• Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 months ago

    The fact that people say A honestly makes me a little bit worried about the state of physics education

    Like… they enter at speed, why would they not exit at that speed?

    • Milady@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because they don’t “enter at speed”. The portal is moving ; not them. To them, they haven’t actually moved.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        So like i said, i worry about the state of physics education.

        Motion is relative, things don’t have some magical hidden speed variable tracked by god, all that matters is how things move relative to other things. This is fundamental physics.

      • pancakes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        But if you draw out the velocity vectors, the portal and people would have a would have a positive differential.

        Imagine a building comes flying at you and but you barely jump into the window. To you, you’re not moving, but everything else around you is. It would be the same principle if a moving portal came flying at you.

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        What happens to a pole?

        If the portal approach you as you hold it then the other end needs to be moving in it’s local space outside the second portal. That means it is given momentum which must come from the portal, likely taken from the momentum of the first portal which is moving. Also, the far end of the pole will likely experience a degree of inertia and push on the end you’re holding (at an equivalent of half the speed of the portal).

    • Devion@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, I’d be a bit more careful about making statements on physics education. The setup in itself is breaking physics itself. Arguing about what would happen is like saying “if we ignore the rules, what would happen according to the rules?”. It’s theoretical either way and there’s no correct answer.

    • Firemyth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Whoopsie. Maybe take another look at how portals are handled in the game. Then extrapolate that to this "conundrum "

      The answer is neither. They wouldn’t be ejected at all theyd just fall right back into the portal. Which would make them fall back through the orange back and forth forever. Until someone grabs the blue portal wall and pulls them out.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        So you’re saying that Portal is an accurate physical simulation of reality that should be used to base proper scientific conclusions on?

        • kcsmnt0@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’re saying that there should be such a thing as a “proper scientific conclusion” to this meme about a video game physics engine? The only definition of these portals that we have to work with is the definition in the Portal physics engine. There is no definition of anything that behaves like these portals in the scientific study of physics. It is meaningless to try to draw a scientific conclusion about something that does not have a scientific definition.