So Yea Forums?

Irrelevant. It’s just an opening falling on a stationary object. The object will stay at rest unless force is applied. There is no force being applied

SPEEDY THING GOES IN SPEEDY THING GOES OUT.

fuck you
you RETAIN your speed

if you go IN at 3, you come OUT at fucking 3.
asshole. no IRL physics shit, i played the damn game.

The post to which you replied is just stating facts. I'm sorry that you don't understand Galilean relativity. Perhaps read a physics textbook instead of getting mad.

>if you go IN at 3, you come OUT at fucking 3.
Velocity is always measured with respect to a chosen frame of reference.

If, in one frame of reference, something goes in at 3 m/s to the left and comes out at 3 m/s to the right, then in another frame of reference, it goes in at 2 m/s to the left and comes out at 4 m/s to the right.

If you're about to tell us that there's one absolute frame of reference which just happens to be the one in which you are stationary, then you should go back to 5th grade.

FUCK YOU

if i play portal, asshole, i have two portals NEXT TO EACH OTHER, im NOT GONNA GO FASTER GOING IN ONE AND COMING OUT THE OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FUCK V!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Literally answered by a physicist
youtu.be/531FKCzTX40?t=2675

>ending to portal 2
>shoot portal at moon
>come out other side relative to other portal as if neither were moving
>moon moves at hundreds of miles per hour relative to earth, and thus the portal on it was too
>the moment you exit portal, you are moving hundreds of miles per hour relative to the portal you entered

A-theists BTFO.

Are you even trying to understand what I just wrote?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_invariance
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_frame_of_reference

Velocity is always preserved yes. It goes in at x it comes out at x.
This has been confirmed.

Attached: portal_momentum_a.png (1545x959, 140K)

Everytime I enter a topic like this it’s fuckin clear that no one knows what the laws of motion are

you don't need a physics degree to understand that passing an object through another object without the first object ever making contact with the second will NOT result in the first one speeding up.

Imagine putting a hula hoop over a ball.
Will the ball suddenly go flying up? NO

Depends on how hard it hits coming down and if the platform is stationary.
More than likely a.

Thats the side I agree with numb nuts. Don’t come at me with that aggressive shit. I’ll fuck your sister

Not if I fuck her first

yeah well I like you, come over to my house and fuck my sister

A.

Attached: old movie.gif (350x267, 374K)

>Earth is constantly rotating at a rate of .000694 RPMs
>Earth is revolving around the sun at a rate of 107,000 km/h
>Our Solar System is revolving around the Milky Way galaxy at a rate of 828,000 km/hr
>That one moment in Portal 2 where you need to topple the neurotoxin generator (youtube.com/watch?v=EChO5ZD2tHs)
Do you even play games?

Attached: don't care.png (259x212, 107K)

The Earth is flat.

A, portals preserve momentum and no momentum is transferred. B is what you'd expect from the orange portal's reference frame, but that's not what the cube experiences.

Attached: 1531333429944.png (457x550, 476K)

ITT: brainlets who never did physics past high school

>the correct answer is A. The object's momentum is conserved across the transition between spaces, but gravity on the blue side of the portal will start affecting the object when it begins to pass through the portal.
The wording of this email confuses me a bit.

He says it's A, and his reason is that "momentum is conserved ... but gravity ... will start affecting the object".

Analyze the sentence structure, the "but" in particular.

1. Momentum is conserved.
2. BUT, gravity.
3. Therefore it's A.

It's like he's saying B represents conservation of momentum but A is what you get when gravity is added. If that's what he's saying, then he totally misunderstands the problem, because B isn't supposed to be the gravity-free option. Gravity exists in both; nobody ever said that the cube in B will never hit the ground.

You're overthinking it. He's saying that momentum is conserved through the portal, but it will still slightly change direction once it goes through (because gravity obviously).

Attached: 8c3.jpg (496x496, 134K)

By "change direction" you mean the fact that it plops onto the ground? So the "but gravity" is just his explanation of the fact that it falls? If that's what he meant then I guess it makes sense.

Yeah basically.

>B is what you'd expect from the orange portal's reference frame, but that's not what the cube experiences.
The thing about frames of reference is that the laws of physics are the same in all of them. If B happens in the orange portal's frame of reference, then it happens in the cube's frame of reference too. Describing a problem from a different frame of reference doesn't magically teleport you to an alternate universe in which different events take place. It just changes the way velocities are measured.

>claims momentum is conserved when portals don't conserve momentum
>ignores the fact that the cube must move, at least a distance equal to its own length, in order to emerge from the stationary blue portal
I'm sure the guy is a fine programmer but, he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to physics, and he hasn't put a lot of thought into this problem.

Attached: portals don't conserve momentum.png (752x572, 19K)

He means the energy you dum dum.

We're measuring true motion, which is in reference to the Earth, dipshit

Is this bait?

Portals don't conserve energy either. Proving that they don't conserve energy is even easier than proving that they don't conserve momentum.

Attached: conservationofenergy.png (450x500, 21K)

>true motion, which is in reference to the Earth
Thanks for making this bait so obvious. If it were more convincing, I might have been tricked into giving you a serious reply.

Do you not understand how true motion and relative motion work?

Attached: copper.png (570x473, 473K)

If I actually believed that you were this ignorant then I'd tell you to read a book.

No really, do you actually know how true motion and relative motion work?

Just in case you're not baiting, I'll just tell you that there's no such thing as "true motion" as opposed to "relative motion" which is why you won't be able to find a physics textbook which claims otherwise.

Please do try to find one, though. Because, if you really believe that motion is "true" only if measured with respect to the little rock on which you happen to live, then reading literally any introductory physics textbook will set you straight.

Attached: AfagsBTFO.png (1714x788, 203K)