π“Ÿ host1.bitchan.one

𓀐 @~uB77wt6

⏱ 2d seenβ›“ 0πŸ‘ 0β§– 1

filter [-]

languages:onother

Alright, since there's more people coming in on the A side, I'll reiterate that both answers are internally self consistent. They just rely on a different set of baseline assumptions about portals. >Side A: A portal is, apologies for the jargon, a localized topological nonconformity. There's no spacial discontinuity. There's no "spooky action at a distance." There's no distinction between the frames of reference on either side. It's all one continuous, albeit counter-intuitive, manifold. The box doesn't launch because there is nothing could have caused it to. >Side B: A portal is a discrete entity that allows objects to "teleport" across two discontinuous regions in space. Spooky action at a distance is, not only implied, but necessary. The two sides of the portal represent distinct reference frames with the only linkage being the portal itself. The cube launches because Inertia is conserved as an object emerges, completely agnostic to what is happening on the side it came from. So there you have it. The whole argument is about the same physics being applied to two different sets of assumptions regarding a fictional concept. Both sides take their own assumptions for granted and assert the other doesn't understand physics at the most basic level without ever addressing those assumptions.⏱ 12m↩