𓁟 host1.bitchan.one

+⧖I vibe-coded a physics engine just to prove my point. If you still think its A, you are just wrong. portalphysics dot xyz I vibe-coded a physics engine just to prove my point. If you still think its A, you are just wrong. portalphysics dot xyz
𓀐 @y7AVg78X: >If you were on the output side of the portal, watching the cube fly out of said portal you would describe that as a launching. Is a train launched out of a tunnel? >If you are proclaiming that there is a distinction between reference frames on the input side vs the output side then you are necessarily describing a discontinuity. I am describing portals. The whole point here is that they run into each other. You can be looking at the same cube in two ways, both in front of you and through the portal, and conclude that, from your frame of reference, it is stationary and it is moving, even before going through the portal. So which is it? That's the whole point here. But the transition through the portal is continuous and the motion is uninterrupted. It does not suddenly "switch" from one frame of reference to another, because again, this is merely a way of describing things. >Absolutely nobody is confused about this. Nobody. You certainly appear to be. But perhaps you don't even notice what it is you're missing. >Certainly not the A side. lmao, it's one thing your side always struggles with. You can say "yes I understand it's relative" and then immediately add "but the cube is objectively stationary!" >What's clearly confusing you, despite people telling you this over and over again, is that the people advocating for A are not treating the input side as a distinct reference frame from the output side at all. They're the same local frame of reference. That's ironically, the opposite of what you're doing. How can the cube be stationary and moving in the same frame of reference? And why does it suddenly stop in the frame of reference in which it is moving? You are explicitly telling me that the distinct frame of reference in which the cube is stationary supersedes all others. The only person you've managed to confuse here is yourself.

>Is a train launched out of a tunnel? If it goes airborne. >it's one thing your side always struggles with. You can say "yes I understand it's relative" and then immediately add "but the cube is objectively stationary!" Who said this? >How can the cube be stationary and moving in the same frame of reference? If we're talking about portals and daynamically distorting manifolds, there is no contradiction involved with a local frame of reference being in motion relative to itself. >And why does it suddenly stop in the frame of reference in which it is moving? If you're on a descending elevator and you reach your floor, why does the building suddenly stop moving up relative to you? >You are explicitly telling me that the distinct frame of reference in which the cube is stationary supersedes all others. I am very explicitly not.

⧖expiring ~14d0/1 kept1d ago

𓀐 @qxjipq=7

⏱ 2d 👍 0

⬆ upvote 0