Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-26919090-20170404012605/@comment-25458443-20170408103007

"Also, GLaDOS said Companion Cubes were sentient." -I think the notion with that line is that the companion cubes are sentient in a similar way to the turrets and personality and even GLaDOS being sentient. The first game also has you destroy the cube as practice for the final boss and the second game based a joke around the broken grid....I don't see you're point here about how the box never goes through a grid considering there's good reason for both games. But that's just the way I see it.

As for Rattmann...idk I consider that to be pretty mysterious but if an almost dead man is actually inside the cube than remember that that man is blind the everything in his surroundings and also (even if he could see) doesn't have any way of knowing MORE than doug does.....I always thought that was a really poor piece of evidence and plus YES, Rattmann is canonically actually crazy, soooooooo...

"If she burns the test subjects because she doesn't need them anymore, Why can't she just free the test subjects?" -Because she has zero motivation to free them, remember GLaDOS has zero compassion for people, she sees them as tools for her tests and when a cube/core/turret no longer serves it's purpose she incinerates them. That's why it's so satisfying to tear her apart and incinerate HER because it's a sort of "yeah how does it feel NOW" moment.

"Why does GLaDOS die when all the cores are destroyed?" -Well she clearly doesn't "die" die, she remains conscious and mentally reprocesses getting defeated over and over again right? So it stands to reason that the chassis functions as it's own thing without any cores attached to it but that those cores also served an important function. I mean this is personal theory territory but she doesn't just "shut down" without the cores, the entire chamber self-destructs. I can only assume that the scientists knew she'd kill everyone without the cores attached (which she did anyway but whatever) and had it rigged so if she removed them it'd all just completely backfire and wipe the slate clean.

"Why can portals move in the neurotoxin chamber?" -So the physics of portals moving is a complicated matter but I can only assume that portals can totally move in relation to where the first portal is 100%....BUT when aperture science plates in a testing chamber move they MANUALLY destroy the portal on them. I mean you shoot the moon and some spare tiles being transported which are the only two portalable surfaces that

A) Move

B) Aren't digitally connected to the A.S. mainframe.

So it stands to reason that inside the testing chambers walls that move make sure there's no portal on them, and if they do they destroy the portal on them.

"If the cores that didn't work were dumped in the incinerator, why are there deactivated cores in the end of Portal 1?" -That's a fair question and I don't really have an answer. It is worth noting that lots of cores seem to have managerial JOBS in aperture so maybe they only destroy cores that wouldn't have served a function if they weren't connected to GLaDOS or maybe the incinerator is actually there in case the scientists try to do what Chell does in the first game's boss? IDK that's a good question I think.

"If the Incinerator is actually higher than 4000 degrees Kelvin, then why would GLaDOS bother saying all aperture technologies remain safely operational up to 4000 degrees kelvin?" -Another question I don't have the answer to. Why does Aperture say/do half of the things they've EVER said/did?