Aperture Science wants to remind you, that you can't put Portals on moving walls. Thanks. Edit: "Could you guys stop commenting the same stuff on my two year old comment."

@JakeNOTHING

4 жыл бұрын

Daniel Kröber I was looking for this comment xD it's been a very long while since I played the game, but I remember you are told it's not possible to place portals on moving surfaces, and if the surface with a portal starts moving the portal just fades

@rjrafol275

4 жыл бұрын

He referenced this in 0:55 . He is under the assumption "what if we can put it on a moving platform"

@GoudaBug

4 жыл бұрын

Except for that part near the end of Portal 2 where you put a portal in a moving surface?

@BlockSaver

4 жыл бұрын

@@GoudaBug right, the section where you had to cut the neurotoxin tubes with the lasers. Sadly, there's no way to actually go through the portals without console commands, but I'd assume it would be the same result as the portal moving down: no physical objects allowed.

@dpdug6961

4 жыл бұрын

What if the portal was a machine and was just pushed?

1: Put two portals on ceiling 2: Put a cube half way through 3: Gravity pulls on both sides equally therefore the cube doesn't fall 4: Profit

@colingreen1006

4 жыл бұрын

You would need to *perfectly* line it up though.

@BentoEmanuel

4 жыл бұрын

At this point it depends if the cup is half full or half empty

@alarkabhopale8930

4 жыл бұрын

@@colingreen1006 that too it should have uniform distribution of mass

@user-um7fw6bl2e

4 жыл бұрын

Umm you tried to out think the channel that is about physics so for that a sitting cat cannot sit

@MrKassNova

4 жыл бұрын

That is actually a very good thought experiment. Kudos.

my physics teacher (slightly suggested by me since we were both gamers and I was the one who provided him a copy of the game to play) used Portals related lessons several times to explain concept like inertia or the meaning of accumulated and static momentum He used this problem in one of his lessons, and was the funniest one imho, since the class was very interested in this problem and came up with a lot of solutions for both option A and B

@Fr33mx

8 ай бұрын

how can it be anything but A if no forces are applied to the cube other than the gravitational force of the planet that changes when cube comes out of the other end resulting in it just ploping out?

@zRuSh_XraY

8 ай бұрын

@@Fr33mxyess!! Im thinking the same thing. If nothing but gravity is moving the box why would it fling up like that

@bigshot103

7 ай бұрын

@@zRuSh_XraYbecause as layer of the cube come out of the blue portal they will push the layer before them out as fast as new layers are forming which is the same as the orange portal’s speed. The orange portal makes the most scenes as the reference frame (thing the speed is measured based on) because the environment does not even need to be there for the experiment.

@zRuSh_XraY

7 ай бұрын

@@bigshot103 with that logic… if a door flies past me standing still… i get launched at supersonic speeds fo no reason…? Cus thats the pov of the box. Nothing makes the box move since nothing is aplying any force to it. (Exept gravity ofc, hence the flop)

@ThisIsntAYoutuber

4 ай бұрын

@@zRuSh_XraY You’re missing the part where the rest of the world behind the door is also moving towards you in the case of portals. Your analogy doesn’t work because you’re only accounting for the door. If a portal is approaching you, the REST OF THE UNIVERSE behind the portal is also “approaching you.” A normal door does not “take” everything else with it, portals do.

if a portal in this game's rules, as I have understood, is in a surface and it starts moving, the portal disappear instantly

@clover266

Жыл бұрын

except in one level of portal 2. where you can place in a moving surface when ||you and wheatley are cutting the neurotoxin supply|| although there is no way for the player to enter the portal

@marengo6990

Жыл бұрын

you can enable movable portals in console

@ajgumpper

Жыл бұрын

@@marengo6990 how?

@localschizo

Жыл бұрын

@@marengo6990 necc

@localschizo

Жыл бұрын

@@ajgumpper necc

There's only one way to address this issue: _Portal 3._ _Which in itself will cause a paradox because Valve don't count to three._

@ajpearl2075

4 жыл бұрын

But half life three is coming out

@darkfurno8990

4 жыл бұрын

What is they prank us and cancel it on the day that it’s supposed to be released on

@supernova5434

4 жыл бұрын

STOP! you almost triggered the energy black hole that operates at the higgs field

@WilderPoo

4 жыл бұрын

They count to Alyx instead

@camelCased

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe it will not be half life 3 but half of 3 life, so that is half life 1.5.

"Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out."

@federicostrippoli7706

3 жыл бұрын

Unrated comment

@warpedmine9682

3 жыл бұрын

Speedy portal sucks something in shoots like cannon

@crazynachos4230

3 жыл бұрын

But the cube isn't moving relative to the exit so it shouldn't be moving relatively when it comes out

@warpedmine9682

3 жыл бұрын

@@crazynachos4230 but thats the thing the portal gives the energy to the cube shooting it out of the outside like a cannon

@giordihero

3 жыл бұрын

@@warpedmine9682 that's not how physics works tho, there is no force being applied to the cube, which means it cannot acquire velocity by Newton's first law. The Portal doesn't apply force, it's just a hole in space. The result would be the same as if the portal was just a wall with a hole in it.

Years ago, I was trying to program a small 2-D platformer game that had a mechanic where a user exiting one side of the screen would reappear on the opposite side (same with top to bottom). I tried adding an extra mechanic where the user could resize the game frame to solve puzzles and I ran into this same question. I realized that I had accidentally backed into creating a Portal style game in 2D with moving portals. In terms of physics, the proper answer is that the object leavers the exit portal with the speed and acceleration it had RELATIVE to the entrance portal. And that speed and acceleration is relative to the exit portal (not the environment). While it makes for an interesting thought experiment, it creates a lot of problems for a programmer. For example, if the user is shrinking the game frame, the portals are moving toward each other. An object entering a portal gets a speed boost from both the entrance AND the exit portals (because they are moving toward each other). If a user allows the player to go through the portal several times while shrinking the screen, the user will accelerate each time, until the player is going so fast that the frame rate of the program can't keep up. This creates weird problems with the collision engine (player is moving so fast they pass straight through solid objects) and the rendering engine (player is moving so fast that it creates an optical illusion where it looks like they are moving backward). After breaking my brain on this for a while, I realized why portals really aren't allowed to move - it creates physical possibilities that are impossible to replicate with a computer. I ended up abandoning the project because the physics was not something that could be simulated with a computer. I'm guessing that the developers of Portal had these same issues, which is why the portals can't be placed on moving surfaces.

@ka-boom2083

9 ай бұрын

Do you have any published games that I can play? I want to see what kind of games you’ve made 😊

@bradleywalker8642

8 ай бұрын

There's already a game similar to what you're describing, about wrapping around the screen edges. Look up "Four Sided Famtasy". I got 100% completion on it. Enjoy ...

@Lttlemoi

6 ай бұрын

You could always try to dampen any speed above the maximum natural speed that your character can attain by themselves without portals and call it simulated wind resistance.

Consider what you would see looking into the exit portal. You would essentially see the ground pushing the cube out of it. When you think about it like that, it seems like it would have to be relative to the object and the entry portal.

@SkyeBerryJam

9 ай бұрын

I'd think of it like slamming down a ring around a wooden cube. Except the ring is now in two seperate places. Box go plop

@ahrengroesch8774

9 ай бұрын

@@SkyeBerryJam in the ring plopping down scenario The exit portal is moving opposite of the object exiting it canceling out the momentum. Imagine you have your exit portal on a wall and you're standing right next to it. Looking into it. The entrance portal is coming down at the box very fast so what you see is the box coming at you very fast. The box goes through the portal slams into you and sends you flying. Speedy thing go in. Speedy thing come out. It doesn't matter that everything else on the other side of the portal was stationary in reference to the box or the none of it went through the portal. The box was speedy going in so it must be speedy coming out. When a portal is moving literally everything is speedy relative to the portal.

@SkyeBerryJam

9 ай бұрын

@@ahrengroesch8774 I mean if we want to get really technical I think none of these things happen and we need to know how objects interact with the edge of portals/how gravity works for something with its two halves on opposite ends of a portal

@ahrengroesch8774

9 ай бұрын

@@SkyeBerryJam I am dying for someone to get technical with me on the topic of portal thought experiments. On interactions with the edges of portals, I lean towards it working effectively like it's just a plain hole in a flat surface. I see a portal less as teleporting something that goes through it, and more like creating a normal man sized hole in a wall/ceiling/floor that has another universe on the other side of it that is also the same universe from a different direction. I think you could grab the inside edge of a portal just like you could stick your hand through and hold onto a hole in anything. On gravity, it being described as the bending of space time, and a portal seeming to be connected tears in space time, I lean towards gravity from either side stopping at the portal. Thus if you were half way through it you would be pulled or pushed in both directions. So if both portals were on the floor you could float there feeling pressure in the middle of yourself. Or if both were on a ceiling it would feel like you were being pulled in two. I believe this is a plausible explanation explain of the behavior observed in the game. If you think none of the video's or my explanations thus far is how it would work I'm dying to know your ideas.

@Lorentz_Driver

9 ай бұрын

Okay but what you see and what is happening are not the same thing.

To quote GLaDOS from Test chamber 10, "Momentum, a function of mass and velocity, is conserved between portals. In layman's terms: speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out."

@trash9378

5 жыл бұрын

So what happens when a stationary thing goes in? A stationary thing can't come out

@haroldsaxon1075

5 жыл бұрын

@@trash9378 yes it can. Replace the term portal with hole. The hole is in motion, not the box. the hole is being pushed down around the box. Only external forces on the other side cause it to fall over.

@cupofmeep6366

5 жыл бұрын

Option A is the correct one by any means, I don't know why would anyone even question that, portals are just a continuation of certain space in one place on another place, they only transfer the existing mass and energy as a continuation of space, they are not some energy generating force.

@cyraknoss

5 жыл бұрын

@@trash9378 The answer is "Momentum, a function of mass and velocity, is conserved between portals. In layman's terms:stationary thing doesn't go in because it's stationary! Stationary things can't go."

@cody4211

5 жыл бұрын

@@cyraknoss Technically the velocity being measured is the velocity at which the object enters the portal. Although the object may seem stationary to you, to the portal it is moving toward it at a rate of distance over time. Think of it as you riding a train. You are stationary, however, you also maintain the velocity of that train.

"The portals never move" *Cough cough* neurotoxin generator *cough cough*

@valkwetenschap2656

4 жыл бұрын

Very true

@Titanic-wo6bq

4 жыл бұрын

Exactly.

@Jasmine-pc4qp

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah but that's kinda the game's fault at this point

@TheSpyroplayer

4 жыл бұрын

True, but the entry point is stationary, and only the exit point moves. It doesn't create the same paradox, since entry and exit are different when thjnking about the paradox

@Titanic-wo6bq

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheSpyroplayer Now that I think about it, you are right. The entry portal is still, and the exit portal is moving, but the thing moving through the portals is light; a laser. Light always travels at C.

Assuming that portals are only windows as seen in the games, the only force applied on the cube to move him is the gravity force at any speed of the orange portal

i have watched this video a dozen times in the past 3 years and my answer changes every single time

I think this paradox is the entire reason that Valve implemented a "no portal on moving platforms" policy except for one exception where it would be impossible to put an object through it

@lunkel8108

3 жыл бұрын

That just opens up another problem: What do they mean by "not moving"? How is a reference frame chosen and with what justification? Also, aren't there two exceptions? The one where you shoot it onto the moving platform and the one where you shoot it on the moon which I'm pretty sure is not stationary with respect to earth.

@pogwater5366

3 жыл бұрын

just go into the console and enable that

@Monody512

3 жыл бұрын

Well this and it also the programming headaches.

@SuperDeinVadda

3 жыл бұрын

No that's not right. At the end you open a portal on the moon and it works. And the moon is moving damn fast.

@Monody512

3 жыл бұрын

@@SuperDeinVadda Don't forget the moving panels in the neurotoxin generator scene. The player was prohibited from ever placing moving portals in any situation where they could be interacted with directly. That doesn't mean they can't canonically be moving.

My science teacher used portal as an example to explain this and he played it for us as well which is super surprising

@mkatrfamily4404

3 жыл бұрын

I want that person as my teacher

@yajvinsinghal6559

3 жыл бұрын

Fucking legend

@davidpowers746

3 жыл бұрын

Good teachers are the ones who've realized the indelible impact of well made KZread videos. Thankfully my teachers understood that back in my days and showed us episodes of Reading Rainbow and Bill Nye the Science Guy in class.

@DominikPac-Boy

2 жыл бұрын

Great teacher.

@Mini-se6cx

2 жыл бұрын

Which part or game

I always thought of the portals as gates or doors. Normally stationary you walk through one side come out the other. If a door frame is throw thrown at you yourself won't gain any momentum from that. Also my problem with B is, you don't have any momentum to start with even if a portal is moving at you fast and slams down on top of you you should still be standing on the same ground so what force will pull you up.

@Athinira

Жыл бұрын

Except in your analogy, both portals would essentially be moving, not just one of them. If you throw a door frame (entry and exit), you're throwing both portals (entry and exit). But in this conundrum, only one of the portals is moving. So how are you gonna throw only one side of a door frame? The correct answer is B.

@edbproductions

Жыл бұрын

@@Athinira I can see where you are coming from but that's not quite how I see it. I just have a hard time seeing how the portals are impeding a force on the object. I see a port as infinitely thin if some goes in one side it comes out the other maintaining its own momentum. So If you go through a portal that's coming at you rapidly it would act just as if you walked through the portal and came out the other side. I'd love to make a video on it to better explain my point of view.

@Athinira

Жыл бұрын

​@@edbproductions Let me put up a scenario for you then. Imagine that you have the Orange portal on a moveable ceiling (that is, the portal is facing downwards). Imagine you have the blue portal on the floor (facing up). Now, imagine that you are halfway through the portal. Your lower body (waist down) is on the orange portal side, standing on the floor below the orange portal on that ceiling. Your upper body is sticking out of the blue portal on the floor. Suddenly the moveable ceiling with the orange portal slams down to the floor fast, bringing your whole body through the orange portal so you're now fully on the side of the blue portal. What is going to happen? Well, initially, your upper body has no momentum. It's just stationarily sticking out of the floor. But once the orange portal comes down, your upper body needs to move up to make room for your legs coming through the portal (assuming that the force the ceiling smahes with isn't enough to just crush your legs). However, moving requires momentum. To move anything, momentum has to be build. Therefore, once the orange portal touches your floor, this entire time, the lower part of your body on the orange portal side has been pushing the parts of your body that has already passed through the portal. Pushing builds momentum, just like if i pushed you in real life. So once the orange portal touches the floor and stops, your body will continue and do a small jump. The thing people get wrong here is the transfer of power. Usually people would assume that there is no transfer of power, therefore there can be no momentum. There is however a transfer of power. The power in this case just doesn't come from the floor you're standing on, but rather from the moveable ceiling with the portal. Since the ceiling is moving, it has momentum. And it's that momentum (rather than the momentum from a stationary floor or platform) that is transferred to your body.

@edbproductions

Жыл бұрын

@@Athinira ok I've been absolutely spiraling for like an hour thinking about different references planes, portal orientation, 1 portal moving 1 not, both portal moving, moving in the same direction moving in opposite directions..... Etc. Honestly at the end of it all I feel like both of our arguments have equal standings. Because here's one counter argument for gaining from a portal like in your example. If you are standing in front of a stationary portal and the portal is going 100+mph on the other side could you physically move through your stationary portal on your side without moving at least 100+mph. Because In my head you could poke your out and it would be moving 100+mph and your feet would still be stationary.

@Athinira

Жыл бұрын

@@edbproductions Yes, that's exactly what would happen. Your two body parts would be moving at different speeds. Imagine this scenario: You're standing stationary in front of a statinary orange portal. You poke your hand through. The other side of the portal (blue) is moving sideways at 100 kph (sorry, I'm european - no mph 😉 ) in a completely wind-still environment. Would you feel the air brush against your hand even though there's no wind? Of course, because since the portal is moving 100 kmh, so is your hand. That makes it a 100 kmh difference between the wind speed and your hand, even if the rest of your body is standing still. For the air to brush against your hand, there HAS to be a difference of speed between air and hand - even if it _appears_ from the side you're standing at that it's the wind blowing. So imagine something else: You're standing in front of a stationary portal. On the other side is a portal moving at 100 kph towards a floor. You poke just the front of your head through the portal and see the floor zooming towards your head. Would the floor smash your head once the portal reaches it, even though the floor is technically stationary? What if you didn't put your head through the portal, but the floor had a spear sticking out that would eventually enter the portal and hit you on the other side. Would it impale you through the portal, even though it's stationary? The answer is obviously: Yes.

I think we could measure speed relative to the environment and still have B happen in a game if the teleportation takes both the object and portal's speed relative to each other into account. For instance, if cube and orange are both moving towards each other at a speed of 1, then cube exits blue at a speed of 2, but if both are moving in the same direction, then if orange is faster than cube, then cube would exit blue at the speed of orange - cube. The same thing would then apply to the speed of blue relative to cube. If blue is moving forward, then cube exits at its new velocity plus that of blue.

@philkill44

Жыл бұрын

You just described the option, where the speed is measured relative to the portal. You described what would happen if the speed is measured from the cube in relation to the portal, not in relation to the environment...

@venomo2868

Жыл бұрын

If the cube is now has velo of 2 but blue portal still has velo of 1, then the gross momentum of the system is now 3 units where it was 2 units before entering the portal.

@Rye-Bread

11 ай бұрын

@@venomo2868 yes, and that breaks the universe and your cube may become dark matter

@Izzmonster

11 ай бұрын

Portals do not affect inertia, the cube would not gain speed nor would it move in either scenario.

@Graytail

5 ай бұрын

@@Izzmonster until more than half of it is out of the exit portal, then gravity would pull it over onto the ground.

The portals aren't teleportation. It's just making a continuous space where there normally isn't one, it's no more teleportation than you walking into your kitchen.

@user-pl7tf9gv8e

3 жыл бұрын

Then wtf is teleportation

@legoindiecomments1344

3 жыл бұрын

That's why I imagine it as A. If blue portal was on a wall, and orange portal was above you moving down wards, you would be half in one portal and half in the other. Legs would be glued to the floor due to gravity until enough of your weight was through the blue portal and then you'd fall to the floor there. From the perspective of blue portal, it would look like the floor you are on is the part moving, moving up and putting you through. It wouldn't behave any different than a doorway moving past you when you're standing still, you just have to factor how you'll be impacted by different gravity on different parts of your body.

@lorenz0c0rdova65

3 жыл бұрын

Teleportation is Half-Lifes thing. It is used to move to point a between dimensions to move to point b. It is brought back in 2 where they manages to just sling past Xen and just telelport, but it takes some time and I am sure it Deatamizes you in one space and Reatamizes you in another. Portals'... portal's are just tears in space time or a small form a time travel as in Portal 2 Cave Johnson mentions that the you in a Portal is you from another time, so don't stare at it. Also portals are like folding a piece of paper and poking a hole through it to walk through between those points. You stay as you just moving through a hole instantly. So you are you just walking through what is essential a door.

@lamegamertime

3 жыл бұрын

So you could imagine that the portal accelerating to you would be like a door accelerating to you. Option A is the answer.

@Pup_Pryde

3 жыл бұрын

exactly. imagine i drop a hula hoop around someone, they pass right through it. the fact that one side of the hoop is on the other side of the room is completely irrelevant.

"speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out" but what if speedy thing was never speedy? [queue vsauce music] what if, instead, stationary thing goes in speedy hole: does it come out the other fast or slow?

@CmdrShepard1001

3 жыл бұрын

Everything is speedy relative to something else. If the object exits at the same velocity relative to the ground, it would not exit at all. If the object exits slower than the velocity that the portal moves towards it, the object would compress. If the object passes through the speedy portal and its spacial dimensions do not change, than the object must be speedy.

@deffinatalee7699

3 жыл бұрын

@@CmdrShepard1001 i’m speedy relative to your mom

@liliththefirehawk796

3 жыл бұрын

@@deffinatalee7699 lmao legend

@cantthinkofnameyeah7249

3 жыл бұрын

Somewhere in the middle becuase the inertias would start to build on one side of the cube while the other is still moving relatively slow

@electricheisenberg5723

3 жыл бұрын

slow. imagine istead of a portal it's just a hole. portals are like holes that defy euclidean space.

The portal, in my opinion, would behave as if the bottom platform was pushing it into the portal, since the platform moving towards the portal, and the portal moving towards the platform are essentially the same thing in this context.

@erikcarl2384

3 ай бұрын

no they are not. if drop a tube on the ball it would not be launce up into the tube. if you however slam the ball into the tube it would. its not essentailly the same at all.

@SleepyFunkin

3 ай бұрын

@@erikcarl2384 what I need context here, what tube, and what ball?

@erikcarl2384

3 ай бұрын

@@SleepyFunkin any tube and any ball that fits into a tube. you dont need any context.

@PedroGonzalez-pd6vw

3 ай бұрын

@@erikcarl2384 No, it is. You're assuming there's a surface the ball is sitting on. Physically speaking, if you move a tube over a ball floating in space, such that the ball goes through the tube, it's the same thing as moving the ball through a stationary floating tube. This is the main principle behind the theory of special relativity. The common example provided for this, is an elevator floating in space with you inside of it. You feel yourself being pulled to the bottom of the elevator at an acceleration of 10m/s^2. You cannot see outside the elevator. You are tasked with discerning which of the following is true: a) You are inside an elevator that is accelerating upwards; or b) You are inside a stationary elevator that is near a massive body, and are thus experiencing a gravitational pull Which is it? You actually can't tell. If the elevator were to accelerate upwards at a constant rate-let's say 10m/s^2-you would feel the elevator pushing up against you with a force proportional to that acceleration (due to F=ma). If there were a gravitational field, perhaps that of a planet nearby (but invisible to you since you are inside the elevator), pulling you down at a rate of 10m/s^2, and if the elevator were stationary in this case, you'd likewise feel the elevator pushing up on you with the same force. Einstein's theory basically says that, no, there is no way of differentiating these two scenarios: "The laws of physics are invariant (identical) in all inertial frames of reference."

@Dustyoo10

3 ай бұрын

The thing is that reactionary forces only applies to objects that COLLIDE with eachother. If there was no portal, then yes the cube getting hit by the wall and the wall getting hit by the cube would be the same, but since the cube doesn't collide with anything, it simply goes through the portal unaffected, and thus does not react to anything.

another option is that if an entry portal moves then the exist portal has to move at the same speed. So the speed should be relative from the portal to the object itself, I think of portals like tubes or rings which are the same, the only difference is what is bigger the length or the diameter.

Minutephysics: It depends whether you think more like a programmer or more like a physicist. Me, dual majoring physics and computer science: *Visible confusion*

@panlis6243

5 жыл бұрын

I go with the B option even tho I work as a programmer

@II__argo__II

5 жыл бұрын

Jesus christ. You're a next level masochist. I'm having a difficult enough time just with CS

@bigbossjo

5 жыл бұрын

This your time, to discover your real you; my advice; follow you heart

@Hangman11

5 жыл бұрын

You wanna get more confused? Imagine the portal wouldnt move at all and the moving pillar would be pushed through the entrance portal from the backside. With enough pressure anything bigger than the portal would just be cut off. But when its true that the portal doesnt move at all, it wouldnt move with the earth spinning and flying through the universe thus cutting a giant hole in the earth while the earth is moving through the portal. Although i guess the portal cant not move since relativity or smth

@gravity4261

5 жыл бұрын

Portals are just holes that happen to connect, if you cut a hole in a piece of cardboard and set a leggo in a table then slammed the cardboard with the hole onto the lego so that the lego went thru the hole would it shoot out the other end?

I rule in favour of Option D. When the stationary object is consumed by the portal, the source engine crashes.

@HeckuleStudios

4 жыл бұрын

the entire universe is running on source engine.

@hiu2ying

4 жыл бұрын

No no, it’s option *3* .

@yukisetsuna1325

4 жыл бұрын

@@hiu2ying *critical error*

@user-um7fw6bl2e

4 жыл бұрын

You call d the teir zoo route or else

@Ommelanden

4 жыл бұрын

Option E: Portal crashes to desktop and a pop-up with the secret download link for portal 3 is shown

For some reason this made me think of the portals like slinky's. And I'm just imagining moving the portal onto a stationary object the sane as dropping one end of a slinky over a stationary object. Now I'm wondering what the environment inside of the portals is like. I'm sure none of this would match up with theories of wormholes, teleporters, or quantum tunneling larfe scale objects but my brain went there

You remember that game, hole in the wall? The things passing through the holes didn't push the objects unless they clipped the side of it. The way this boils down in terms of portals is simple. 1. The portal is moving down, meaning it presses into the ground which moves the location but adds 0 velocity 2. The portal is moving sideways, and since it can't be an open shape the bottom of the portal, however small, pushes against the object. With a small enough gap between the edge of the portal and the ground, the object would be picked up slightly since it's easier to lift up then be pushed.

I feel like Henry just tackled this century-old paradox because he just bought it from the Steam Summer Sale lmao

@LeeBuddy

5 жыл бұрын

Gaben is pleased

@skeletonrowdie1768

5 жыл бұрын

Steam sales pushing educational technology since...

@sleepi5550

5 жыл бұрын

I bought it yesterday :)

@Jared7873

5 жыл бұрын

@@skeletonrowdie1768 Playstation VR Convenience Store Simulator Demonstration?

@firefish111

5 жыл бұрын

What about one portal moving into the the other end??

Moving portals should be in portal 3. But that will never happen because valve can't count to 3.

@connorharker6548

4 жыл бұрын

Just remember at a gaming event Gabe said "yove killed more than 2 people but less than 4" Like come on just say 3

@stardustcorpse

4 жыл бұрын

Portals *can* move so long as the surface they're on is moving within the same plane, and not changing orientation. As in, not on a surface that lifts, pivots, or flips.

@andrewnguyen6842

4 жыл бұрын

connor harker Oh my god, did he actually said that? Give me the damn link!

@dantecavallin8229

4 жыл бұрын

@@stardustcorpse It can, because the velocity is relative to the portal. If the portal flips then the object flips too. In space we measure by relativity so instead of measuring its velocity relatively to earth we measure its velocity relatively to the portal. That way it is as if the object is standing still but just surrounded by a moving gravity.

@p1CM

4 жыл бұрын

Six comments, divide by portal 2... Portal 3 confirmed!

It depends on why the moving portal is moving, is it falling under its own weight or is a force being applied to it? Energy conservation says that for stationary portals the kinetic energy of the cube is maintained (speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out) so logically this still applies to a moving portal, the energy being used to move the portal over the stationary cube is added to the kinetic energy of the cube. If a very strong piston pushes the portal over the cube very quickly, then the cube will shoot out of the other end quickly, if the portal is falling with a weight of just a few grams over a cube that weighs much more, then only a very small force will be applied to the cube, and it will just barely plop out of the other end. In fact, if the end portal is angled upwards, then there may not be enough energy being added to the cube for it to fully emerge from the other end. There is no paradox as long as you understand the rules as explained in the game, the paradox only seems to appear if you fail to fully understand what is going on.

Actually there are moving portals in the game, you shoot one at the moon, the portal on it then moves quite dramatically with respect to the portal left on earth. And that also proves that velocity is seen relative to the entrance portal, not environment or a combined system. :D

Everyone should play portal once in their life. Such a great game

@kiven_gamez4474

4 жыл бұрын

Not on console sadly

@125conman

4 жыл бұрын

@@kiven_gamez4474 ...why not? Ive played portal 1 on 360 and portal two on both console and PC. They seemed great except you can't play the costume maps on console (that's how it was 7+ years ago, things may have changed)

@The_Nordic_Doctor

4 жыл бұрын

*at least once . ?

@RTS-APERTURE

4 жыл бұрын

Kiven_Gamez I play 1 and 2 on Xbox 1 bruh 🤣 what world you live in?

@joemackay6368

4 жыл бұрын

I've played portal 2 at least 30 times

0:16 the technical term is "Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out,"

@robertjones6891

4 жыл бұрын

Exactly, and in order for something to enter a portal, it must have some relative movement toward said portal. Whether it's the portal or the object that are in motion shouldn't matter in that respect. I'd imagine if portals like these actually did exist, they'd lead to quite a few changes in our current understanding of physics.

@bolson481

4 жыл бұрын

Aaron Yeetosaurous yep why did they make this video it’s obviously a

@ryanwolf1869

4 жыл бұрын

Aaron Yeetosaurous the thing is not speedy, the thing it’s going through is though. If stood on a platform and a ring was lowered down to your feet really fast would you get yote out? No.

@kevinvu5432

4 жыл бұрын

@@robertjones6891 if you drop a slab of wood with a hole over a rubiks cube. Does the same apply?

@sierra1513

4 жыл бұрын

@@kevinvu5432 both ends of the hole have opposite velocities relative to the cube so it cancels out

Bro left us with more questions than the beginning

Thank you for making this video it was very cool 😎

Portal right now costs 0,81€ on steam. This can't be a coincidence.

@weirdshamanwizzard3156

5 жыл бұрын

RiꜱᴇnHᴇᴇd 1$=0.81€

@Netsuki

5 жыл бұрын

I think it is. Cause we have Summer Sale. And Valve gives good offs of their products.

@Seekay37

5 жыл бұрын

It's Steam Summer Sale. Valve always makes their games dirt cheap during this time.

@mmseng2

5 жыл бұрын

TBH Valve has frequently given Portal (1) away for free several times. But I'm guessing by "not a coincidence" you mean to imply that the sale is what brought it to the top of Minute Physics' mind.

@Jancias

5 жыл бұрын

Great games for cheap prices...

Minutephysics: the portal para- Me: *Speedy Thing Goes In Speedy Thing Comes Out*

@l0k1nycc

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, The first law of portal physics.

@karelpgbr

4 жыл бұрын

In layman’s terms:

@Arkouchie

4 жыл бұрын

But the thing isn't speedy. The things "speed" relative the environment is 0. That's the entire point of this video.

@iunnoo

4 жыл бұрын

@@Arkouchie yes but relative to the Portal there is speed

@Acefdiamonds

4 жыл бұрын

Is it bad I read that in glados's voice

If you imagine the portals as infinitely short tunnels, you can expand the concept to a general case for all wormhole-like pathways. When you slam a tube down around an object, the object doesn’t gain momentum through the tube; the motion of the object relative to the tube is entirely dependent on the tube. In this way it can be argued that case a (plopping out on the other side) is the resolution of the paradox. On the other hand, if you consider the portal as comparable to a hand coming down around a wet bar of soap, an argument can be made for case b (object goes flying). When you grab a bar of soap, you need to exert force upon the bar as you grip it. This force commonly and easily launches the soap out of your hands, in spite of not adding any apparent momentum to the soap. The energy gained by the soap is sourced from invisible interaction between the object and the passage it travels through (in this case, the hand). This argument, essentially, is that one cannot actually pass freely through a portal which is in motion. In order for the object to gain speed as it passes through the portal, the portal itself would need to be exerting some force on the object (otherwise the object would remain inert, according to the generalized case of a tunnel of arbitrary length). Either a moving portal “squeezes” objects passing through due to some unseen interaction between the membrane/field of the portal and said object, or the object does not gain momentum. Put into terms of energy, unless some unseen mechanism transfers energy from the moving portal to the object enveloped by the portal, it’s impossible for the portal to cause the object to accelerate. Yet another example would be jumping through a window on a moving vehicle, without touching the frame of the window, while the start and end point of the jump are both stationary from the perspective of the person jumping. The properties of the vehicle don’t matter - it could be a bullet train loaded to maximum capacity, or it could be a bike meandering through a neighborhood. From the perspective of the person jumping, all that changes is which side of the window they occupy. In order for the person to fly like a rocket out the other side of the window, the vehicle would need to transfer some kind of energy or momentum to them. Barring some kind of novel discovery about topology or vector addition, I feel like this one isn’t toooooo hard to suss out. But then again I dropped out of college lmao

Nice video man!

According to GLaDOS in the first game: "Momentum, the function of mass and velocity, is conserved between portals. In laments terms: Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out". Since the object enters the portal with zero momentum, we must assume it leaves the portal with the same momentum. Thus, the correct answer, according to GLaDOS, is option A

@beefybread5769

4 жыл бұрын

What the1necromancer just said in laments terms means that the speed is relative to the portals. So if portal is speedy and moving towards speedy companion cube, lets say, the same speed towards eachother, then the cube would come out at 2x the speed.

@adamguenther190

4 жыл бұрын

You are exactly right, I can’t believe they don’t say this in the video. The box has no kinetic energy so it cannot have kinetic energy going out of the portal

@beefybread5769

4 жыл бұрын

@@adamguenther190 he never said it because there was never a need to say it. Things like speed and measurement are not definite, they are relative. Meaning it is measured relatively to another object. So the cubes speed is measured relatively to the portal, meaning that if the cube and a portal were moving towards eachother at the same speed, then the cube would leave the exit portal at twice the speed.

@yaddar

4 жыл бұрын

This The portal is basically a door If you are not moving and a door with a door moves towards you, you will still not be moving by the time you arrive to the other side of the door

@beefybread5769

4 жыл бұрын

@@yaddar how many times do i have to say that speed is measured RELATIVELY. Imagine you are walking in the same direction a train is moving, lets say you and the train were moving 3 MPH. If your speed was measured relative to the ground, you would be moving 6 MPH. If your speed was measured relatively to the train, it would be 3 MPH. Its basically the same thing for the portal, except this time, the portal would be moving at you. Its literally what the1necromancer said. If you are moving towards a portal which is moving towards you at the same speed, your body would go theough twice as fast as opposed to having the portal stay in the same place.

"It's a paradox, there is no answer!" ~GLaDOS, 2011

@MatiEP09

4 жыл бұрын

XD

@MatiEP09

4 жыл бұрын

I remember she said something like this when trying to beat wheatley with paradoxes.

@coolbuck7214

4 жыл бұрын

Yes I answer yes Wheatly 2011

@feather314

4 жыл бұрын

True, I’ll go true

@ninjafahita

3 жыл бұрын

"Don't think about it. Don't think about it. Don't think about it. Don't think about it." Glados 2011

Actually I think in portal 2 there's an area you can put a portal on a moving wall/platform and if it moves over an object, the object doesn't shoot out the other portal if the object was stationary

197 is going WILD on this paradox

@NamingIsHard828

9 ай бұрын

My man

Quote by GlaDOS: "Momentum, a function of mass and velocity, is conserved between portals. In layman's terms, speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out."

@breakerboy365

2 жыл бұрын

conversely, if a speedy thing comes out, a speedy thing went in

@sneednfeed5559

Жыл бұрын

Counterpoint momentum is not conserved because the direction of the object changes therefore glados is a lying pos

@xezzee

Жыл бұрын

When neither portal is moving 👍 When one of the portals is moving with constant speed as in 0 acceleration the object passing trough orange portal experience 0 acceleration and comes out of blue portal with same speed as Orange Portal had. What happens when you stop the portal mid point of the box? in that moment when you stop the portal instantly in place trough the object is felt two foces that pull each other one tries to stay still and other is moving 50km/h and if your human neck can with stand that kind of instant pull 😏 15 hours later while super drunk someone said "it is like hula hula rim!" and we came in to conclusion the moment you slam it to someones head and start pulling the head should be flying off in the most brutal way possible 😂

@valentinorubio703

Жыл бұрын

yeah but it's not "speedy portal rams into, speedy thing comes out"

@xezzee

Жыл бұрын

@@valentinorubio703 I spend 17h drunk arguing about this topic and to sum it up: Orange Portal's speed is given to the object without acceleration. Everything else ended up with "Well that that can't be right" and we also never agreed who of us won the argument :D perhaps we all lost.

Maybe this is why you can't have a portal on a moving object.

@Overload151

5 жыл бұрын

Yeah... I think Valve notice that it would be even more tricky to move the portals around, so they made every puzzle with static portals XD

@geraq0

5 жыл бұрын

There is one puzzle in Portal 2 that has you putting a portal on a platform that is moving vertically, so lasers can cut down a pipe. I think the dev commentary says that is the only instance in the whole game such thing happens, every other moving object (a hatch door, for example) instantly disintegrates the portal it has on.

@c0ldshock927

5 жыл бұрын

@@geraq0 portals can only be placed on conductive surfaces. The doors aren't conductive,and aren't coated in conductive material either. That's why you can make portals on white surfaces, because that has ground up moon rocks. The white gel is made with moon dust,which is why it makes surfaces conductive. And the ending of Portal 2 shows this as well.

@geraq0

5 жыл бұрын

@@c0ldshock927 Yes, I know that. That wasn't my point at all. I was talking about hatches activated by switches, for example, that change angles hence deleting any portal created over them.

@Silikone

5 жыл бұрын

Earth is moving.

In my opinion, Scenario A seems the less plausible. Portals connect two points in space without creating any new space. Therefore, the time it takes for an object to enter one portal should be identical to the time it takes for the object to exit the other portal. So, if an orange portal moves slowly towards an object, than that object should also emerge slowly from the blue portal. Similarly, if the orange portal moves toward an object at like Mach 10, then that object should theoretically exit the blue portal at an equivalent velocity. The velocity of the object relative to the portal has to be preserved so that the time between entering and exiting the portal stays consistent. If it doesn't, then where would the object momentarily exist? Given that portals don't create new space, just connect existing spaces, the relative velocity at which an object enters a portal should dictate the velocity at which it exits. Since the object exits with a certain velocity and has mass, it would also possess momentum, thus it would result in Scenario B (or maybe C). The only way Scenario A could work is if the portals somehow momentarily changed the mass of objects as they passed through, but that just feels like making up rules. Thoughts? (note i am not an expert in physics or anything so my reasoning could be wrong.)

All these questions are easy to answer if you always consider the reference frame to be the portal closest to the cube (or part thereof). When you do this the calculation becomes deceptively simple; 1) calculate the forces acting on the portion of the cube still on the orange side of the portal (if any) 2) calculate the forces acting on the portion of the cube on the blue side of the portal (if any) 3) sum them to determine the total force acting upon the cube as a whole.

*Minutepsysics:* Let's talk about Portal Paradox which isn't actually a paradox... *Me:* That's a nice paradox.

But GLaDOS already answered that. "In layman's terms: Speedy thing comes in, speedy thing comes out."

@TheRedKing247

4 жыл бұрын

But that's for stationary portals. Moving portals would be different because their rules aren't defined in the game.

@ChrisPepper1989

4 жыл бұрын

Therefore, 'Stationary thing comes in, Stationary thing comes out" #thinkinglikeaprogrammer

@Chutley

4 жыл бұрын

yes they are, portal 2 has a moving portal in the section where you cut neurotoxin pipes, and the laser exiting the portal has the same wavelength/colour as the one entering.

@alexbm5128

4 жыл бұрын

@@ChrisPepper1989 I read that as pro gamer

@lovecontemplation8607

4 жыл бұрын

TornadoATP but the portals obey the laws of nature it exists in. And the cube has no momentum while the portal has one. This cannot be translated without adding energy to the cube. So either the portal translates energy from the portal itself to an object. Option B. Or its the objects momentum that matters. Option A.

For option B, what happens if the portal stops moving halfway across the object? Does the object get pulled through since half of it now has a velocity but the other half doesn't? Would objects get ripped apart if the speed is too high?

@robertobohm5328

Жыл бұрын

this is what makes me think that it'd be more like option A, it's simply a window onto another point in space, think "hole in the wall" the american game show. And regarding the issue where only part of the object goes through, then what happens to it would depend on the center of mass of the object. if the center of mass has gone through the portal, then the object is under influence of gravity at the other side of the portal, wherever that is in space.

@trappedcosmos

Жыл бұрын

He did a video on this and it would shoot out with half the speed or break depending on the durability of the action

In my mind, if you shove an delightful companion cube through a stationary portal that then comes out the other end of the portal that's moving, as the example/question at the end, the cube would exit the end portal straight up, assuming you shoved it in straight down, but the exit portal would of course be moving so when gravity pulls the cube back down, depending on timing, the cube would just land on the floor. Now in the case of putting a cube into a moving portal coming out a stationary one, I would have to explain my point of view as to the working of the portal. The entirety of the portal mechanic being fictional as there is no working science that has created such a device, it is my beleif that the intent of these portasl is one of two options. Either A, the portals are forming a lightspeed shift of some kind whereby something that enters one end is instantly tranferred to the other at light speed. However, with this we wouldn't get the characteristic "mirror" effect of being able to see through it. However with B, if the portals work more like 'magic' fantasy portasl wherein the idea is that they are creatinig a doorway, perhaps folding space or some kind of dimensional acceleration as such found in many FTL drives in sci-fi, then it would simply be connecting 2 points in space meaning we could see through it and walk through it. However, as it's merely a gateway that'd act the same as if you punched a hole through a wall and walked through that, or an ordinary door I guess. So, with my belief in option B whereby it's merely a gateway, then as far as any objects or persons are concerned going through it, it is simply a hole in a wall. Therefore, tossing a delightful companion cube through a moving portal would exit the stationary end of the portal at the same velocity and angle. Though mystery being how do the portals orient themselves and relative to what? This behavior can be observed in the game I beleive as to lead me to my conclusion. This also being why I believe that the game does not allow you to place a portal on a moving surface or on a stationary surface and then move it. As one of the two points being connected in space/the universe, has shifted and therefore cannot be connected to dropping the connection and destroyign the portal that was attempted to be moved. I do not believe that thinking "as a programmer" is the right answer to thsi question as while yes, the game is a game and thus must needs have been programmed, it is representing a sci-fi world and concept to us. To take the question seriously, I feel, one must take this fantasy as seriously. That is to say assume that it is true or real as to really discover how it works.

I always thought of them as a ring that was split. Teleportation is like putting a ring around something else, but this coming out of the ring is placed different in spaces. As if it was a tunnel with the length of 0.

@Lance3015

3 жыл бұрын

so A, right?

@hushwonder2070

3 жыл бұрын

@@Lance3015 it'd still be B. From the perspective of the side of the ring the cube is leaving, it's still coming out of that side at a certain velocity relative to it, therefore that velocity would be maintained.

@Paradox66199

3 жыл бұрын

@@hushwonder2070 Not true, it makes no interaction with the cube itself therefore it would not carry over the velocity. There is effectively no space; open air in-between the portal boundaries and they've never interfered with the objects passing through them like you say

@AnonYmous-spyonmepls

3 жыл бұрын

@@Wert-eo7sz Maybe the portal is not moving but disappearing and reappearing at a different point in space quickly that case the object would go through you. and the laws of physics still would work.

@FlaWLessMinigun

3 жыл бұрын

@@Wert-eo7sz Our current understanding of the universe isn't very great...

absolutely no one: minutephysics: lets give this old paradox that the internet has argued about for a decade another step of complexity

@luck3949

5 жыл бұрын

We definitely need to think about accelerating portals.

@asmer3302

5 жыл бұрын

Its just /v/ shilling

@Tyunz

5 жыл бұрын

@@luck3949 but first, let's talk about parallel universes

@polynngt8853

5 жыл бұрын

327likes in 1hours? I cant even get 10likes in year

@HandledToaster2

5 жыл бұрын

You're so original

I believe you need to look at it from the state of the exiting portal. If the exiting portal is stationary then the object gains the momentum difference of the object and the entering portal. If the exiting portal is moving at a faster rate than the entering portal then the object will follow the exiting portals momentum minus the momentum the object enters the entering portal.

These non-answerable questions are always kind of fun, but I wanted to pose a question to you that I think is a bit more difficult to answer than your ending question (at least with respect to option B of portal ideas.) What happens if a portal moves quickly down towards a stationary object as you have pictured, but stops suddenly halfway through? Does the object get carried by the momentum through half of its object moved through the portal, and then slowed down/stopped by the other half? Or would momentum be applied to the object only as it completely goes through a portal, or even as it begins to go through a portal?

@J4hk2

Жыл бұрын

Realistically it would work per-particle. Whereby the part of the object that has passed through would possess momentum and the part yet to go through would not. A sudden change to the portal's movement would mean the two parts not entering/exiting in sync with each other resulting in a pulling/pushing of the two parts to resolve that. This effect can be observed under A's understanding of portals as well by the way. Because A still acknowledges an object launching out the portal as long as it considers the object to be moving to begin with. So something explicitly moving towards to entrance portal would, half way through the portal have part of it also moving on the other end. So if the entrance was to suddenly be moved away from the object when half way through, there would be a similar effect whereby the part that has exited has momentum to be moving away from the exit but the part still to enter can't get into the portal due to the entrance moving away. The logical result would be a similar pulling/pushing effect.

@fly1ngG0PHER

9 ай бұрын

Time for armchair physicist speculation! I’d say the part that passed through already would have momentum, and the side that didn’t would not; if the portal stopped on a dime halfway over, the object would have exactly half the momentum it would have had if it passed through completely. As for realistic physics, it’s the same problem as stacking portals above each other, hanging a long bike chain down, linking the back end to the top end through a weight, fitting a motor to the chain, and then dropping it so that gravity infinitely moves the chain and feeds the motor: where does the energy come from? The portals have to either intelligently supply that energy themselves, or the portal has to behave differently than envisioned (in the case of the infinite gravity-powered generator, gravity would have to not have a net pull on the chain between the portals as it does in the rest of the room, which makes a bit more sense as a non-teleporting portal by necessity forces spacetime to be continuous, and gravity is just the observed effect of spacetime warping or compressing in a certain direction; the chain would float or bunch up against the portals, because the only way “gravity” works is if space-time gets continually more and more “compressed” as you go down the chain, which is not the case for two portals linked together, else there would be a “jump” in spacetime where space is compressed at the bottom and immediately decompressed at the top; in the Portal game, gravity is a constant acceleration applied to all objects unrelated to spacetime, for obvious reasons, but this is not reality). The simplest solution to accelerating portals I think would be that the change in momentum of the matter caught between them would have to be reacted against the portal to satisfy conservation of energy; moving and stopping portals must take energy at least equal to the momentum added by the matter passing through it, or you could create kinetic energy at will by just wiggling the portal. The slice of material inside the portal would effectively hit a wall as the portal stopped, but it’s still connected to both halves of the object, so if this boundary is an actual boundary where space-time is not continuous and is knife-sharp, it would shear anything inside it in half, or arguably it would prevent motion through it. If the portal is stationary and starts moving, the two halves would be compressed together.

Aperture Labs uses quantum tunneling if I remember correctly whereas Black Mesa was dabbling in wormholes

@miletilblight2181

5 жыл бұрын

Yep

@CEntertainArt

5 жыл бұрын

@cak01vej this would obviously not be the case for wormholes, as I think you already know!

@bananacars1684

5 жыл бұрын

@cak01vej don't forget that portals are essentialy just doors that open elsewhere so using a portal like this would act the same way as hitting a static object on a table with a tennis racket without strings the only loophole is the laws of gravity not momentum

@RhinoHand

4 жыл бұрын

@cak01vej That would hurt a bit

@iPhr0stByt3

4 жыл бұрын

B seems the most intuitive and so also applies to the final puzzle: object would exist at an angle.

Valve: Portals can't move Also valve: Let's use moving portals towards the end of the second games

@moonl1314

3 жыл бұрын

moon rotation yes

@bullzebub

2 жыл бұрын

i mean.. they must be able to move since we are all moving.

@ryzatheduck5195

2 жыл бұрын

That moment is near the middle.

@creativename3707

2 жыл бұрын

your logic can apply to earth too, making the portal gun useless

@oracleharbinger9729

2 жыл бұрын

@@moonl1314 earth moving too)

I wonder if this means that the object would experience an intense pulling force. As the leading edge rapidly accelerates to the speed of the portal and drags the rest of the object with it.

@breakerboy365

Жыл бұрын

I think this is great intuition

@evanvollbrecht541

9 ай бұрын

Surprisingly, no - you wouldn’t experience any acceleration at all, since from your perspective the rest of the world would accelerate around you instead. The portals don’t apply any force to the person moving through them - otherwise when falling into/shooting up out of a portal, you’d experience twice the force of hitting the ground

@cfehunter

9 ай бұрын

@@evanvollbrecht541 So that would mean experiencing an immediate change in velocity without acceleration, as if the world had accelerated around you. That makes sense from the explanation in the video, but is incredibly odd to think about.

@evanvollbrecht541

9 ай бұрын

@@cfehunter It’s really weird in the abstract, but it makes more sense if you imagine looking through the portals - you’d see everything on the other side already moving towards you at the speed the orange portal was descending. For example, looking through the blue portal, you’d see the box coming towards you even before it flew out. Likewise, from the box’s perspective, you’d see the ceiling/room coming towards you the whole time.

@cfehunter

8 ай бұрын

@@evanvollbrecht541 right because there are effectively two "primary" reference frames present at the same time. Relative to the blue portal everything on the other side of the orange portal has the velocity of the orange portal (plus its own local velocity) even if the objects themselves aren't moving relative to the world.

Quite frankly, A makes no sense at all unless you only think of the (impossible) case in which the entire solid object instantaneously moves from one side of the portal to the other. I've always arrived at B by imagining what happens while the portal is in the process of moving over the object. While this is happening, the object is presumably emerging from the out-portal at the same rate that the in-portal is traveling downwards. If this is the case, then the particles composing the object ARE moving with momentum through the out-space, unquestionably. And there's no reason that they wouldn't retain that momentum as the object finishes emerging. Another way to think about it, in light of your example at 3 minutes, is that those slices DO appear on the other side, unmoving, but the next slice is right behind it and pushes it forward... which just produces the same effect as B. Or, if you assume that the slices don't retain their bonds and can't affect each other when on opposite sides of the portal, then they're just going to become a soup of particles trying to occupy the same space. (Though, since characters never have to consider the risk of being cut in half by going partway through a portal and then stepping back, I would assume that atomic bonds do hold.) There's no model in which an object can emerge from the portal both intact and without momentum. The option are B and disintegration. A much simpler example that indicates why it's B is this: Consider what would happen if the box were sitting on a tall pillar, narrow enough to pass through the portal. The portal passes over the box, and the box is now on the opposite side, but so is a portion of the pillar. As the in-portal continues to go lower, more of the pillar emerges from the portal as well, pushing the box diagonally up and to the right. And then, if you stop, the box is going to go flying in that direction. (this is essentially the same thing as what happens in the box-only case, just on an object scale rather than an atomic scale)

In the games, the portals disappear if placed on a moving surface. Which can be explained by the logic that portals must remain at a constant distance and orientation from each other.

@robertyang4365

5 жыл бұрын

I don't think so. In Portal 2, when you're destroying the neurotoxin tubing, you do utilize portals that move relative to each other.

@totodaj

5 жыл бұрын

except if they are moving continously at the same speed

@feryth

5 жыл бұрын

How about the moon portal?

@sjege

5 жыл бұрын

In Portal 2 there is 1 moving portal

@NYCFenrir

5 жыл бұрын

No there's moving platforms in Portal.

All I wanted to do was play portal, not question the exsistance of universe. But I'm glad I did.

@jessejordan5658

5 жыл бұрын

i'm glados you did oof

@inkkles

5 жыл бұрын

@@jessejordan5658 this comment is just so funny to me and i hate you for it

@gramarnazzi7841

5 жыл бұрын

@@slyceth *They're

@gramarnazzi7841

5 жыл бұрын

*Existence

@mariogonzalez4928

5 жыл бұрын

* Capitalize “I”s

I believe option A makes the most sense as the cube has no force applied to it when it enters, which means it has no force on the exit, creating no velocity. It wouldn't pile on itself either as moving the orange portal closer past the cube would in turn change the position of where the rest of the cube is at the ends of the blue portal.

@nicholasnolan2086

Жыл бұрын

Okay but imagine the portal is coming down on you, how fast is it? You would have to exit out the other side bit by bit the same times each part enters. If it happens slowly, you can see on the exit portal how a person is being pushed out from head to toe. Now lets say the poral moves faster, their toes come out almost immediately after their head, their body would have had to move out that second portal at the same speed of the first portal coming down at them, surely they'd keep the momentum and wouldn't just flop to the ground after flying out the portal?

@midas.mp4

Жыл бұрын

@@nicholasnolan2086 but they don't HAVE any momentum to keep. you aren't being pushed through the portal, the portal is being pushed through you, remember, a portal is just a hole with disconnected ends.

@J4hk2

Жыл бұрын

*_"It wouldn't pile on itself either as moving the orange portal closer past the cube would in turn change the position of where the rest of the cube is at the ends of the blue portal"_* That's movement. You've just described movement. Look up the definition of speed and velocity, they are both defined by the rate at which an object changes position in space (one being directional). At a fundamental level you're trying to argue something moves without obeying the laws of motion. Which state that the object will continue its current state of motion when there is nothing to change it.​ @@midas.mp4 *_"but they don't HAVE any momentum to keep. "_* The fact the portal left a stationary exit, something that requires velocity and momentum proves that they do. Portals alter momentum of objects passing though them. It's something they do even with the basic portal fling as both momentum and velocity are defined as having a direction and portal flings are all about changing the direction an object is traveling. And furthermore that's shown to be a change of movement that does obey the laws of motion, which continues when there is nothing to change it. In other words, you're trying to argue the portals induce a change in movement that don't obey the laws of motion when they already show that they induce a change in movement that does.

@LineOfThy

Жыл бұрын

except because of relativity, a cube moving through a portal is the same thing as a portal moving through a cube.

It's gonna have to be B because the velocity vector change direction. In the A scenario. if a cube is moving down while entering portal A, it would also have to move down exiting portal B regardless of portal orientation. Programming wise the A scenario might be more analogous but because of the fact that the velocity vector changes upon portal travelling it's actually simulating scenario B.

I'm surprised you didn't mention gravity. The block sitting experiences torque as soon as it begins to pass through. It should exit the second portal with rotation.

@Certrix

5 жыл бұрын

Exactly what I thought, it wouldn't flatten, gravity would pull the heavier side of the block, the one leaving portal B, completely out of the portal.

@kurokamireaper3761

5 жыл бұрын

It should fall off the second portal, right?

@Certrix

5 жыл бұрын

Kurokami Reaper It should, yes

@Sivah_Akash

5 жыл бұрын

@@Certrix, it would flatten. Since the tiny bit first teleported stays in the frame of the teleporter, it experiences gravity from the sites of both the entry and exit portals.

@MistahJuicyBoy

5 жыл бұрын

@@Sivah_Akash That doesn't make sense. The normal force of the ground pushing on your feet equals the force gravity is pulling you down with. You don't flatten

"THIS. SENTENCE. IS. FALSE! don't think about it don't think about it" That's the true Portal Paradox

@alphathealpha

4 жыл бұрын

Ehhh, true. I'll go true.

@AllUsernamesTaken

4 жыл бұрын

It's a paradox you moron, there is no answer!!

@yusuf_kizilkaya

4 жыл бұрын

* confused frankenturret noises *

@petofiarkwright3236

4 жыл бұрын

Yes!

@user-tt6uf2um5y

4 жыл бұрын

OMG YESSSSS

Thanks for that final puzzle you left us with. I WANTED to sleep tonight but now…

Any one who argues for case A seems to forget a fundamental thing here. Even in the worst case scenario. The first part of the cube, the top, goes through the portal. And then the rest of the box pushes it through, giving it some velocity. The way by which you go from orange portal to blue is irrelevant Think of the situation at the destination, static portal. Thing comes out at speed. Just because it was standing still before the moving portal hits it doesn't change that It's moving on the exit side. And will hold that velocity

@typhoon1575

Жыл бұрын

Oh and before any armchair experts try to mention it. Portals, if they could exist, break the laws of thermodynamics and energy conservation by merely existing. Acquiring velocity and energy through this isn't that much of a stretch

@J4hk2

Жыл бұрын

Don't worry, the only other person who tends to bother responding to these comments is me and I'm fully with you.

@typhoon1575

Жыл бұрын

@@J4hk2 yea I got recommended this video again, and option B feels so obvious that it bugs me that people try to ignore the fact were working with entry and exit points that can be in different states of motion

Portals don't work on moving platform... Except for that one time in the neurotoxin generator room

@ascaban6220

5 жыл бұрын

@Cris Angelo D.C I think that that was actually a storage unit not a generator but wheatley was kinda dumb so he thought it made it

@maxlinker44

5 жыл бұрын

That's what I was thinking about

@barackobama8309

5 жыл бұрын

So weird how it's just that one spot where it works and nowhere else

@makinbacon21

5 жыл бұрын

Ascaban I’m p sure u can do it in Portal 2 custom editor

@ERROR_-_404

5 жыл бұрын

@@makinbacon21 you cant. as far as i know, there is a console command that, if 'true' causes a portal to disappear if the ground they're on moves. that command always stays active, apart from that one level.

"In the game, the portals pretty much never move relative to the environment." Boom. Problem solved!

@elliebrooke3987

4 жыл бұрын

Except in the one part of portal two when they changed it for the sake of a fun mini-puzzle. And also the moon

@link_team3855

4 жыл бұрын

Well. Only time the portals ever move relative to their surroundings is portal 2, the neurotoxin generator.

@luken2o223

4 жыл бұрын

@@link_team3855 And how do the portals work? A or B?

@randomperson-kv5nx

4 жыл бұрын

@@luken2o223 can't be a you would be smushed like a pancake force on an object causes another to move except in videogames, like Minecraft the speed you go when you tp, you would be dead.

@funposting8912

4 жыл бұрын

Luke N2O it was moving sideways, not vertically, so some argue “you can’t move them forwards and backwards in the direction they face, so it doesn’t count!” You could still do the test at the end of the video, however.

If the cube is on the floor it will just plop out This is because the portal stops moving when it reaches the floor (and that there's nothing forcing the cube off the floor it's sitting on). This can be seen in a non-portal variation of the example. Instead of the portals you have a second room with a hole in the bottom and drop it so the hole falls around the cube. Relatively speaking, the cube is moving towards the room, and yet when the room lands around the cube, it doesn't suddenly shoot up. The falling room stops when it hits the floor so then the relative speed of the cube and the room are the same. To someone in the falling room that cube could be traveling incredibly fast, but at the moment of impact the cube stops. This example would suggest however, that a floating cube would fly out the other end, but that also gets into other portal weirdness.

@J4hk3

10 ай бұрын

*_"This example would suggest however, that a floating cube would fly out the other end"_* You've hit upon the mistake with this analogy, to your credit a lot of people fail to realise this part. The thing about falling room analogies is that whatever is in the room has to undergo the same changes in motion the room does. If you didn't then every time the room changes motion, whatever is in the room would shift position within the room. This would be the equivalent of picking up a panel with an orange portal, shaking it, and seeing everything near the blue portal suddenly shake around because you're shaking the "room" that the objects are in. So if a falling room is to be used as an analogy it would have to be used with an understanding that if the room changes motion then that same change in motion is also applied to whatever is in the room, so that it stays in sync. So if the room is falling at -10m/s (negative because it's moving downwards) then it hitting the ground and stopping is actually a +10 m/s change in motion making it 0 m/s. So that +10m/s is also applied to the objects in the room, that were falling with the room at -10 m/s, they also get brought to 0m/s so that they stop with the room (otherwise they would experience the equivalent of being on a freefalling elevator hitting the ground, despite merely being next to the blue portal) However, that also applies to the cube, that is now in the room when it landed around it, the cube also receives that +10m/s change, which is why it launches off the ground. Not what would happen with an actual physical room, but as we've established, the portal won't behave exactly like falling a physical room would. In other words A would only happen with this analogy if you're not correctly applying the changes to motion to the cube when the room changes motion. And we know this is the case because if we completely remove the room changing motion as a factor entirely, as you've observed, it actually results in B.

@dsp4392

2 ай бұрын

Exactly. There is no paradox. Just basic frame of reference stuff. For the cube to shoot out the blue side, the falling room would need to push the floor. Like most of these Internet disagreement, it all hinges around one piece of information that's not made available.

Option b makes the most sense to me at first blush, but the saddest thing about portals is that they /can't/ obey conservation of energy, so it's all kind of moot. This is exemplified by the what happens when you place a portal on a floor and a portal directly above it: anything that falls through the floor effectively has infinite potential energy.

@colemanbubar5098

10 ай бұрын

Well, if we assume that portals actively consume energy, we can satisfy conservation of energy by concluding that any energy gained by raising the cube is less than or equal to the energy lost through keeping the portals active.

There's no paradox. Your initial premise id's incorrect, there is no movement in relationto the portals, they are the same point in space. It's like asking if you passed a hoola-hoop quickly over a box, the box would shoot up. The portals in the game don't teleport objects, they link two points in space to make them the same point in space.

@federtm2

5 жыл бұрын

Exaaaaaaactly what I've been thinking through the whole video.

@emperorleachicus2199

5 жыл бұрын

That’s what I was thinking. It baffles me when he started talking about it squishing up inside the portal - no, that portion of the cube would just hang out of the other end of the portal, eventually having a greater mass on the blue side than the orange, causing gravity to pull it downwards, “tipping” it out of the portal. No acceleration is required, the cube is just suddenly at a different point in space and is affected differently by gravity on one side of the portal than the other.

@westonmundy5423

5 жыл бұрын

Take a look at some of the visuals. Yes they connect two points in space however by what manner do they do the objects exit in relation to the entrance/exit is the question. If you were looking at real life put a box on the ground and take two hula-hoops. Say one hula-hoop is the entrance and the other is the exit. Now set one against a door or wall and drop the other over the box. Will the hula-hoop you dropped over the box be stuck on top of the box, have the box come out with a velocity from the other hoop, come out with no velocity, or come out as a flat object? (You answer is then 3:06, Option B, Option C, or Option A respectively) Does this make sense as an explanation?

@fredfredburgeryes123

5 жыл бұрын

And yet, in the example of a hula hoop, the box would have a velocity relative to the hoop. If the hoop passes over the cube at 5 m/s, then the cube will "enter" one side and "exit" the other at that 5 m/s. The moving side of the hoop would pass over the stationary cube at 5 m/s and the cube would exit the stationary side at 5 m/s relative to the hoop.

@Jdietz43

5 жыл бұрын

Exactly. I was going crazy when he started talking about boxes "squishing", or portals becoming walls(???) if his own perception of motion became invalid for the object. Imagine you had a stationary box sitting on a windowsill, and you were able to move the window frame itself laterally from one side of the box to the other. There's no extra movement imparted on the box from this action, the only factor in its movement is friction and center of mass. The fact that it's no longer oriented the same way is irrelevant until the center of mass reaches the other side of the portal and it tips out if there's space for it to do so. That's all portals are in this case. Two sides of the same "wall" for a window. The difference in movement between the two "halves" of the portal is irrelevant and lost in whatever subspace realm of fantasy they were created in, the connection is not rigid.

Answer to the bonus question: If the portals were like 3D printers, the cube would come out slanted.

@cubicengineering4715

4 жыл бұрын

Oooo I like your thinking! Although if the speed is measured relative to the moving portal then while the part of the portal that prints is moving the object is also moving just the same, lining it back up again.

@Mr_Chaotic_Neutral

4 жыл бұрын

2+1D printers. 3s dont exist according to valve.

@connorbagwell4465

4 жыл бұрын

If the portals were like 3d printers, you wouldnt be able to see through them like in the game

Because of the nature of the portal, I think it would depend on how fast the orange portal is moving. The cube could be "sucked" into the orange portal and fly out the blue one. as soon as the orange portal "touches" the cube at a high speed, the end of the cube is quickly shot out the other end. If the force moving it through the blue portal is stronger than gravity, the cube would be launched through the blue portal without the orange portal even needing to fully envelop the cube. Because velocity is preserved through portals, the end of the cube that would be moving pulls the rest of the cube with it. If gravity is stronger than the force moving it through the blue one, it may remain it a state of "hovering in the blue portal. If we imagine the blue like a window and not a portal, we can imagine the cube is pushed through by the ground. the block is metal, the ground is a magnet, so if the force moving it through the "window' is stronger than the "magnetic" (gravitational) force, it would fly out. If the force is weaker, the "magnetic" force would hold the cube to the ground until fully through the portal.

@pigoverlord8250

Жыл бұрын

Something I would like you to imagine is if the orange portal was moving incredibly fast, like a good percentage of the speed of light. instead of enveloping the cube, it would stop after sending one mm of the cube to the blue portal. That mm exited the blue portal at a good percentage of the speed of light, and pulls the rest of the cube with it, making it fly out at the speed of the orange portal minus the speed taken by gravity

The thing that makes me cross my arms and say "A" is: how does the cube change from still to moving without making contact with anything? For it to fly out the other side of the portal, something would need to give it energy. The moving platform doesn't touch it, the platform it's sitting on isn't moving, then would it be the portal? Since it perfectly conserves momentum, (aside from changing direction) it shouldn't add or subtract any energy, right? What clinches it for me is shifting my thinking about what the portal does. It's not actually moving the cube, it's shifting where the cube is. Yes, a fast-moving portal will cause a cube to appear out the other side quickly, but that doesn't mean the cube is moving quickly, just that the portal's plane of "being somewhere else" is passing over it quickly. It quickly changes from gravity pulling it in one direction to gravity pulling it in the other direction. Also, the moving platform's energy dissipates into the stationary platform.

‘Depends if you think like a programmer or a physicist’ But when you program video games you have to think like both 😭😭😭

@dfaehab

5 жыл бұрын

Haaris Qureshi ....isn‘t this another paradox?

@Xezian

5 жыл бұрын

Not really only if you want to have realistic physics which you don’t always necessarily do

@MakotoIchinose

5 жыл бұрын

Ehhhhh not exactly. Unless you're programming Algodoo, which is arguably a quite accurate 2D physics simulator out there (and used by academics somewhere), you're not putting real life physics equations as is in video games. Even with advanced engines like Bullet, Unreal Engine (and PhysX), or GTA V's RAGE, the physics in 3D game engine can defy real life physics, even if the code got the concept right and believable enough to percieve by our logic outside speedrunning or uncommon situations. Besides, putting real life physics equations as it is in a game physics engine can ruin a game's fun and charm or even the gameplay itself. And performance wise, it's not good either to do those equation in 16 ms or less.

@bhanuvardhan

5 жыл бұрын

@@Xezian not really. Even if you don't use real time physics, the game itself runs on a set of rules you as a programmer input and it has to stay consistent and you have to chart your own "imaginary" physics from scratch

@bruh1704

5 жыл бұрын

Bhanu Vardhan yes but programming a new set of rules is a lot easier than programming an existence that isn’t even possible yet. Physicist don’t even have the proof of concept that a portal can exist except for theories and equations, this is infinitely harder than programming a game to say when X enters A send X to B with equal momentum.

Who feels like he wants to go and play portal again after watching this video

@trianglesqrt2576

5 жыл бұрын

been a while might as well

@PydraxAlpta

5 жыл бұрын

I feel like I should play it for the first time!

@firefish111

5 жыл бұрын

@@PydraxAlpta me too

@Alex.Francisco

5 жыл бұрын

@@PydraxAlpta It's 90% off in the summer Steam sale right now.

@thinkpasta8829

5 жыл бұрын

YES

The reeality is I think A, but what we perceive is B because the estra bits that try to make it through the moving portal shove bits that already made it through out of the way. This results in no pancake cube.

To the thumbnail question I have a question. Which direction is gravity once the box get let through the orange portal by the orange portal? Because the box would technically still be standing on the original platform and the gravity would be messed up🤔 To the final question I think the box would “jump” out of the blue portal at an angle. If the blue portal was equal to the orange and it too was moving, the box would just “jump” straight up because the box is moving in the same space vertically constantly. But since the blue portal isn’t moving and both the box and the orange portal is, the box needs to react to the orange portal being in movement. Hope it makes sence to read at least😊

Items are locally measured to the environment. As GLaDOS explains in the game, "Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing goes out"

@leonardusl5141

5 жыл бұрын

I don't see any reason why that would imply that speeds are measured relative to the environment, rather than relative to the portal.

@israelRaizer

5 жыл бұрын

Non sequitur. "Speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out" does not mean it's measured to the environment.

@lyanreehan

5 жыл бұрын

So that would explain that in the HL/Portal universe that there are quantum tunnels but the portal gun shoots teleportation data

@digitalunity

5 жыл бұрын

@@leonardusl5141 speedy THING goes in though. This implies for the item to go out at a velocity, IT must move.a stationary item would therefore plop out with example A.

@outofthisworldmovies5886

5 жыл бұрын

@@digitalunity A is impossible. By the time the portal fully covers the box the box is not fully out of portal number 2. then it is in two places at once. The velocity of the box is depending on how fast it went through the portal. The box went through the portal at the speed the portal was moving therefore emerges at the speed of the portal.

Option D. : When a portal move its just disappear

@yukkahiro

3 жыл бұрын

*cough cough* neurotoxin generator *cough cough*

@RedLoveAi

3 жыл бұрын

@@yukkahiro ahem ahem

@Prototrode

3 жыл бұрын

then portals can’t exist on earth because it’s moving via gravity might not even exist anywhere in the universe because dark energy is funny topic

@ethandavies7608

3 жыл бұрын

YuriNone well the neurotoxin emitter part was merely the only possible way to do said part. So you know. How else were you going to shut down the neurotoxin emitters for good

@scritch8833

3 жыл бұрын

@@ethandavies7608 idk wheatley was screaming at me so i didn't really get to think also i think i inhaled neurotoxin

I feel like it would be both as the portal isnt taking the entire cube with it so it could be applying the force of the portal's movement like B while the parts of the cube not through yet doesnt have the motion applied to it yet as the potential energy is not on the cube but the portal so it gets pushed through but has serious diminishing returns Its like the parts on the other side now are technically moving relative to the portal exit so it would have the energy of the portal moving but the part of the cube that hasnt gone through yet wouldnt have the potention energy of the portal yet since it hasnt interacted my idea can be explained if you used a slinky/spring instead the part of the spring that got pulled through would stretch and try to pull the rest of it but the part of the spring that didnt go through yet would also try to pull back the more of the object through the portal the more it would pull the other half of the object through basically taking the mass of both sides of the object and putting them against each other I like the idea of this similar to the portals that doctor strange uses the portals sometimes move and swipe people through them but rather than the portal flinging them at high speeds the portal just plops them through the portal at a much slower speed

4:04. I think that the cube would exit with the same velocity, but would be flattened like a 3d rhombus. This would be because as the cube goes through, the remaining parts of the cube come in at a further point of the portal, stretching the shape's matter.

I love that 12 years later were still talking about Portal

@NXE212

5 жыл бұрын

Altho there is no portal 3(beside bridge construction portal)

The literal term for portal is a doorway or hole between two places, if you have a moving door, your speed relative to it will stay constant

@Doglover745

4 жыл бұрын

Ok but, doors and doorways aren't the same thing.

@Theepic750

4 жыл бұрын

@@Doglover745 yes and a doorway is literally a portal

@Doglover745

4 жыл бұрын

@@Theepic750 yes but, this is about the hypothetical kind. Which is clearly not what you're talking about.

@MrJesvi

4 жыл бұрын

@@Theepic750 I didn't think it was complicated, like the orange one comes down to the cube on the platform, then on the blue one you'd just have the the cube on top of the platform, with just the the cube fully thru, and then it changes to the relative gravity once thru, your literally just tossing a hoolahoop on the cube, and what sposed to go thru pops out of the other hoolahoop

@tarrute

4 жыл бұрын

Or what about if the platform the box was on is moving relative the portal speed, but the portal isn’t moving this time. It would shoot out, right?

I would assume that it would plop out, and not fly out, because imagine the portal as a ring/hoola hoop, it just has a distance between the entrance and exit, a box that has a hoola hoop slammed down around it DOES NOT send the box flying up, it stays there, without momentum, therefor, in should be the same scenario if there were portals to do it with.

@cjthenarhwalking1378

4 ай бұрын

But here is the problem with your example. If the cube does only retains its moment and none of the portals then it shouldn't be able to go through the portal in the first place. In order for it to go through the portal at all it needs some momentum for the first particles to move out of the way otherwise they would just be teleported into each other. And for your example with the hoola hoop both sides are moving at the same speed, while portal one would be stationary. The two possibilities would be it would have momentum relative to the entry portal and would be sent flying or it has momentum relative to the exit portal in which case you would have two stationary objects coming in contact which is impossible so the portal acts like a wall.

Actually the cubes would be coded with local examples. Stationary cube plops out the other side and doesn't fly out, not because it's stationary. But instead because of the gravity pulling it back down from the other hole. While with falling through a portal it's all about momentum, gravity and the OBJECTS relative speed. It's OBJECTS that provide the answers to momentum Objects, Gravity and Momentum.

Physicists: Valve what will you do about moving portals? Valve: We'll make them disappear if they move. Physicists: Surprised Pikacu face.

@jfb-

5 жыл бұрын

Valve: makes portals move in one level anyway

@thanosattorneyatlaw4062

5 жыл бұрын

@@jfb- Valve: **disables special code to do so**

@coolguy284_2

5 жыл бұрын

@@thanosattorneyatlaw4062 Its not really special code, its the sv_allow_mobile_portals flag (accessible in console).

@thanosattorneyatlaw4062

5 жыл бұрын

@@coolguy284_2 I was making it more dramatic........ It's a joke ..

@anselmschueler

5 жыл бұрын

Maps have a flag for enabling moving portals. In portal 2, you can enable this using the developer console. However, the Valve Developer Community site, this option causes moving portals to be non-traversable for anything but lasers.

2:40 the ground gets closer to the portal The cube on the other end is affected by gravity I imagine it like a box going through a hoop If I drop the hoop onto the ground the cube is just in the middle and therefore on the other side of this hoop (other portal)

@fghsgh

4 жыл бұрын

Actually, gravity would also be transported by the portal, so if you put one end on earth and one end in space, you would be pulled towards the portal as if it were the earth's surface.

@coolguysbro101

4 жыл бұрын

fghsgh To be really technical in that situation, (to the point of being a dick) wouldn’t the jet of air coming through the portal into the vacuum outweigh that of the earths gravity? (A bit like the end of portal 2, the jet of air was greater than that of earth’s gravity and moon’s gravity combined. Enough to launch Wheatley & Space core into space)

@coolguysbro101

4 жыл бұрын

fghsgh Another question would be how the portal would project the gravity of the earth?

@fghsgh

4 жыл бұрын

@@coolguysbro101 The air may push you through the portal, but you'd still feel the gravity as only your skin gets pushed up but everything gets pulled down. So you can still feel the gravity, but you may be vacuumed through. If, however, you keep the portal open for long enough and the pressure evens out, gravity will have its influence back.

@arthurizando

4 жыл бұрын

@@fghsgh Following the premise that portals do exist, they could not allow to gravity to pass through them because if they did their own existence would not be possible, since the implications of the bent of space time caused by gravity would affect the meter around the other portal leading to a massive tidal affects in the earth what would most likely tear apart the planet.

Have you seen the Mythbusters episode where they fire a ball out of a tube at 30mph while on a truck moving at 30mph? The ball appears to remain stationary. Now imagine a cube floating in the air, and two portals are back to back so, they act as if they're not there (as soon as it goes into one portal, it's coming out the other, like the portals aren't there). Now imagine swiping the two portals at the floating cube. The cube would appear to stay in place, which to me, would indicate it's coming out the second portal at the same relative speed it's entering the first portal at, like the ball exiting the tube at 30mph on a moving truck. This is option B, which is against my initial guess of option A.

"how could a stationary object come out of a stationary portal?" That's the answer! The portal is not stationary. You treated the two ends as separate things, but they are the same points in spacetime. The thing is... The orange portal acts like a moving camera, and the blue one as the screen you see the footage. If B was correct, than you're creating a force from nowhere

@J4hk2

Жыл бұрын

You can't treat the portal as a singular point without abandoning the fundamentals of what they do. Acknowledging their ability to transport you requires acknowledging their positions in two points in space as it's between those two points that they transport you for example. At a fundamental level you have to acknowledge the object is moving on leaving the stationary portal exit, it's not a question of arguing that the portal is distorting things because its a part of the object that isn't in the portal anymore. It's not even a question of arguing that it only appears to be moving. The problem with your camera/screen analogy is that we're looking at part of the object has left the "screen" already and is quite literally occupying the space outside the portal while moving through said space. If you were to put your head at the exit portal as the cube came out you could be quite literally hit by the exiting cube which you argued was only ever moving towards you as an illusion. Thing is portals are already make changes to an object's velocity. It's the entire purpose of the portal fling technique in the games. You use portals to change a downward velocity to a sideways one. This change in velocity would also traditionally require a force, so the portal is, in the sense "creating a force from nowhere" unless you accept that portals are able to alter velocities of objects without it involving a force.

Don't look at it like a portal, but like a hole in a wall with the possibility of changed gravity in the other room.

@ndfan2007

5 жыл бұрын

This guy gets it

@RemedieX

5 жыл бұрын

@Gooey Prickles Sounds like you're overanalyzing it a bit. The way the portals function in the game is essentially like a hole and you can even put objects mid way in them. Applying real life laws to game logic is not wrong though and I'm sure you'd be right if it were real life circumstances because I won't deny that physics and motion aren't my forté, but game logic wise... It's just a hole and option A was the more reasonable explanation for the way the way portals function here. Though, real life circumstances are probably option B, if not something similar.

@alyx8815

5 жыл бұрын

I get both sides but listen to this. Say that a door that transports you to another one is dropped on you and you go through, but gravity forces you to go back through. since the portal is there you go back through but you ganed no energy so it doesn't push you out. You will get stuck between them

@alyx8815

5 жыл бұрын

@Gooey Prickles that is why I compare it to a magic door and you would get stuck

@alyx8815

5 жыл бұрын

@@RemedieX I get what you are trying to say but it is wrong. Option b would have to have force applied to the cube in order to whoosh. But since the only force is the smasher which isn't affecting the cube it would just go through because the "portal" has no mass and doesn't realy have anything to push

2:17 and considering Valve themselves have referred to the portals as “quantum space holes” in some promos for Portal 2, this is _the way_ the portals work.

@hinamiravenroot7162

4 жыл бұрын

They do obey conservation of momentum like he said yet he is still drawing the conclusion b that "if fast go in fast go out" If the cube was on a pillar, the pillar wouldnt be send flying just because a hole slammed into it. And the cube would rest on top of the pillar until the gravity on the blue side would pull harder than the gravity on the orange side

The cube isn't going into the portal at speed, the portal is going around the cube at speed, so I'd think that the cube would just plop down as if you'd dropped it on the other side of the portal

@SkyeBerryJam

9 ай бұрын

@@MikeMichelson-vv4zb it'd be like if I had a cup and slammed it down around a wooden block. The block doesn't jump up and hit the bottom of the cup, it stays still, if the entrance to the cup, is just a portal this time, I'd expect the same result. It's fun to speculate either way and I DO realise that this video is just for fun speculation

I have no idea how B is more logical, you're adding energy to the cube and the portal loses 0 energy in the process. Where does the cubes new energy come from? What losses were induced on the portal? I understand it's moving relative to the portal, but even when you include relative motion you don't answer where the energy comes from unless the portal is slowed by the cube traveling through. That breaks physics more than the portals themselves. Edit: talked with a friend about it for a bit and B is only possible if the extra relative velocity is added by whatever powers the portal gun, and if you consider the portals to be a part of a 4th spatial dimension, so they're stationary relative to each other no matter what their relative motion is to the 3 spatial dimensions we can observe. If you don't include a 4th spatial dimension and the energy from the portal gun itself, answer B can generate infinite energy.

@J4hk3

9 ай бұрын

Portals have basically never abided by conservation of energy laws. Most obvious example is something falling indefinitely through two portals, not only is the GPE of the object constantly increasing, but you've fulfilled the definition of a perpetual motion device which inherently breaks conservation of energy. Also portals being able to change the direction something moves means its speed and kinetic energy has changed in most reference frames. It in fact only stays the same in the reference frame where both the portals are motionless, which isn't the case in the reference frame the problem is presented in.

Too many people use the word "paradox" when what they're talking about is a "conundrum" …

@unclecreepy7025

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this comment. I finally decided to watch this video because I had never heard of the “portal paradox”. Then I was like, where is the paradox?

@framedkraken7403

5 жыл бұрын

They don't even solve the conundrum , just giving wrong answers.

@scalpingsnake

5 жыл бұрын

Paradox gets more clicks tbf

@martinconrad9260

5 жыл бұрын

@@scalpingsnake That would be a sad commentary on a channel that purports to set people's thinking straight about complex topics....

@scalpingsnake

5 жыл бұрын

@@martinconrad9260 I prefer to blame KZread. KZread make it necessary for clickbait in order to get the views you 'deserve'. Of course there are also the videos that don't deserve them and clickbait purely to trick people into watching and maximise views I am referring to the fact that respectable channels also do this because otherwise they simply won't get the views they probably should get.

In the game, GLaDOS explicitly points out "how the momentum is changed [when going through the portal], or more precisely how it is not" in a situation where portals are perpendicular to each other. I find that difficult to interpret in any way other than "B", that is, momentum is maintained, but frame of reference is shifted (and rotated) from one portal to the other

@tanaypandey1771

3 жыл бұрын

true , all these terms are relative and we can only determine in one frame possible , thats how our physical world works and portals are (as of now LOL) not possible . It doesn't satisfy space-time laws we have .

@noskillpureandy

3 жыл бұрын

If you take a piece of cardboard and put a hole through it and drop it onto a ball, the ball doesn't go flying out the other end. I think portals are like a hole in that cardboard, but the cardboard has no width and the ends can be anywhere. That would make A be the correct answer.

@Guinea.Pig-Gaming

3 жыл бұрын

@@noskillpureandy Yeah, but relative to the cardboard hole, the ball *is* flying out the other end, so option A would no longer work.

@lazykirby57

3 жыл бұрын

@@Guinea.Pig-Gaming so if for some unexplainable reason, if a hula hoop drops around me at lets say 20 mph and I jump through it while its still falling, then I should gain enough energy to jump much higher and much faster then normal.

@Guinea.Pig-Gaming

3 жыл бұрын

LazyKirby57 Not relative to you, but relative to the hula hoop.

For 2:15 The portal gun is also called the Quantum tunneling device, so it is essentially a wormhole creator

What came to my mind is that we were never told about portals producing or consuming energy. So if an immobile object starts moving after coming through portals, wouldn't that mean that it got kinetic energy out of nowhere?

@BalooSJ

Жыл бұрын

I mean, you can use a portal to a higher altitude and that's adding potential energy which is pretty much the same thing as far as the laws of physics are concerned.

@AlexKuz

Жыл бұрын

@@BalooSJ yeah but it would work the same with a lower altitude so...

Shoots out the portal at an angle, again it's relative speed so it's equivalent to it travelling at a angle towards the portal

@jantemili

5 жыл бұрын

damn i want this as a real level to play, pretty sure it won't work with the engine or something tho

@reddragon3132

5 жыл бұрын

Or equally, goes straight up if we're considering portals to work using option A

@thenirow5843

5 жыл бұрын

not really, because the other end of the portal is not moving also the portal has to interact with the object in some way and also had to deaccelarate due to the conversion of energy and impulse. Also your relative speed argument works against you, because if the cube shoots out at an angle you are changing the relative speed. Before it was moving downwards and "sideways" relative to the orange portal and afterwards it would move "sideways" and up relative to the blue portal. You can not just change the frame of reference, when looking at relative speed once you picked one you have to work with it.

@diabl2master

5 жыл бұрын

@@jantemili I really think it could be made to work.

@MisterJokestar

5 жыл бұрын

But what if it is As hypothesis... It would go straight up but the cube would be morphed as each "slice" of cube will be more off set as the entering portal moves. ... I still like B more but just thinking of A is still interesting

Bruh you can't place portals on moving platforms. They just disperse.

@guard8428

5 жыл бұрын

Besides that one time you could I’m portal 2 (but we don’t talk about that)

@CREEPZOMBEY

5 жыл бұрын

You can't place portals because they don't exist...

@dallasrenner1365

5 жыл бұрын

@@CREEPZOMBEY shut up

@YuriYoshiosan

5 жыл бұрын

Portal 2. When you destroy the Neurotoxin generator. The laser cutting the pipes was moved a portal.

@PHNeutre49

5 жыл бұрын

Which is called "Bending and Rupture of an Unstable Harmony". BRUH, for short.

Quick question, could you move a portal in the first place? I mean, a portal is always described as a "hole in space" so it shouldn't be possible to move it. For a portal to move it would be closer to constantly destroying and re-creating it, meaning no momentum would be transferred.

What stationary cube people are missing is that they're perceiving the cube as the fixed point in space here, when in reality you should view it as the opposite. Portals are effectively an infinitely expandable fixed point in space, where the entrance "percieves" space at a fixed point relative to it when it's moving (despite still being a fixed point in space), and the exit has the space from the entrance moving relative to it. This is an important distinction. To the exit portal, the floor in this case is launching the cube at the same speed the entrance portal is moving. If the second portal is moving away from the direction the floor is moving relative to it, it adds to the speed of the launch, as the floor will still be coming towards it at the same relative speed no matter what the portal is doing, but it is also moving relative to the object through it. The floor effectively gains the speed of the exit portal, causing a farther launch. This is also why if you put two portals on opposide sides of a wall and move them both past the object, its effectively no different than cutting a hole in said wall. The second the entrance portal stops is the second the cube launches. No different than a catapult. Obviously there would be some weird gravitational stuff involved as one part of the portal would be feeling gravity at a different point to the other initially, but in a space without gravity this is how it would work. If you have it stop half way down the cube, the launch would likely be half as powerful as well, as only half of the cube is moving relative to the exit portal, while the other half is stationary relative to the entrance portal.

@KeksimusMaximus

7 күн бұрын

What force causes the cube to move? Portals don't affect speed or momentum. What makes the cube move?

@illagevidiot8254

6 күн бұрын

@@KeksimusMaximus The fact that from the perspective of the still portal the world inside of it is moving relative to it. Despite being a stationary point, relative to the portal you are effectively moving at whatever speed the portal was as you pass through it.

@KeksimusMaximus

6 күн бұрын

@@illagevidiot8254 now describe what's happening from the perspective of the cube

@illagevidiot8254

6 күн бұрын

@@KeksimusMaximus The cube upon the portal passing over it is effectively moving relative to the stationary portal. The cube is irrelevant to the momentum transfer. It's pretty simple. When you look through the stationary portal you see the cube moving towards it at the speed that the moving portal is going. Upon stopping, and the cube being pushed all the way through, the inverse of the momentum that the portal was moving is then transferred to the cube. Its kind of weird to wrap your head around, being that we're talking about relativity, but it makes perfect sense.

@KeksimusMaximus

6 күн бұрын

​@@illagevidiot8254 Now I see what the B believers think. Now let me explain to you why you are wrong. And somehow you managed to make two false statements in a single comment. See, you just want to ignore the cube perspective to justify your idea of portals moving objects, when in fact the cube perspective is all that matters because it's the only thing that can have velocity and momentum in this equation. The platforms can move, sure, but portals on their own can't apply any forces to the objects that pass through them. Your entire premise is wrong. The cube is very important, because only its momentum matters. First of all, there is no such thing as "momentum transfer", you're completely and utterly wrong here. Portals do not affect speed or momentum, it's one of the rare rules in this problem that we actually know for sure. Think about it, if portals affected anything, that would mean that two stationary portals would stop any object moving through them, you would just hit a wall. The momentum of the cube is what matters. I don't actually have any problems "wrapping my head around", I clearly understand what you're trying to explain. You really want to say that the top platform with the portal "falling on" the cube on the bottom stationary platform is absolutely the same as if their roles were reversed and it was the bottom platform pushing the cube into the top platform. Which is absolutely not the case and is a lie. You see, in your scenario, the cube has no momentum or speed on its own, it's just standing there. And if the bottom platform were to move instead, it would actually give the cube the momentum it needs to enter the portal and fly out the other side. See, this is why you want to ignore the cube's point of view, because from the cube's point of view, option B makes it look like the cube, after being absolutely stationary, would instantly get insane momentum out of nowhere, and you actually have to construct a new (and false) term "momentum transfer" just to justify it. Portals don't transfer anything. The thing going through the portal must have its own momentum to move after it passes through the portal. In this scenario, nothing gives the cube that momentum. Portals don't affect the momentum of objects. Does my explanation make sense to you? Can you see why you're wrong?