? Are you seriously arguing that circling something with a hoolahoop will propel it off into the distance? If it worked like that we'd have hoolahoop powered everything.

literally didnt play the game

the whole question is a paradox claiming both the portal and cube are moving, and yet not moving at the same time.
to suggest a or b, is to contradict this rule. (placing priority over which one they want to see moving, and which they want to see stationary)

The cube isn't in motion, even though the cube exists in a new place because of the portal. The space around it was in motion. This is what is nonsensical about portals and why they don't work if you apply real-life physics, you can't magically go from one place to another without motion. But with portals you can, that's the point. You need to grasp this to understand why there's no argument to be found for B.

Its phrased in such a retarded way that you can not get a clear answer
Is the "One of the hits is always a crit" an actual information about the problem?
Because if so its 50%, one will always crit so fuck that you just roll a 50% once and it either crits or it does not

>They would cancel eachother out equally.
No, not really. The cube merely transitions between frames of reference. The cube appears to be moving when you're looking at it through the stationary portal, but if the orange portal stops moving towards it before it actually gets to it, it's not going to suddenly fly up. Because it hasn't actually crossed over into the other frame of reference yet. But if they cancelled each other out, then this would already be cause for a paradox before the cube even crosses the threshold.

Red falls due to gravity, Black follows suit. There's no propelling.

As the cube is entering the portal, the lower parts of the cube are forcibly attempting to enter space in which more of the cube already exists. The fallacy of everyone in these threads is that they fail to consider the cube as a conglomeration of matter instead of a single object. As matter tries to enter the space that other matter inhabits, a collision happens.

If you push a ball with your hand from the back side, why does the front side move? That's exactly the logic.

???
If only the red cube goes through it just falls due to the gravity, the black cube stays where it is.
If both go through they both fall due to gravity.
Where the hell do Bfags even get the "flying away" shit from? How stupid can you be holy shit

i have hard time describing it to my brainlet friends but i guess they eventually got this.

So imagine this cube is 10 meter long pole.
Portal is moving towards it at 10m/s
So when the portal starts covering the pole, pole disappears in one second
And now, we know from in game observations (because we are talking about portals from portal game) that there is no "time debt" during teleporting, while you enter the portal you are on the other side instantly, there is no buffor between
Thus there is no buffor, an object that entered blue must immediately appear at orange end
So if the pole disappeared in blue portal in one second it must appear at the other side in one second, therefore if the pole moved by 10 meters in 1 second it has velocity v=s/t

so the question isn't how can moving portal add velocity to stationary object but what could stop the object that appeared on the other side while inertia force is still a thing.

AND
has momentum=mass * velocity
So we can assume when the portal stops halfway if the velocity of portal is big enough pole can be sucked into portal if the momentum on the other side is big enough to pull off remaining mass
you A guys are very dense

sorry for my ESL english.

i literally posted the right an swer here, it eats the whole pillar, which falls because of no support
it doesnt just stop at the block its clearly bigger than

This is like coming into a thread about FTL travel, how it could theoretically work, and the implications of it and declaring yourself smarter than everyone for pointing out it's scifi.

In fact it's exactly the same because portals are just a way of FTL travel, come to think of it.

you added new information, which is why theres confusion on A and B to begin with.
the original question doesnt specify if the portal stops at the platform, or swallows up the platform, and keeps going.
not that A or B have been fully determined by ur version.
(plus u keep thinking of objects as stationary.)

Nothing is pushing the cube. The cube having a doorway / hoolahoop / portal between points moved onto it. They're no different to each other in how they function, beyond the entrance and exit of the portal not needing to be physically connected.

Are portals just folds creating in the universe to make two points into one, but we are unable to comprehend it from your perspective?

>The portal moved.
I assure you that the portal it came out of did not move.
>You think that a portal that moves halfway down a cube, then stops, would have already "catapulted" the cube out the other side? Have you ever played Portal?
This scenario never occurs in Portal.
>Please, explain what force acts on the cube to propel it upwards like magic to escape the gravity keeping it on the platform.
Its own momentum.

red cant fall before black pushes it if the portal moves fast enough

And being a B-fag is like going into a thread about how FTL travel could theoretically work, and claiming it already works and you know how, just hear out my analogy about relativity and hula hoops.

The cube ceases to be stationary when it enters the portal at this rate. I'm willing to bed the reason you're acting so stupidly is because you're imagining that the cube "teleports" to the other side of the portal. It does not. Upon entering the portal, the cube is displaced very quickly as more of the cube enters the portal. This is by definition, kinetic energy.

No one has ever been able to refute this in any of these threads. Everyone uses their Physics 101 knowledge to say "well it doesn't have forces durr"

Attached: 1388535441261.jpg (717x960, 217K)

>it exits with no momentum
>out of a stationary portal

Anyway, that's not what I said, was it? I said, it moves out as quickly as it moved in. And that is exactly how quickly the portal was going. You're trying to get around this fact of logic by repeating your axiom like a mantra.

>but we are unable to comprehend it from YOUR perspective

I knew 4th dimensional beings posted on Yea Forums.

Because trying to answer the "implications of FTL travel" that breaks usual physics using usual physics is retarded. The answer might be A, B, both or bananas, but you're it's not explainable by the laws we have.

its a paradox yes.
the :"at least one" can either be direct information about it, or a hint about a question for you to solve.

>The cube appears to be moving when you're looking at it through the stationary portal
what about from the perspective of the world below the cube? (if you only consider one perspective, u forget that there's 2 contradictory perspectives)

The fact is, which one gets priority is the one that corresponds with which side of the portals the cube is on. So they both get equal priority but at different points in time.

>Moving through a portal takes zero concious effort. A step is a step no matter how far apart the two portals are.

>What is relativity?
it doesn't matter if you move towards the hoola hoop 50MHP or if the hoola hoop is moving towards you 50MPH, depending on where you look from you will always "exit" the hoola hoop at 50MPH

In the OP example if I look into the portal on the right TO ME the cube is moving towards me even if from the cubes perspective its standing still

the exit portal isnt stationary.
it appears to be stationary (like the earth), but nothing is stationary, otherwise ur suggesting the cube is also stationary.

OK then A fags. Tell me why the red cube WOULDNT be shoved to the right once its outside of the portal? It has to be shoved. And guess what, this is the EXACT same thing as the problem with the One cube. the cube that is COMING through the portal is pushing the cube that is already through the portal, hence why it gains speed.

Attached: Double Cube Problem.png (809x509, 31K)

>This is like coming into a thread about FTL travel, how it could theoretically work
The problem is that people are applying real life physics to a problem that is impossible with real life physics. It's a paradoxical question, like asking if the number 6 is green or not.
It doesn't make sense.
If you want an answer you'll have to establish the rules that allow portals to work and then work it out through those.

>you can't magically go from one place to another without motion. But with portals you can, that's the point.
Actually, you still can't. With two stationary portals, you will have to move yourself to get to the other side. And you cannot stop moving in between. There is no in between.

so the half way point, both are equal priority right? then the cube isnt moving through the portal if it doesnt have priority at the half way point.

also, before entering the portal, its still approaching the portal.

you're making up rules to try and fit a narrative you're biasly wanting in your head.

>It has to be shoved
[Citation needed]

That's not how portals work in this context though. They're not teleporting, or being displaced. They are identical to a doorway that doesn't make sense. The entrance and exit just aren't physically connected. Just like standing between a doorway doesn't make you fly off, standing between two portals doesn't propel you either. Unless you're trying to argue the semantics of all movement (even good old standard walking) is displacement? But then what is the point of that argument?

>what about from the perspective of the world below the cube?
That is relevant for as long as the cube remains in that frame of reference. It is why the cube doesn't fly off if the portal stops above it. Only by actually crossing over into the new frame of reference does the cube factually acquire the apparent properties associated with it from that frame of reference.

Again, gravity drops red first. Black falls on top of it. It wouldn't be pushed out, any horizontal movement would be due to the oddity of gravity pushing on its sides simultaneuosly due to the perpendicular shift of the portal.

>"One of the hits is always a crit"
It doesn't say that. It says at least one of the two hits was a crit, meaning only in that particular instance. The chance for any given hit of being a crit is always 50%. There's nothing wrong with the wording of the question.

If the cube has no momentum, what happens if someone holds his hand infront of the second portal to stop it? The cube has to move OUT of the portal at the speed of the moving portal, the doorframe/hula hoop analogy doesnt work

neither are right cuz those portals are impossible to exist in reality. if its in a game you can do either who cares

that makes no sense. How is red falling down if the first portal moves so fast that red has no time to fall?

That's nice and all, but the problem is only examining instances where at least one of the hits is a crit.

>about how FTL travel could theoretically work, and claiming it already works and you know how, just hear out my analogy about relativity and hula hoops.
Well, yes, there are in fact theories about how it could work and what exactly would be necessary for it to work and what would have to be different from our current understanding of physics (say, the existence of moveable portals). This is stuff real scientists have written papers on.
>Because trying to answer the "implications of FTL travel" that breaks usual physics using usual physics is retarded.
No, not really. Lots of sci fi has explored the implications of travelling at relativistic speeds for our perception of time, for example. That's breaking physics in one way to explore how it might work another way.