Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

JL Superman Seemed Stronger So Was That Punch From Hulk That Stoped That Levi.. In Its Tracks

Can Supes Take It??

He probably gets knocked down or sent flying but not seriously injured.

Hulk is a 2nd tier Avenger now. A coward and irrelevant

Hulk met the greatest character in the history of fiction. Superman already died and was beaten into submission by a human being. He lost to an oil rig.

Originally posted by The Spectre+
JL Superman Seemed Stronger So Was That Punch From Hulk That Stoped That Levi.. In Its Tracks

Can Supes Take It??

One punch i don't think he can. Isn't like he's gonna die though.

Same supes who took a nuke? Hulk tickles him.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Same supes who took a nuke? Hulk tickles him.

If you consider Tanking and getting vaporized to skeletal form equals then your english is different than mines.

So much lowballing on both sides of this argument.

Superman doesn't have the same mass as the leviathan, meaning a punch of that magnitude will send him flying but it will also help him absorb the blow. The punch will hurt him, maybe even wind him, but it won't do any lasting damage.

Bottom line: It's going to take more than a single punch from Hulk to take out Superman but neither is Superman going to be able to just shrug the blow off.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
You've got me confused with someone else there. I thought JL would tank after how downright pathetic BvS was. I thought it was you so it has now become you.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I thought it was you so it has now become you. Nah.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Following up BvS, there is no way it will make 1 bil. I actually think it will make less than BvS did. BvS got by on the names of Supes and Bats respectively. Despite that, the actual movie was subpar. People are going to remember that going in. It's like the reverse situation of Spiderman 3 making a ton just because it followed up Spiderman 2 despite the fact that it wasn't any good. And what do you know? I was spot on.

You know, I've noticed you've been confusing me with some other DC fanboys a lot lately. I've always been Team Marvel since I was a kid (three guesses as to where the forum name "Arachnid" originated), but I back up Supes in most of these threads because I don't let bias cloud my judgement. The guy is a power house.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
You know, I've noticed you've been confusing me with some other DC fanboys a lot lately. I've always been Team Marvel since I was a kid (three guesses as to where the forum name "Arachnid" originated), but I back up Supes in most of these threads because I don't let bias cloud my judgement. The guy is a power house. So is Thor, Hulk, etc. You powerset Superman which is to the same thing most biased posters do. Your mind has failed.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So is Thor, Hulk, etc. You powerset Superman which is to the same thing most biased posters do. Your mind has failed. Yeah, they're powerhouses, but not in Superman's tier (though Thor is edging closer and closer, unlike Hulk). The speed and strength divide between Supes and those two is huge.

And me, biased? Says the guy who tries to argue that Hulk would beat Doomsday lol. Even you don't really believe that, but anything to try to amp your favorites right? When I think biased posters, you're the first that pops to mind, and that's not a good thing.

Superman is as of the JL movie stronger than a planet. Hulk breaks every bone in his hand punching Superman's chest.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Superman is as of the JL movie stronger than a planet. Hulk breaks every bone in his hand punching Superman's chest.

There's nothing in JL to indicate that Superman is that durable.

Originally posted by FrothByte
There's nothing in JL to indicate that Superman is that durable.

Batman said it, so obviously a fact

Originally posted by NemeBro
Superman is as of the JL movie stronger than a planet. Hulk breaks every bone in his hand punching Superman's chest. Thor can withstand the full force of a neutron Star. Anyway you look at it MCU is bigger and better, gayboi. Hulk is stronger than Thor to boot.

Originally posted by FrothByte
There's nothing in JL to indicate that Superman is that durable.

"The Mother Box was designed to reshape a planet. But what if you were stronger than a planet? If your cells were lying dormant, but incapable of decay? A boost from the Mother Box-"
"Could bring him back to life."
―Batman and the Flash

Would you say there is nothing in IW to indicate that Thor withstood the power of a neutron star?

How is Batman an expert on:
-How strong Superman is?
-How a Motherbox works?

Also, statement sounded like he was talking in hypotheticals, basically guessing.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
How is Batman an expert on:
-How strong Superman is?
-How a Motherbox works? He has studied Kryptonian DNA extensively in preparation for his showdown with him, which explains him being an expert on Superman.

As far as a Motherbox, that is the device's function, literally what it was created to do. Notably, Cyborg doesn't contradict him. Cyborg's father extensively studied the Mother Box and passed the knowledge onto them.

The hypothesis was that Superman was durable enough to withstand the world destroying and creating energies of the Mother Box, and that if he did the creation energies would kickstart his cells. He was right.

Originally posted by NemeBro
He has studied Kryptonian DNA extensively in preparation for his showdown with him, which explains him being an expert on Superman.

As far as a Motherbox, that is the device's function, literally what it was created to do. Notably, Cyborg doesn't contradict him. Cyborg's father extensively studied the Mother Box and passed the knowledge onto them.

Studying DNA does not give you a full understanding of what a creature can do. It can help you identify characteristics like susceptibility to certain diseases or anomalies in our genes that can lead to developmental defects, geneology, etc. but it does not tell you that X can lift X weight.

Not a DNA expert, tho. So pls correct me if I am wrong.

If you were talking about the Batman montage where he looked at some computer files for a bit, I highly doubt that made him any sort expert on alien DNA.

I have the JL movie on my HD, pls show me (a scene description would suffice, I can look for it myself) the instance where Cyborg's father was shown to have full understanding of the mother box and where he passed on this information so I can review evidence.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
How is Batman an expert on:
-How strong Superman is?
-How a Motherbox works?

Also, statement sounded like he was talking in hypotheticals, basically guessing.

He isn't, but statements from non-experts count it they're about DC characters. just like expert statements don't count if they're about Marvel characters.

It makes perfect sense, if you're a massively biased fanboy.

Originally posted by Silent Master
just like expert statements don't count if they're about Marvel characters. Can either you or quan quote me saying Thor's statement doesn't count?

Also, same conversation with Batman/Flash:

Wonder Woman: Bruce, No, you have no idea what kind of power you are dealing with.

Also not contradicted by Batman.

Sounds like Batman was just guessing to me.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Would you say there is nothing in IW to indicate that Thor withstood the power of a neutron star? Damn it, I've been waiting for some time for the chance to use that exact argument.

lol

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Studying DNA does not give you a full understanding of what a creature can do. It can help you identify characteristics like susceptibility to certain diseases or anomalies in our genes that can lead to developmental defects, geneology, etc. but it does not tell you that X can lift X weight.

Not a DNA expert, tho. So pls correct me if I am wrong.

You're not using strength in the correct context here, first of all. Batman was referring to Superman's durability, rather than his capacity to lift x weight.

And studying his cells and DNA would enlighten him toward the source of Superman's power, his cells' ability to store and hyper-efficiently utilize solar energy. But read below.



Doing some quick research I actually think I misremembered Batman's research of Superman and was mistakenly giving him some of Lex Luthor's more extensive and direct studying of Kryptonian DNA.



Are you truly disputing that the Motherboxes' purpose is to terraform worlds? Did you actually watch the movie? That is literally Steppenwolf's goal, to reclaim the Motherboxes to change Earth into a Apokoliptic hellscape.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Also, same conversation with Batman/Flash:

Wonder Woman: Bruce, No, you have no idea what kind of power you are dealing with.

Also not contradicted by Batman.

Sounds like Batman was just guessing to me. You're using a statement from Diana hyping the energies of the Motherbox as being too powerful and dangerous to use in an attempt at downplaying them. Interesting strategy, I'm not sure it will work for you though.

So your argument is that Batman made a random guess out of nowhere that Motherboxes are meant to terraform planets (lol)?

I think the issue here is that Eitri:
-Being King of the Dwarves, who operate and built(?) the forge
-Who uses said forge to build weapons, where precision is needed.
-Even knew exactly how long he needed to forge the weapons.

Would unequivocally be an expert of the upper limits/characteristics as well as the conditions Thor would experience when opening the Iris. There is no doubt that he would know exactly what would happen. And the scene in question where he described to Thor exactly what would happen has to be taken at face value.

In contrast, the Batman scene describing how they would bring back Superman appears to be them trying to guess beyond hope something of a solution using something they do not yet fully understand. Thus everything there needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

That's my take of it anyway.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Also, same conversation with Batman/Flash:

Wonder Woman: Bruce, No, you have no idea what kind of power you are dealing with.

Also not contradicted by Batman.

Sounds like Batman was just guessing to me.

But it helps a DC character, thus guessing from non-experts are 100% true. just like statements of fact are 100% false when coming from Marvel experts.

Originally posted by Silent Master
But it helps a DC character, thus guessing from non-experts are 100% true. just like statements of fact are 100% false when coming from Marvel experts. So is the answer no, you can't quote me saying Thor's quote is false?

Originally posted by Silent Master
But it helps a DC character, thus guessing from non-experts are 100% true. just like statements of fact are 100% false when coming from Marvel experts. So how would you dispute Superman's tectonic plate shift that averted an earthquake as stated in the BvS newspaper? Thats something that's also been swept aside by fanatics on this forum.

It's so weird, I have been nothing but civil since I started posting in this thread, only to have this kid come in and attacking things I never actually said. What a strange little man.

Originally posted by NemeBro
1) You're not using strength in the correct context here, first of all. Batman was referring to Superman's durability, rather than his capacity to lift x weight.

2) And studying his cells and DNA would enlighten him toward the source of Superman's power, his cells' ability to store and hyper-efficiently utilize solar energy. But read below.

3) Doing some quick research I actually think I misremembered Batman's research of Superman and was mistakenly giving him some of Lex Luthor's more extensive and direct studying of Kryptonian DNA.

4) Are you truly disputing that the Motherboxes' purpose is to terraform worlds? Did you actually watch the movie? That is literally Steppenwolf's goal, to reclaim the Motherboxes to change Earth into a Apokoliptic hellscape.


1) "Stronger than a planet" isn't "tougher than a planet", tho. Choice of words seem misleading. Are you just saying that they meant Superman is tougher than anything in the planet?

2) I don't think understanding cells (not DNA) and mitochondria gives researches the upper limits on one's capabilities.

Also, bit of a disconnect here. First you say that his understanding is about toughness, now it's about utilization of solar energy. Pls explain what you're trying to get at here.

3) I watched the montage, all that is shown is what looks like Kryptonite matrix and a few strands of DNA. I still fail to see how this qualified Batman as some sort of expert in Kryptonian capabilities. All it tells me is: Kryptonite was tested against Kryptonian DNA and shows that it has negative effects.

4) Not doubting what a Motherbox can do (where did I say I did), I'm doubting their understanding of it as the Motherbox was being portrayed as some sort of unfathomable technology. They would have some basic understanding of it, no doubt, but fully understanding its inner workings, capabilities and limitations as if they were experts seems a bit of a stretch.

But still willing to change my mind if there is an instance where Cyrborg's dad was able to show a full understanding of the Mother Box and managed to transfer said info to them. I just need scene so I can review it.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
So how would you dispute Superman's tectonic plate shift that averted an earthquake as stated in the BvS newspaper? Thats something that's also been swept aside by fanatics on this forum.

To be fair, a lot of newspaper articles aren't 100% true.

Originally posted by NemeBro
You're using a statement from Diana hyping the energies of the Motherbox as being too powerful and dangerous to use in an attempt at downplaying them. Interesting strategy, I'm not sure it will work for you though.

So your argument is that Batman made a random guess out of nowhere that Motherboxes are meant to terraform planets (lol)?

That's a big strawman there. I never said they didn't know what a motherbox could do. Just they aren't really experts on it.

It's like saying that I know how destructive a nuke is, but that doesn't necessarily mean I know precisely how a nuke works.

Just that their portrayal of the scene seems to have a lot of guesswork and hypotheticals. The scene shows desperation on their part and the need to use untested extremely risky measures.

Originally posted by NemeBro
It's so weird, I have been nothing but civil since I started posting in this thread, only to have this kid come in and attacking things I never actually said. What a strange little man. Same thing happened to me on the first page. Welcome to every single Killermovies forum debate ever.

Honestly, it's why I sometimes cant stomach debating here for more than a few replies per thread. Some (not all) people tend to ignore feats, post personal attacks, and manufacture asinine arguments to get a leg up.

Originally posted by FrothByte
To be fair, a lot of newspaper articles aren't 100% true. But in a fictional movie? Knowing that nothing in the movie contradicted it's occurrence, and the director included it intending it to be an actual feat?

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Same thing happened to me on the first page. Welcome to every single Killermovies forum debate ever.

Honestly, it's why I sometimes cant stomach debating here for more than a few replies per thread. Some (not all) people tend to ignore feats, post personal attacks, and manufacture asinine arguments to get a leg up.

Chill man, I'll debate with you. I promise I'll be nice.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
So how would you dispute Superman's tectonic plate shift that averted an earthquake as stated in the BvS newspaper? Thats something that's also been swept aside by fanatics on this forum.

What expert wrote the newspaper headline?

Originally posted by Arachnid1


But in a fictional movie? Knowing that nothing in the movie contradicted it's occurrence, and the director included it intending it to be an actual feat?

Well, yeah. Nothing in fictional movies suggests that every single newspaper article is true. Or that they're not exaggerated.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1) "Stronger than a planet" isn't "tougher than a planet", tho. Choice of words seem misleading. Are you just saying that they meant Superman is tougher than anything in the planet?

Do you believe that all words carry only a single definition that is usable?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/strength

The first three definitions all partly or fully support its usage in describing something being durable or resistant to harm.



For a human no, but we're not talking about a human. More importantly, you seem to have missed that I've already acknowledged I was mistaken about the context of this scene. Can you read?



Where do you think his durability comes from? One leads to the other. This isn't a hard concept to grasp.



Read above my son.



I didn't say they'd fully understand its inner workings, only that Silas Stone extensively studied it and passed on the knowledge to Cyborg (the former statement is true, and the latter is implicit given Cyborg's own working knowledge of it being a perpetual energy matrix).

This is still a strawman.

Let me streamline what I'm saying for you:

The Motherbox's function is to destroy and restructure a planet, right? Batman knows this, obviously. He then theorizes that by activating the Motherbox and exposing Superman's body to its planet-reshaping energies, Superman's body will have the strength to withstand them and would be rejuvenated, which he was correct about. I'm not claiming Batman or even Silas Stone have encyclopedic knowledge on the Motherbox, only that the basic premise of perpetual energy machine that reshapes planets had said energy applied to Superman without destroying his body due to his invulnerability. I would agree it was a desperate gamble, but it was portrayed as one Batman was correct on. Would you agree?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That's a big strawman there. I never said they didn't know what a motherbox could do. Just they aren't really experts on it.

Then you have been strawmanning me. The most I've said is that Silas Stone extensively studied it. Do you dispute this?



Sure, and like a nuke, though Batman could not build his own Mother Box, he has an idea of how colossal the energies Superman would be exposed to are.

And the portrayal of the scene is that Batman's hypothesis was correct.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Chill man, I'll debate with you. I promise I'll be nice. You're a great poster as far as I've seen. Honestly, never change.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Well, yeah. Nothing in fictional movies suggests that every single newspaper article is true. Or that they're not exaggerated. Have you ever heard anybody use the saying "to feel the full force of" something with the nature of the statement being intended hyperbole? I have. Who's to say Eitri's statement wasn't exactly that when he stated that Thor would take the full force of the neutron star?

You see what I'm getting at. People tend to draw that line when and where it pleases them. They'll throw out Supermans feats and claim that soandso was lying, or this person doesn't know what their talking about, always going to the extreme to discredit Supermans best. Meanwhile, those same people will treat a potentially hyperbolic comment as gospel because it amps Thor, despite the fact that the feat in question is so far above anything Thor has ever shown. Anyone can apparently interpret any feat in any way as long as it backs their argument.

IMO every feat should be included as intended by the writers and directors. Give Supes and Thor their best. Otherwise, each side will just continue to lowball and attempt to discredit the other. This sets a solid line.

Originally posted by NemeBro
1) Do you believe that all words carry only a single definition that is usable?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/strength

The first three definitions all partly or fully support its usage in describing something being durable or resistant to harm.

2) For a human no, but we're not talking about a human. More importantly, you seem to have missed that I've already acknowledged I was mistaken about the context of this scene. Can you read?

Where do you think his durability comes from? One leads to the other. This isn't a hard concept to grasp.

Read above my son.

3) I didn't say they'd fully understand its inner workings, only that Silas Stone extensively studied it and passed on the knowledge to Cyborg (the former statement is true, and the latter is implicit given Cyborg's own working knowledge of it being a perpetual energy matrix).

This is still a strawman.

Let me streamline what I'm saying for you:

4) The Motherbox's function is to destroy and restructure a planet, right? Batman knows this, obviously. He then theorizes that by activating the Motherbox and exposing Superman's body to its planet-reshaping energies, Superman's body will have the strength to withstand them and would be rejuvenated, which he was correct about. I'm not claiming Batman or even Silas Stone have encyclopedic knowledge on the Motherbox, only that the basic premise of perpetual energy machine that reshapes planets had said energy applied to Superman without destroying his body due to his invulnerability. I would agree it was a desperate gamble, but it was portrayed as one Batman was correct on. Would you agree?

1) I can certainly agree that strong = tough. Just needed you to clarify that that is what you meant (thus the question at the end).

2) Batman is a human, so I'm not sure what you mean. I acknowledge your correction, just that I also wanted to address you pre-correction comment out of courtesy since you made the time to type it up. Why the aggression?

Durability can come from a lot of things in fiction. But being able to figure out where his durability works and getting a full understanding of its upper limits from (maybe) simply looking at what powers his cells is a bit of a stretch. Especially since it was never even alluded to in the scene in question at all.

3) And I can agree with you here. Some basic understanding of the device is an acceptable read on the scene. But we need to agree that, even at that point, the device and its inner workings is still being portrayed as unfathomable. Thus, they can't be experts and we cannot take their words as literal and quantifiable.

4) I can def agree to this. In fact, this is exactly how I saw the scene. What's our disagreement again?

Originally posted by Arachnid1

Have you ever heard anybody use the saying "to feel the full force of" something with the nature of the statement being intended hyperbole? I have. Who's to say Eitri's statement wasn't exactly that when he stated that Thor would take the full force of the neutron star?

You see what I'm getting at. People tend to draw that line when and where it pleases them. They'll throw out Supermans feats and claim that soandso was lying, or this person doesn't know what their talking about, always going to the extreme to discredit Supermans best. Meanwhile, those same people will treat a potentially hyperbolic comment as gospel because it amps Thor, despite the fact that the feat in question is so far above anything Thor has ever shown. Anyone can apparently interpret any feat in any way as long as it backs their argument.

IMO every feat should be included as intended by the writers and directors. Give Supes and Thor their best. Otherwise, each side will just continue to lowball and attempt to discredit the other.

For what it's worth, I was never one of those posters who insisted that Thor took on the full force of a neutron star. So you won't get any argument from me there. I'm of the opinion that majority of what is said in movies are very flexible and subjective unless backed up by feats.

That said, Eitri was the person in charge of that forge, the expert of his craft and thus the authority on what kind of powers were at play in his forge. I'm pretty sure the person who wrote that newspaper article was not an expert in seismic technology or tectonic plates. Eitri's knowledge was provided first hand, whereas the newspaper article was probably already 3rd hand information.

Originally posted by NemeBro
1) Then you have been strawmanning me. The most I've said is that Silas Stone extensively studied it. Do you dispute this?

2) Sure, and like a nuke, though Batman could not build his own Mother Box, he has an idea of how colossal the energies Superman would be exposed to are.

3) And the portrayal of the scene is that Batman's hypothesis was correct.

1) I never said you claimed it. I was merely saying that I might be missing some scenes so my understanding of what the movie was trying to say might be missing some context (and that might be where our disagreement lies).

Granted I also mentioned what I needed to see in order to change my mind so perhaps it was bit leading?

2) Not quantifiably, tho. He might know "really really lots" of energy but not its "megatonnage." I'm sure we can agree to that.

3) "Let's zap this maybe not-dead guy with life energy and see if it works wasn't a bad plan, really". So I can certainly agree that it worked out for the best in the end.

Originally posted by FrothByte
To be fair, a lot of newspaper articles aren't 100% true.

Ha I Like That...

Originally posted by The Spectre+
JL Superman Seemed Stronger So Was That Punch From Hulk That Stoped That Levi.. In Its Tracks

Can Supes Take It??

A punch that was less than 50tons of force?
This thread is stupid.

Originally posted by Silent Master
What expert wrote the newspaper headline?

That's irrelevant. This isn't real life. It's all about what the writer WANTS TO BE TRUE. He basically wanted Superman to do the same thing as Reeve Superman did. Therefore, Cavil Superman did.

Originally posted by h1a8
That's irrelevant. This isn't real life. It's all about what the writer WANTS TO BE TRUE. He basically wanted Superman to do the same thing as Reeve Superman did. Therefore, Cavil Superman did. Nah, you decide what the writer means all the time changing the standards from thread to thread.

Originally posted by h1a8
That's irrelevant. This isn't real life. It's all about what the writer WANTS TO BE TRUE. He basically wanted Superman to do the same thing as Reeve Superman did. Therefore, Cavil Superman did.


The Writer means jack here.

On Screen Feats only. Not what you think the writer imagines in his head.

Originally posted by h1a8
That's irrelevant. This isn't real life. It's all about what the writer WANTS TO BE TRUE. He basically wanted Superman to do the same thing as Reeve Superman did. Therefore, Cavil Superman did.

Prove that was the writer intended for Cavil Superman to have performed the feat.

Since h1 likes to point out his old computation of the Leviathan punch using nothing but his assumed values, I hereby present a corrected version using corrected values (using the calculation methodology he provided of F=MA) using timestamped evidence-based research instead of h1 biased-math.

As a comparison, here is h1's math and evidence-methodology (aka. practically none):

Originally posted by h1a8
I mathematically proved that the leviathan punch was under 200 tons of force. That's assuming the leviathan weighed 1000 tons.

For those who are not adept in physics, here you go.
Note: The Leviathan is probably somewhere between 200-500 tons. Let’s just say 1000 tons for the sake of argument. That way, no one should have a problem.

How much force does it take to stop a 1000ton object moving at 20m/s in 10 seconds?
Force = change in momentum/ change in time
= (1000ton * 20m/s) /(10s)
= (907185kg * 20m/s) /(10s)
= 1.81e6 N
= 204 tons of force

So assuming Hulk wasn’t bracing (allowing the concrete to supply the pushing or stopping force) then its a 204 ton feat at the most.

But the reality is that the concrete was supplying the majority of the stopping force as Hulk’s arm was extended through the majority of the feat (he did give a little push here and there though). So the feat is significantly less than 204 tons.



NOTE: I am not a physicist so anyone with a correction (except h1 since I don't trust you and you'll just lie, obfuscate or try to muddy the waters whenever you can), feel free to chime in.

I've edited the below quotes of mine to make them a bit more to-the-point rather than include parts where I was reminding h1 why I don't particularly trust his math. Also added further corrections, clarifications and updates to values on the post.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The sudden deceleration occured exactly 1:17-1:18 wheras the Leviathan was moving at 20 m/s (value provided by h1) prior to it and suddenly slowed to (based on Hulk's starting distance and distance traveled from 1:18-1:28) around 1 m/s (this number will be further corrected below).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzvSM5nTi0s

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Actually, reviewing the video and running it over and over again, (using the signpost and car as frames of reference @ 1:19-1:20) it looks closer to about 4m/s within the first 2 seconds then drops off to 1m/s @ 1:20 and beyond.

Basis: Car is about 5m in length. Hulk started at 1m behind car and street sign was around 1 car length @ 1:18 and ended at around a little less than 2 car lengths @ 1:20 behind the sign. Speed drastically drops off at 1:20 til full stop while the Leviathan's tail gets whipped into the air. This is the low end.

If we use Hulk as the basis (who is around 2.5 meters in height, according to some numbers), the lamp post is about under 3 hulk distance, 2.8 it looks like from the lamp post. Seems to be a discrepancy of about 33% give or take.

Have been trying to get the right velocity of the Leviathan. Funny enough the 20 m/s guesstimatge isn't so far off.

At exactly 0:59, Iron Man was chased by the Leviathan down a street and crossed (what looks like) about 6 car lengths (30m) from 0:59-1:00.

So a range from 20-30 m/s (can actually go higher than 30m/s since the Leviathan looks like it crossed an intersection with a gap larger than 2 car lengths) is as close as I can get it from the video.

So ending velocity of 4-6m/s from 20m/s-30m/s.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Edit. From the top view @ 1:22 it actually looks like 1 (so 4-5m not 6) car's distance is the more accurate measurement based on Hulk's position relative to the street sign.

So breaking it down:

Assumption: Leviathan weighs in at 1000 tons. If you disagree with this weight multiple the below answer by the % you think the actual weight weighs in relation to the assumed weight.

Thus, a computation using extracted evidence-based values covered by time-stamps (see above for details):
Starting speed (0:59-1:00): 30m/s
Time (1:17-1:18): 1 second*
Ending speed (1:19-1:20, 1:22): 5m/s

*-this is a lowball value as punches tend to last a lot shorter than a second, so value below can go much higher depending on how long a punch would last. Someone feel free to provide me with punch-physics/data.


F=MA

=(1000 tons) * (5 m/s-30 m/s)/(1s)
=(907185kg *25m/s)/(1s)
=22,679,625 kgm/s^2
=2,312.68 ton-force

NOTE: Value can go down slightly (percentile) depending on how heavy the Leviathan is and how fast it was going. Value can go up greatly (multiplicative) based on the time a punch manages to transfer its energy and the physics behind it relative to the 1 second I used.

Edit. Transferred h1's calcs above instead of this post.

Also, last note (correction): Above value should be expressed in a negative (As in negative force meaning one that is acting in the direction opposite to what you decide to be the positive direction.).

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Since h1 likes to point out his old computation of the Leviathan punch using nothing but his assumed values, I hereby present a corrected version using corrected values (using the calculation methodology he provided of F=MA) using timestamped evidence-based research instead of h1 biased-math.

As a comparison, here is h1's math and evidence-methodology (aka. practically none):





NOTE: I am not a physicist so anyone with a correction (except h1 since I don't trust you and you'll just lie, obfuscate or try to muddy the waters whenever you can), feel free to chime in.

I've edited the below quotes of mine to make them a bit more to-the-point rather than include parts where I was reminding h1 why I don't particularly trust his math. Also added further corrections, clarifications and updates to values on the post.







So breaking it down:

Assumption: Leviathan weighs in at 1000 tons. If you disagree with this weight multiple the below answer by the % you think the actual weight weighs in relation to the assumed weight.

Thus, a computation using extracted evidence-based values covered by time-stamps (see above for details):
Starting speed (0:59-1:00): 30m/s
Time (1:17-1:18): 1 second*
Ending speed (1:19-1:20, 1:22): 5m/s

*-this is a lowball value as punches tend to last a lot shorter than a second, so value below can go much higher depending on how long a punch would last. Someone feel free to provide me with punch-physics/data.


F=MA

=(1000 tons) * (5 m/s-30 m/s)/(1s)
=(907185kg *25m/s)/(1s)
=22,679,625 kgm/s^2
=2,312.68 ton-force

NOTE: Value can go down slightly (percentile) depending on how heavy the Leviathan is and how fast it was going. Value can go up greatly (multiplicative) based on the time a punch manages to transfer its energy and the physics behind it relative to the 1 second I used.

I believe this is correct.

You can calculate the feat by using both Time and Distance.

I applied the distance variable instead of the Time variable since i consider it a more accurate one.

According to my calculations the feat should range between 2000tons - 2500 tons depending on the distance you use.

The fact that both yours and my calculations both reside arround the same numbers point at the fact that H1 should have made an error somewhere....

Bellow i post my calculations.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Okay I will show you how it's done H1.

First of all you clearly forgot about deceleration which plays an important role here.

Force Formula: F = m * a where Force = mass * acceleration

Now we need to find acceleration therefore we use the formula:

Vf^2 = Vi2 + 2AX where Vf = Final Velocity , Vi= Initial Velocity, A = Acceleration and X = distance

We know that Vf = 0 because the leviathan stopped. Vi= 20m/s and distance = 8m (If you look at the scene, you'll notice that the Leviathan stopped very quickly. At a distance of approx 8m.)

If we manipulate the formula you end up with:


A = /
A = /
A = -25m/s2

*Note that we have a negative value for Acceleration which translates into deceleration**

Now we substitute into the formula for Force:

F = m * a
F = 907185kg * -25m/s2
F = -22679625 Newtons

The negative means that you require 22679625 newtons to stop such an object.

22679625 Newtons = 2312678.12 Kg or 2549.29 Tons

Hulk applied 2500 tons of strength in one arm to stop 1000 ton Leviathan moving at 20m/s over 8 meters.

Damn long time i don't do physics

Well, we know h1 used Ton-force over 10 seconds. Which is change in momentum with relation to time in tons. And if you multiply the value he presented over the time he provided (10 seconds) you'll get a similar answer (2k tons).

Essentially, (IMO) he deceptively used the 10 second divisor to try and lowball the "feat" hoping no one will notice.

I do feel the "stop distance" methodology would misrepresent what was happening here tho because the factors affecting the Leviathan's stoppage came in 2 instances:
>Initial sudden deceleration during the punch from 1:17-1:18.
>Slower deceleration due to gravity/friction from 1:19 onwards.

Essentially, the punch didn't fully stop the Leviathan on its own, it just greatly decelerated its speed.

Also, I would like to reiterate that a "punch" isn't slow application of energy over time/distance. It is a sudden burst of energy over a very short time. So we need to apply it at point of contact and nothing else.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Well, we know h1 used Ton-force over 10 seconds. Which is change in momentum with relation to time in tons. And if you multiply the value he presented over the time he provided (10 seconds) you'll get a similar answer (2k tons).

Essentially, (IMO) he deceptively used the 10 second divisor to try and lowball the "feat" hoping no one will notice.

Aye.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Well, we know h1 used Ton-force over 10 seconds. Which is change in momentum with relation to time in tons. And if you multiply the value he presented over the time he provided (10 seconds) you'll get a similar answer (2k tons).

Essentially, (IMO) he deceptively used the 10 second divisor to try and lowball the "feat" hoping no one will notice.

Also we are excluding the fact that the floor/cement bellow Hulk was crumbling.

Should the ground be strong enough, it's possible Hulk would have stopped it quicker.

Did an edit above on why I think the portion of the "feat" where the Leviathan touched the ground should be ignored entirely.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Did an edit above on why I think the portion of the "feat" where the Leviathan touched the ground should be ignored entirely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYYwayKbs-M&index=3&list=PL2RwxNNlDTeZ4zFljWNn8UOxQbrFgq10J

Check from minute 1:02. Hulk's strength is clear.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Since h1 likes to point out his old computation of the Leviathan punch using nothing but his assumed values, I hereby present a corrected version using corrected values (using the calculation methodology he provided of F=MA) using timestamped evidence-based research instead of h1 biased-math.

As a comparison, here is h1's math and evidence-methodology (aka. practically none):





NOTE: I am not a physicist so anyone with a correction (except h1 since I don't trust you and you'll just lie, obfuscate or try to muddy the waters whenever you can), feel free to chime in.

I've edited the below quotes of mine to make them a bit more to-the-point rather than include parts where I was reminding h1 why I don't particularly trust his math. Also added further corrections, clarifications and updates to values on the post.







So breaking it down:

Assumption: Leviathan weighs in at 1000 tons. If you disagree with this weight multiple the below answer by the % you think the actual weight weighs in relation to the assumed weight.

Thus, a computation using extracted evidence-based values covered by time-stamps (see above for details):
Starting speed (0:59-1:00): 30m/s
Time (1:17-1:18): 1 second*
Ending speed (1:19-1:20, 1:22): 5m/s

*-this is a lowball value as punches tend to last a lot shorter than a second, so value below can go much higher depending on how long a punch would last. Someone feel free to provide me with punch-physics/data.


F=MA

=(1000 tons) * (5 m/s-30 m/s)/(1s)
=(907185kg *25m/s)/(1s)
=22,679,625 kgm/s^2
=2,312.68 ton-force

NOTE: Value can go down slightly (percentile) depending on how heavy the Leviathan is and how fast it was going. Value can go up greatly (multiplicative) based on the time a punch manages to transfer its energy and the physics behind it relative to the 1 second I used.


There is a contradiction when using your speed estimate along with the time and distance we observe.

Thus we must rule one of them out.
Speed should be rule out because the speed at the time of impact is an assumption, whereas the time and distance of the stoppage is observed during the scene and can be measured.

Calculations
Time t= 10s, Distance d = 15-20m (NOT 8m), Initial Velocity Vo = Unknown, and Final Velocity Vf = 0 (although Hulk never completely stopped it)

We have the following system of equations
1) Vf = Vo + a*t.
2) d = Vo*t + 1/2a*t^2

I'll use the larger estimate of d since that gives the greatest acceleration and hence greatest force.

Plugging in the values gives
1) 0 = Vo + 10a
2) 20 = 10Vo + 50a

Solving 1) for Vo and substituting into 2) yields a = -0.4m/s^2

1000tons = 910000kg
So the average stopping force is F = 910000*(-0.4)N = 41 tons of force.

Originally posted by h1a8
Distance d = 15-20m (NOT 8m)

Are you ****ing kidding me!? That is not even near 15m!!! 10meters would be a max!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amVfFRNmDE4

Minute 0:53 Hulk hits the Leviathan a bit infront the blue sign. Minute 0:57 Hulk stops moving right infront the white car and a bit behind the blue sign.

That is NOWHERE near 15 m!!!! PLEASE RECONSIDER YOUR WORDS.

Originally posted by h1a8
There is a contradiction when using your speed estimate along with the time and distance we observe.

Thus we must rule one of them out.
Speed should be rule out because the speed at the time of impact is an assumption, whereas the time and distance of the stoppage is observed during the scene and can be measured.

Calculations
Time t= 10s, Distance d = 15-20m (NOT 8m), Initial Velocity Vo = Unknown, and Final Velocity Vf = 0 (although Hulk never completely stopped it)

We have the following system of equations
1) Vf = Vo + a*t.
2) d = Vo*t + 1/2a*t^2

I'll use the larger estimate of d since that gives the greatest acceleration and hence greatest force.

Plugging in the values gives
1) 0 = Vo + 10a
2) 20 = 10Vo + 50a

Solving 1) for Vo and substituting into 2) yields a = -0.4m/s^2

1000tons = 910000kg
So the average stopping force is F = 910000*(-0.4)N = 41 tons of force.

Furthermore, Hulk stopped moving in minute 0:57!!! Which means he was able to contain the force in 4s in contrast to the 10s you claimed!

Clearly Mr. H1 your calculations are ERRONEOUS.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Are you ****ing kidding me!? That is not even near 15m!!! 10meters would be a max!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amVfFRNmDE4

Minute 0:53 Hulk hits the Leviathan a bit infront the blue sign. Minute 0:57 Hulk stops moving right infront the white car and a bit behind the blue sign.

That is NOWHERE near 15 m!!!! PLEASE RECONSIDER YOUR WORDS. Wrong. The leviathan started somewhere at the red car in the previous scene. You see Hulk gets pushed by by about 3m before the next scene starts. Leviathan traveled about 3.5 car lengths. A small car is about 4.5m long.

Basically more than 1 car length in front of the pole and about 2 car lengths behind the pole.

Note : The larger the distance then the greater the force, since 10 seconds is fixed.

Originally posted by h1a8
Wrong. The leviathan started somewhere at the red car in the previous scene. You see Hulk gets pushed by by about 3m before the next scene starts. Leviathan traveled about 3.5 car lengths. A small car is about 4.5m long.

Basically more than 1 car length in front of the pole and about 2 car lengths behind the pole.

Note : The larger the distance then the greater the force, since 10 seconds is fixed. '

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amVfFRNmDE4

Minute 0:58. You have an air view of the scene.

You can clearly see a car on flames. The distance from that car to the pole is 1 car distance MAX! Again, the pole was right behind the red car! 1 car MAX.

2 cars = 8m.

@nibedicus
I calculated the AVERAGE FORCE needed to stop the Leviathan in 10s over that distance.

A car is 4.5m in length. Hulk was pushed back about 3.5 car lengths. I can easily battelzone you on that.
But note:
The greater the distance then the greater the force needed. So a distance of 8m would produce a smaller force which would go against you. So we can use 8m if you like.

The initial punch did almost nothing in stopping the momentum. Hulk just knocked its head down to the ground. So that single application of force is not very impressive.

Originally posted by h1a8
@nibedicus
I calculated the AVERAGE FORCE needed to stop the Leviathan in 10s over that distance.

A car is 4.5m in length. Hulk was pushed back about 3.5 car lengths. I can easily battelzone you on that.
But note:
The greater the distance then the greater the force needed. So a distance of 8m would produce a smaller force which would go against you. So we can use 8m if you like.

The initial punch did almost nothing in stopping the momentum. Hulk just knocked its head down to the ground. So that single application of force is not very impressive.

Quit weaseling. BZ me on your computation right now. Loser leaves 6 months. Come on.

Fine, I'll BZ you on the distance traveled as shown. No "off-screen travel" BS. The distance Hulk is shown is within below 2 or slightly above. Loser leaves 6 months. You said you could prove it so let's go.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amVfFRNmDE4

Minute 0:58. You have an air view of the scene.

You can clearly see a car on flames. The distance from that car to the pole is 1 car distance MAX! Again, the pole was right behind the red car! 1 car MAX.

2 cars = 8m.

Look at 0.53-0.56
Hulk starts at the red car and is pushed back about 3.5 car lengths.

It's does not matter as a smaller distance would give a smaller average force.
So we can gladly use 8m. (small cars are 4.5m in length not 4m).

You still have to contend with these 2 points
1. Hulk didn't completely stop it.
2. After the punch, the concrete did all the work. So it's really a durability feat for Hulks feet.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Quit weaseling. BZ me on your computation right now. Loser leaves 6 months. Come on.

Fine, I'll BZ you on the distance traveled as shown. No "off-screen travel" BS. The distance Hulk is shown is within below 2 or slightly above. Loser leaves 6 months. You said you could prove it so let's go.

I don't gamble.
We can do it for fun though.

Look at 0.53 to 0.56 and see how many car lengths that is.
BTW, small cars are 4.5m in length.

But I don't mind using the 8m estimate. That would reduce the average force needed to stop the Leviathan in 10s.

Bottom line is: Hulk isn't knocking out Superman with one punch but neither is Superman going to be able to simply tank that punch.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't gamble.
We can do it for fun though.

Look at 0.53 to 0.56 and see how many car lengths that is.
BTW, small cars are 4.5m in length.

But I don't mind using the 8m estimate. That would reduce the average force needed to stop the Leviathan in 10s.

Bullshit. If you were so sure, it wouldn't be a gamble.

As of now, your entire computation is shit and every time you bring it up, everyone should just point and laugh at you since you are unwilling to back it up via penalty-based BZ.

It's quite telling that you don't think it's strange that in your computation, an increase in stopping distance would have a direct (not inverse) relationship with the stopping energy provided per unit time. I mean did you even think about it? Where it is common sense that a stronger resistance per unit time would decrease stopping distance. Are you seriously telling everyone here that the stronger the resistance, the longer the stopping distance?

I mean, you love to say "common sense". Common sense that.

But I'll not debate it here any further. Back up your computation via BZ.

Originally posted by h1a8
Look at 0.53-0.56
Hulk starts at the red car and is pushed back about 3.5 car lengths.

It's does not matter as a smaller distance would give a smaller average force.
So we can gladly use 8m. (small cars are 4.5m in length not 4m).

You still have to contend with these 2 points
1. Hulk didn't completely stop it.
2. After the punch, the concrete did all the work. So it's really a durability feat for Hulks feet.

The red car is just infront the blue pole dude...

And both Nibedicus and my calculations lie near the same numbers, despite using different formulas.

There's got to be some error in your calculations!

H1 will back down like he always does.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Bullshit.



Man Nibe, this is the first time i ever hear you curse!

Someone has clearly gotten your nerves.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Man Nibe, this is the first time i ever hear you curse!

Someone has clearly gotten your nerves.

Nah, Just calling it like it is. What he says is bullshit (aka a blatant lie).

Edit. And what are you talking about? I curse all the time! Fck you.

Originally posted by Nibedicus

Edit. And what are you talking about? I curse all the time! Fck you.



Nibe!! Ughhh....Why you hurt me like this!?


http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj531/Josh-Alexander/dr-evil-crying1_zpsgffxjvqj.gif

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Nibe!! Ughhh....Why you hurt me like this!?

No pain no gain sucka!

uhuh

i think KMC should create a math/physics forum where evryone should take lessons. h1 and nibedicus would be the teahers.
That would be fun

Originally posted by The Spectre+
i think KMC should create a math/physics forum where evryone should take lessons. h1 and nibedicus would be the teahers.
That would be fun

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Am pretty sure both Nibe and H1 would be very pleased to work together! They would discover all the existencial questions together without a problem

Originally posted by The Spectre+
i think KMC should create a math/physics forum where evryone should take lessons. h1 and nibedicus would be the teahers.
That would be fun

Any forum with h1 teaching it would have BS as a prefix essentially BS-math/BS-Physics.

And I don't mean Bachelor's.

Also, did you just insult me sucka? Don't make me hurt you.

.

Originally posted by The Spectre+
i think KMC should create a math/physics forum where we all will take lessons... with h1 and nibedicus as the teachers
That would be fun

Welcome to your first lesson.

3xYXUeSmb-Y

Originally posted by The Spectre+
. You edited this out. Coward.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Welcome to your first lesson.

3xYXUeSmb-Y

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Bullshit. If you were so sure, it wouldn't be a gamble.

As of now, your entire computation is shit and every time you bring it up, everyone should just point and laugh at you since you are unwilling to back it up via penalty-based BZ.

It's quite telling that you don't think it's strange that in your computation, an increase in stopping distance would have a direct (not inverse) relationship with the stopping energy provided per unit time. I mean did you even think about it? Where it is common sense that a stronger resistance per unit time would decrease stopping distance. Are you seriously telling everyone here that the stronger the resistance, the longer the stopping distance?

I mean, you love to say "common sense". Common sense that.

But I'll not debate it here any further. Back up your computation via BZ.

Anyone who does not like me can vote against me. Doesn't matter what the truth is.

Again, a distance of 8m would reduce the average force to completely stop the Leviathan (keeping the stopping time at 10s of course).

Originally posted by h1a8
Anyone who does not like me can vote against me. Doesn't matter what the truth is.

Again, a distance of 8m would reduce the average force to completely stop the Leviathan.

BZ's are not decided by regular forum members voting, they are decided by judges that both people involved agree to.

Originally posted by h1a8
Anyone who does not like me can vote against me. Doesn't matter what the truth is.

Again, a distance of 8m would reduce the average force to completely stop the Leviathan (keeping the stopping time at 10s of course).

BS. You think too highly of yourself (not surprised as you've always been arrogant) if you think ppl will be biased just because it's you.

Enough stalling. Do you accept or not?

Will H1 teach double majors? One in physics and another in martial arts?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
BS. You think too highly of yourself (not surprised as you've always been arrogant) if you think ppl will be biased just because it's you.

Enough stalling. Do you accept or not?

I'm not stalling (do you realize what that word means?).
I don't leave my fate in the hands of people I do not know.

Like I said, I don't gamble.

Coward.

Originally posted by h1a8
I'm not stalling (do you realize what that word means?).
I don't leave my fate in the hands of people I do not know.

Like I said, I don't gamble.

h1 running away from another BZ.

Originally posted by h1a8
I'm not stalling (do you realize what that word means?).
I don't leave my fate in the hands of people I do not know.

Like I said, I don't gamble.

Lol. All talk no walk. That's what you are.

You won't even accept a BZ, making an excuse that people would be biased against you on something as non-subjective as MATH.

We all know you don't believe in your own math. Thus, everyone can just ignore your "math" and call you a liar every time you bring it up.

Til you accept my BZ, you're done here.

I don't care personally. Anyone who has a problem with any of the calculations can just say it.
I'll keep an open mind.
Failure to point out which calculations are wrong implies that they must be correct and someone is butthurt.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't care personally. Anyone who has a problem with any of the calculations can just say it.
I'll keep an open mind.
Failure to point out which calculations are wrong implies that they must be correct and someone is butthurt.

You mean refusal for someone to play your dishonest game of constantly shifting goalposts without a medium for resolving it is butthurt? Sure whatever you say, sport.



I'm more than willing to point out where I find your calculations are wrong once you accept the BZ. Why won't you accept? It's math, you're either wrong or you're not. You seem pretty sure of yourself. What are you afraid of? 6 months is nothing, I'm sure you have a life outside KMC (as do I), should be nothing for a kung fu master scientist teacher like you.

I'm certainly not wasting my time arguing with you for 20 pages about where you're wrong only for you to again shift to another goalpost, sorry but I'm not stupid, and I won't waste any more of my time with dishonest weasels.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
You mean refusal for someone to play your dishonest game of constantly shifting goalposts without a medium for resolving it is butthurt? Sure whatever you say, sport.



I'm more than willing to point out where I find your calculations are wrong once you accept the BZ. Why won't you accept? It's math, you're either wrong or you're not. You seem pretty sure of yourself. What are you afraid of? 6 months is nothing, I'm sure you have a life outside KMC (as do I), should be nothing for a kung fu master scientist teacher like you.

I'm certainly not wasting my time arguing with you for 20 pages about where you're wrong only for you to again shift to another goalpost, sorry but I'm not stupid, and I won't waste any more of my time with dishonest weasels.

You pointed out that the distance of 15-20m is wrong. It is more like 8m.
What did I do afterwards? I gave timestamps to the scene where I made the estimate. I even said that we can accept the 8m distance. It would reduce the total average force for the feat though.

Nowhere did I shift goalposts. You pointed out the problem, I gave you the scene where I got it from and I even said I'll accept your estimate instead.

You are just making shit up at this point.

Not sure, but I do know JL Supes could beat Hulk down.

Nib set up the one on one challenge and present your case. H1 will just big you down with nonsense. If he refuses to engage he will lose credibility not that he has any to begin with.

@nibedicus

But you never pointed out the instance of dishonesty.
You thought there were here but I clarified the situation.

Just debate when he creates the thread.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Just debate when he creates the thread.

Alrytie. Will post it in the BZ section in comic VS in a few hours. Typing on an Ipad is annoying. Gotta get on my PC first.

Superman would be sent flying and be feeling it. He might even be temp KO like against Non. He wouldn't be damaged and would get back into the fight unharmed. Superman is impossible to put down long-term, and it's easier to stun him than to make him bleed confusingly.

I don't think any other response is consistent with what we saw in MoS, BvsS and even JL. He felt Wonder Woman's head Butt, Cyborg's canon and was stunned by the Motherbox separation. Those were the only 3 attacks he took, Hulk is all of them to the third power imo. Which again is consistent with MoS, it's easier to stun him and knock him down with sufficient force, than to make him bleed.

So the Battlezone is about what exactly?
The actual distance of the stoppage?
3 car lengths vs 2 car lengths?

BZ challenge posted to h1 posted.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=16615221#post16615221

Let me post some math that are probably better than h1's math of the Leviathan punch.

http://vsdebating.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:ConsumingFire/Hulk_punches_a_Leviathan

About four gigajoules, or about a ton of TNT. Sufficient to destroy a building. Which is reasonable really, seeing as the Leviathan was plowing through them.

I don't know how well h1's numbers corroborate this. I'd recommend asking dadudemon, or Astner if he is still around. I can't think of anyone else who has really calculated feats like this.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1) I can certainly agree that strong = tough. Just needed you to clarify that that is what you meant (thus the question at the end).

2) Batman is a human, so I'm not sure what you mean. I acknowledge your correction, just that I also wanted to address you pre-correction comment out of courtesy since you made the time to type it up. Why the aggression?

Durability can come from a lot of things in fiction. But being able to figure out where his durability works and getting a full understanding of its upper limits from (maybe) simply looking at what powers his cells is a bit of a stretch. Especially since it was never even alluded to in the scene in question at all.

3) And I can agree with you here. Some basic understanding of the device is an acceptable read on the scene. But we need to agree that, even at that point, the device and its inner workings is still being portrayed as unfathomable. Thus, they can't be experts and we cannot take their words as literal and quantifiable.

4) I can def agree to this. In fact, this is exactly how I saw the scene. What's our disagreement again?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
1) I never said you claimed it. I was merely saying that I might be missing some scenes so my understanding of what the movie was trying to say might be missing some context (and that might be where our disagreement lies).

Granted I also mentioned what I needed to see in order to change my mind so perhaps it was bit leading?

2) Not quantifiably, tho. He might know "really really lots" of energy but not its "megatonnage." I'm sure we can agree to that.

3) "Let's zap this maybe not-dead guy with life energy and see if it works wasn't a bad plan, really". So I can certainly agree that it worked out for the best in the end.

All right, so you agree that the Motherbox can destroy and remake worlds using its limitless energy, that Superman was exposed to that energy and his body was sufficiently durable enough to withstand the energy.

Where we disagree is on it being quantifiable. You say it is not. I say it is. Let's assume the low end of what the Mother Boxes can do. Let's say they don't completely destroy and remake the entire planet, but just the surface landmasses and oceans. Superman was durable enough to withstand energy that could destroy the surface of a planet. Do you agree?

Those energies didn't even damage Cyborg or the room they were in.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Those energies didn't even damage Cyborg or the room they were in. I don't believe Cyborg was exposed to the full energies of the Mother Box, given that awakening it to use on Superman required a Kryptonian Genesis Chamber and the Speed Force to activate it, whereas with Cyborg it activated on its own. Cyborg also would have only had the parts of his body that needed mechanical parts exposed to any energy, as opposed to Superman whose body was dead.

As far as it doing no damage to the room they were in, that depends on how you interpret the scene itself.

iK4dMzzw3e8

Was all the visible damage caused by the Mother Box, or Superman? Who knows?

More to the point, who cares? The energy wasn't focused on the room, it was focused on Superman. I don't believe Thor's forging of Stormbreaker had the room take any damage either.

I was thinking of the scene where Superman and Cyborg were trying to separate the boxes.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I was thinking of the scene where Superman and Cyborg were trying to separate the boxes.

Well he must have taken a lot of that blast bcos he said(although jokingly, but still shows the enormity of the blast ) that he felt like dying.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I was thinking of the scene where Superman and Cyborg were trying to separate the boxes. Given that Cyborg's shield could tank Superman's heat vision fairly well, and Superman's heat vision can hurt Kryptonians such as himself, is it really such a stretch that Cyborg has durability approaching Superman's, as the hardiest member of the JL short of Superman himself?

Originally posted by NemeBro
Given that Cyborg's shield could tank Superman's heat vision fairly well, and Superman's heat vision can hurt Kryptonians such as himself, is it really such a stretch that Cyborg has durability approaching Superman's, as the hardiest member of the JL short of Superman himself?
Well his body was created by the motherbox, as such you would expect he would be highly durable.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Let me post some math that are probably better than h1's math of the Leviathan punch.

http://vsdebating.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:ConsumingFire/Hulk_punches_a_Leviathan

About four gigajoules, or about a ton of TNT. Sufficient to destroy a building. Which is reasonable really, seeing as the Leviathan was plowing through them.

I don't know how well h1's numbers corroborate this. I'd recommend asking dadudemon, or Astner if he is still around. I can't think of anyone else who has really calculated feats like this.

Well, 1 ton of TNT can do this:
FAYVMXYYAp4

So that's pretty powerful.

Not sure if I agree with the math, tho. But I won't complain.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Given that Cyborg's shield could tank Superman's heat vision fairly well, and Superman's heat vision can hurt Kryptonians such as himself, is it really such a stretch that Cyborg has durability approaching Superman's, as the hardiest member of the JL short of Superman himself? Or that hv is vastly overrated.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Or that hv is vastly overrated.

No it isnt. That hv is capable of inflicting serious pain to even powered kryptonians.
victor's cyborg body was created using the power of the motherbox, as such it should be extremely durable. And that was exactly what we saw.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Or that hv is vastly overrated.

It sliced an i beam in half with a swipe.
It takes a LARGE amount of heat energy to melt steel that fast.

If HV is overrated because Cyborg blocked it, is the Time/powe stone overrated because Iron Man blocked it with his shield when Thanos blasted him?

why can't i quote nibedicus

Originally posted by WolvesofBabylon
If HV is overrated because Cyborg blocked it, is the Time/powe stone overrated because Iron Man blocked it with his shield when Thanos blasted him?

you nailed it...nice reasoning/logic

Originally posted by NemeBro
why can't i quote nibedicus
It Happens When I Want To Quote Quan Too. But Not Until Today Did It Work.

Originally posted by h1a8
It sliced an i beam in half with a swipe.
It takes a LARGE amount of heat energy to melt steel that fast.

Remember when you tried to claim it took star level energy to cut an I-beam?

Nibedicus, do you think you could do me a solid and repost what you posted last, and hopefully I can quote it this time?

It's funny because I can't quote this post either.

Oh well, I'll do it manually some other time.

Originally posted by NemeBro
It's funny because I can't quote this post either.

Oh well, I'll do it manually some other time.

You should be able to quickquote it...

Quickquote doesn't let me break up the post though.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Quickquote doesn't let me break up the post though.

quickquote and write. Then Edit your post and you should be able to break

Originally posted by Silent Master
Remember when you tried to claim it took star level energy to cut an I-beam?

The heat energy in a beam that swipes and cuts an I beam in half has to have at least the temperature of a star.

Originally posted by h1a8
The heat energy in a beam that swipes and cuts an I beam in half has to have at least the temperature of a star.

"At least the temperature of a star" is meaningless. Quantify.

Certain stars (a brown dwarf) have the temp of freshly brewed coffee.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/03/110323-coldest-star-discovered-cup-coffee-brown-dwarf-hawaii-space-science/

And still waiting on the BZ acceptance. Or have you conceded that your math is just as brown as that dwarf?