 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
(Please see attached diagram, assume Portal physics, and assume that the steel
beam is perfectly aligned, balanced, and centered in two perfectly aligned
portals)
A possible application for such a setup could be energy production (if a
permanent magnet or series of magnets were on the beam, and you had a coil
around it). What are other applications for this setup? What if you had to
bring the beam to a complete stop every week for maintenance?
Assuming new portal formation is instantaneous and doesn't close the other
portal, what would happen if you came across this setup, and suddenly launched
the other portal onto a wall? That is, assuming that the steel beam comes out,
what shape would it be?
I don't know why thinking about this amuses me so much.
-Reactor
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'portal question.png' (22 KB)
Preview of image 'portal question.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Reactor <rea### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> Assuming new portal formation is instantaneous and doesn't close the other
> portal, what would happen if you came across this setup, and suddenly launched
> the other portal onto a wall? That is, assuming that the steel beam comes out,
> what shape would it be?
IIRC the game engine in Portal ejects the object from the portal if it's
half-way through in this situation. Probably to avoid the dilemma of what
would happen if it didn't.
And btw, the situation number 3 cannot happen because the beam would
simply collide with itself.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The main problem is: "assume Portal physics". It is of no value to speculate
on "what might be" if this is based invalid assumptions. If you assume an
impossible thing, you can logically deduct all kinds of impossible results.
Faultless logic leads often to silly results. Logic has nothing to do with
truth as such - it is a means to truthfully determine if an answer is true
or false, provided you know the assumptions you make are either true or
false.
Of course, this is not the answer you wanted, I realize this. It just makes
not much sense to speculate on this.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Reactor schrieb:
> A possible application for such a setup could be energy production (if a
> permanent magnet or series of magnets were on the beam, and you had a coil
> around it).
You wouldn't even have to weld the two beams... um, I mean, the one
beam, together for that. Did you ever try the "Terminal Velocity" challenge?
> What are other applications for this setup? What if you had to
> bring the beam to a complete stop every week for maintenance?
Eddy current brake.
> Assuming new portal formation is instantaneous and doesn't close the other
> portal, what would happen if you came across this setup, and suddenly launched
> the other portal onto a wall? That is, assuming that the steel beam comes out,
> what shape would it be?
Bent, I guess ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TC schrieb:
> Of course, this is not the answer you wanted, I realize this. It just makes
> not much sense to speculate on this.
I guess you missed something recently :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Reactor wrote:
> What are other applications for this setup?
Gravity drive. Just let the beam fall and fall, and you'll eventually be
trucking across the universe.
Larry Niven has a whole big essay on all the implications of teleportation,
altho he looks at it more as a "teleport this volume to that volume" instead
of "bend space to make things go a different place."
> what shape would it be?
Klein-bottle shaped?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> And btw, the situation number 3 cannot happen because the beam would
> simply collide with itself.
>
> --
> - Warp
I'm totally having trouble imagining how that would look. I bet it'd be really
loud, though.
-Reactor
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4. PROFIT!
[I can't believe nobody else beat me to it...]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> What are other applications for this setup?
>
> Gravity drive. Just let the beam fall and fall, and you'll eventually be
> trucking across the universe.
Er... wouldn't you just reach terminal velocity quite quickly?
Unless you could somehow do this in a vacuum...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> What are other applications for this setup?
> >
> > Gravity drive. Just let the beam fall and fall, and you'll eventually be
> > trucking across the universe.
>
> Er... wouldn't you just reach terminal velocity quite quickly?
>
> Unless you could somehow do this in a vacuum...
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Which wouldn't be that hard, since you only need to put a tube around the
portals and evacuated that space. Say, instead of a steel beam, you had a
highly polished cylinder of depleted uranium about 50cm in diameter. Even
though the vacuum wouldn't be perfect, the terminal velocity should be very
high, since you'd only have friction along the sides, as there would be no
front or rear.
-Reactor
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
