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

No Bfr or time travel and no speed steal
Flash isn't holding back (willing to kill) and knows how powerful Saitama is.

Round 1: Standard levels. Saitama (all feats before Cosmic Garou fight).

Round 2: Peak levels for both (most powerful versions of each and using best feats).

You got this from YouTube, but anyways, Saitama stomps.

Originally posted by carver9
You got this from YouTube, but anyways, Saitama stomps.

In both?

Yes.

Flash curbs

Originally posted by carver9
Yes.

Well I have an argument for flash.
1. Flash is quantifiable faster
2. Flash can potentially gain more mass (thus energy) than Saitama has ever been hit with before. For example, a star amount of mass.
3. Flash is willing to kill and knows Saitama power (one punch will kill him, etc)

Originally posted by h1a8
Well I have an argument for flash.
1. Flash is quantifiable faster
2. Flash can potentially gain more mass (thus energy) than Saitama has ever been hit with before. For example, a star amount of mass.
3. Flash is willing to kill and knows Saitama power (one punch will kill him, etc)

How fast would Saitama have to be in order to hit Flash?

Saitama destroyed STARS in a fight against Gaurou and withstood those same punches moments later as if they were feathers falling on him.

What's Flash strongest punch? Remember, CIS is on.

Originally posted by carver9
How fast would Saitama have to be in order to hit Flash?

Saitama destroyed STARS in a fight against Gaurou and withstood those same punches moments later as if they were feathers falling on him.

What's Flash strongest punch? Remember, CIS is on.

In the first fight Saitama isn't that powerful. But you agreed on both fights he wins.
So he gets koed by a star mass IMP punch.

Saitama would have to be as fast to have a 100% chance of hitting Flash.
And 50% as fast to have a 10% chance.

With CIS off (remember Flash is willing to kill here) then Flash can gain the mass of a star easily. That's more than Saitama ever faced before his upgrade.

In the 2nd fight, you could be right and Flash possibly loses since Saitama is MANY times faster than light and insanely durable
(unless you call stalemate and Flash doesn't go for the IMP and just stays well above light speed).

Flash phases his hand in Saitamas chest and Kanos his ass.

Originally posted by h1a8
In the first fight Saitama isn't that powerful. But you agreed on both fights he wins.
So he gets koed by a star mass IMP punch.

Saitama would have to be as fast to have a 100% chance of hitting Flash.
And 50% as fast to have a 10% chance.

With CIS off (remember Flash is willing to kill here) then Flash can gain the mass of a star easily. That's more than Saitama ever faced before his upgrade.

In the 2nd fight, you could be right and Flash possibly loses since Saitama is MANY times faster than light and insanely durable
(unless you call stalemate and Flash doesn't go for the IMP and just stays well above light speed).


Nope, he doesn't. Same guy endured the pressure of a black hole.

HOW fast does he need to be to hit Flash?

Saitama and Garou destroyed stars and left a hole in space and Saitama endured those same punches onwards. I don't know why you keep mentioning star level punches. Who has Flash punched at star level hits?

Originally posted by carver9
Who has Flash punched at star level hits?
Thawne

Originally posted by carver9
Nope, he doesn't. Same guy endured the pressure of a black hole.

HOW fast does he need to be to hit Flash?

Saitama and Garou destroyed stars and left a hole in space and Saitama endured those same punches onwards. I don't know why you keep mentioning star level punches. Who has Flash punched at star level hits?

The pressure inside a black hole can be less than 1000 tons. It all depends on how close you are to the singularity and how massive the black hole is.

I answered your question on how fast Saitama has to be. Did you read it?

Flash has gained the mass of a star before. But that's not the question (of whether he can or not). The question is will he choose to. IMP is when you go below light speed (not above). Flash can go many times faster than light and therefore Flash can literally move at any speed he wants below light speed (especially with attosecond perceptions). That means he can gain whatever mass he chooses to. He doesn't kill so you will never see him hit anyone with that type of mass unless HE KNOWS they can take it without dying.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Thawne

What was star level about that punch? Or was it hyperbole?

Originally posted by h1a8
The pressure inside a black hole can be less than 1000 tons. It all depends on how close you are to the singularity and how massive the black hole is.

I answered your question on how fast Saitama has to be. Did you read it?

Flash has gained the mass of a star before. But that's not the question (of whether he can or not). The question is will he choose to. IMP is when you go below light speed (not above). Flash can go many times faster than light and therefore Flash can literally move at any speed he wants below light speed (especially with attosecond perceptions). That means he can gain whatever mass he chooses to. He doesn't kill so you will never see him hit anyone with that type of mass unless HE KNOWS they can take it without dying.

He withstood it. It's obviously meant to be equivalent to the full pressure of a black hole, not thousands of tons, lmao.

You didn't answer my question. First fights, CIS is on which means Saitama should be more than capable of slapping Flash to death.

Show me Flash punching at star level, please.

Originally posted by carver9
What was star level about that punch? Or was it hyperbole?
Given the fact Wally actually pulling a detailed explanation of why that punch can produce star level mass. I.E, when approaching lightspeed, one's mass increasing drastically, to a point that it can reach infinite mass( see how did he punch white martian)
So yeah, I would say it wasn't hyperole

Originally posted by carver9
Who has Flash punched at star level hits?


Captain Boomerang.

Has Saitama ever lost a fight?

Or needed to land more than one punch?

He's not a very good choice for versus threads unless someone wants them instantly closed for spite, lol.

Originally posted by carver9
He withstood it. It's obviously meant to be equivalent to the full pressure of a black hole, not thousands of tons, lmao.

You didn't answer my question. First fights, CIS is on which means Saitama should be more than capable of slapping Flash to death.

Show me Flash punching at star level, please.

There is no such thing as full pressure of a black hole. You have a gravitational force. The gravitational force can be anything depending on how close to the singularity AND HOW MASSIVE the black hole is. You ignored the HOW MASSIVE part.

And stop making stuff up. That's trolling.
I did answer your question concerning the speed Saitama needs.
One hit from Saitama will kill or ko Flash. Flash knows this. Plus Flash is bloodlusted here and not holding back

So you are unfamiliar with Flash punching Zoom and it's being stated to have the mass of a white dwarf star?

Originally posted by h1a8
There is no such thing as full pressure of a black hole. You have a gravitational force. The gravitational force can be anything depending on how close to the singularity AND HOW MASSIVE the black hole is. You ignored the HOW MASSIVE part.

And stop making stuff up. That's trolling.
I did answer your question concerning the speed Saitama needs.
One hit from Saitama will kill or ko Flash. Flash knows this. Plus Flash is bloodlusted here and not holding back

So you are unfamiliar with Flash punching Zoom and it's being stated to have the mass of a white dwarf star?

He withstood a black hole.

Your first option isn't blood listed flash. He gets killed. Second fight, he gets killed even faster.

Zoom has star level durability?

Originally posted by carver9
He withstood a black hole.

Your first option isn't blood listed flash. He gets killed. Second fight, he gets killed even faster.

Zoom has star level durability?

Flash is willing to kill implies bloodlusted.
He withstood a black hole? How much force was that? How massive was this black hole? You know they come in different masses right?

All Flashes and Zooms have super durability against strikes when they are operating at superspeed. So you can either say that Zoom has star level durability IN THAT SCENE or it is PIS for Zoom.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Has Saitama ever lost a fight?

Or needed to land more than one punch?

He's not a very good choice for versus threads unless someone wants them instantly closed for spite, lol. He punched Boros several times before he was defeated. He hit Awakened Garou and Cosmic Garou several times before defeating him.

So far, he's proven to be easily capable of defeating every opponent he's confronted so far with a single punch if he really wanted. I'd caution against dismissing Saitama as plot-devicey capable of defeating anybody with a single punch whilst ignoring that he's simply strong enough to be able to.

Like.... we get that Superman will ultimately be triumphant... but you shouldn't utterly dismiss his measurable feats just because you think plot demanded them be performed.

Originally posted by Astner
There's a reason mass is distinguished from rest mass when it comes to particle physics.
That is the old convention in SR but not the modern usage, as I said in my post.

These days the term mass, with the symbol m, simply refers to invariant mass. This quantity can be conveniently measured in the rest frame of the particle as its "rest mass", but the same mass (apart from a conversion constant) is obtained in any inertial frame by calculating the four-length i.e. the Minkowski norm of the particle's four-momentum vector. Thus, the mass is invariant by definition.

The frame-dependent quantity is simply the energy, i.e. the quantity E on the left-hand-side of the eqn in my previous post. There's not much value in introducing synonyms for this quantity; however, when the energy is expressed in mass units the term "relativistic mass" can be used for it. It's then important to include the word "relativistic" so that the reader doesn't confuse it with mass m (which is an invariant).

Mass = rest mass, according to the modern physics usage of the word. Nothing disingenuous or misleading there. Energy = relativistic mass (apart from a constant of proportionality).

Since there's no point in using multiple different words for the same concept, it is enough to simply use mass and energy. Speed increases energy, but not mass (which is invariant, by definition).

Originally posted by Magnon
That is the old convention in SR but not the modern usage, as I said in my post.

These days the term mass, with the symbol m, simply refers to invariant mass. This quantity can be conveniently measured in the rest frame of the particle as its "rest mass", but the same mass (apart from a conversion constant) is obtained in any inertial frame by calculating the four-length i.e. the Minkowski norm of the particle's four-momentum vector. Thus, the mass is invariant by definition.

The frame-dependent quantity is simply the energy, i.e. the quantity E on the left-hand-side of the eqn in my previous post. There's not much value in introducing synonyms for this quantity; however, when the energy is expressed in mass units the term "relativistic mass" can be used for it. It's then important to include the word "relativistic" so that the reader doesn't confuse it with mass m (which is an invariant). I call BS. I have spoken to many physicists (on physicsforums.com), saw many documentaries of famous physicists (like Neil) and they all explained the Lorentz transformation that calculates the amount of mass an object will have based off its relative velocity. They explain this is why it would take infinite energy to reach light speed.

Sounds like you been listening to some crackpot.

Originally posted by Magnon
Mass = rest mass, according to the modern physics usage of the word. Nothing disingenuous or misleading there. Energy = relativistic mass (apart from a constant of proportionality).

Since there's no point in using multiple different words for the same concept, it is enough to simply use mass and energy. Speed increases energy, but not mass (which is invariant, by definition).

Sounds like you are either making stuff up or have listened to some Crackpot. I've been talking to physicists for many years and no one talks like that.
Momentum isn't a linear function of velocity. A p =/= rest mass x velocity. For mass to be invariant then momentum would be a linear function of velocity.


Best case scenario, you are arguing semantics because Flash punches will be equivalent (especially in momentum) to getting hit with a more massive object traveling at the same speed (with no relativity intact).

Originally posted by h1a8
I call BS. I have spoken to many physicists (on physicsforums.com), saw many documentaries of famous physicists (like Neil) and they all explained the Lorentz transformation that calculates the amount of mass an object will have based off its relative velocity. They explain this is why it would take infinite energy to reach light speed.

Sounds like you been listening to some crackpot.
No. As I said, modern usage of mass refers to the invariant mass, which is (essentially) the Minkowski norm of the object's four-momentum vector. Minkowski norm of a four-vector is manifestly Lorentz-invariant.

See for example:

Mass in special relativity: Popular science and textbooks

Yes, that is "just" a wikipedia article, but it has proper references to scientific literature -- feel free to check them out!

Edit. For some reason, the link leads to the main article instead of its last paragraph. Check the part "Popular science and textbooks" at the end.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Has Saitama ever lost a fight?

Or needed to land more than one punch?

He's not a very good choice for versus threads unless someone wants them instantly closed for spite, lol.


Boros took more than one punch.

Not a "serious series" punch though, where he still acts really bored and puts marginally more effort into it.


Garou also took many punches.



Basically it takes a cartoon character to "match" him, like Popeye;


7UhguuEX9Tg


I think THINK they took this idea from me. 😝

I was going on about this match for a time here and posted it to Death Battle, and it happened. Can't imagine it likely anyone else thought this up, kind of an unlikely scenario (May as well say "Buggs Bunny vs Saitama"

Originally posted by Astner
The only way you could justify the Flash winning would be if you... replaced the Flash with a murder-machine with the same portfolio of abilities,
valued statements concerning the character as highly as feats,
cherry-picked his best statements and feats, and ignoring everything that doesn't align with this interpretation,
and didn't dispend the same courtesy to Saitama.
What kind of bullshit is this? Tons is a measure of mass, not pressure. Secondly the pressure inside of black holes supersedes that of neutron stars, which is enough to generate neutron degeneracy, which already goes beyond any "defenses" that could be explained by physics.


Except that the momentum, p, is not mass invariant. Particularly, p = mvγ, where γ is the Lorentz factor.

There's a reason mass is distinguished from rest mass when it comes to particle physics.

All of this

Double post

Originally posted by Astner
The only way you could justify the Flash winning would be if you... replaced the Flash with a murder-machine with the same portfolio of abilities,
valued statements concerning the character as highly as feats,
cherry-picked his best statements and feats, and ignoring everything that doesn't align with this interpretation,
and didn't dispend the same courtesy to Saitama.
What kind of bullshit is this? Tons is a measure of mass, not pressure. Secondly the pressure inside of black holes supersedes that of neutron stars, which is enough to generate neutron degeneracy, which already goes beyond any "defenses" that could be explained by physics.


Except that the momentum, p, is not mass invariant. Particularly, p = mvγ, where γ is the Lorentz factor.

There's a reason mass is distinguished from rest mass when it comes to particle physics.

There is no pressure in black holes. There is only force in one direction.
Now you can claim pressure since the force is acting on an object with surface area (P= F/A). That's like saying gravitational pressure instead of gravitational force in general physics problems. Which is unconventionally and rather silly.

When you enter some black holes (the event horizon) the force is very small. You can even fall for sometime before being spaghettified. I was generous with the 1000 tons. It can be much much smaller.

The op states Flash is willing to kill and knows how powerful Saitama is. Put the two together and then logically Flash is going to punch with the highest mass he can achieve. This is not rocket science. It's clear the intent of the OP.

Originally posted by h1a8
Ok but that's where gamma comes into play.
That factor effectively increases the momentum of an object in a way that is equivalent to increasing the mass. Hence relativistic mass.
We have Lorentz calculators all over the place for determining relativistic mass.

Your initial statement is misleading at best (mass doesn't increase with speed). It implies momentum increases linearly with velocity
As I've already said, nothing misleading about my statement. The modern Minkowski-space formulation of special relativity is very clear and unambiguous about these concepts.

All these terms are related to the four-momentum vector of the object:

P = (P₀, P₁, P₂, P₃ ).

Here, apart from some constants of proportionality:

- the component P₀ is the energy E
- the components P₁ - P₃ are the components of the familiar momentum (three-)vector p
- the Minkowski norm or (pseudo)length of P, denoted |P| or ||P||, is the mass.

The individual components of P, i.e. energy and (three-)momentum, are frame-dependent. For a massive object (m > 0) they can be expressed with help of the Lorentz factor γ i.e. the components depend on γ. However, the length |P| and thus the mass is manifestly Lorentz-invariant, independent of γ. Einstein himself supported these notions once special relativity had been put on a rigorous Minkowski-space footing.

Originally posted by Magnon
As I've already said, nothing misleading about my statement. The modern Minkowski-space formulation of special relativity is very clear and unambiguous about these concepts.

All these terms are related to the four-momentum vector of the object:

P = (P₀, P₁, P₂, P₃ ).

Here, apart from some constants of proportionality:

- the component P₀ is the energy E
- the components P₁ - P₃ are the components of the familiar momentum (three-)vector p
- the Minkowski norm or (pseudo)length of P, denoted |P| or ||P||, is the mass.

The individual components of P, i.e. energy and (three-)momentum, are frame-dependent. For a massive object (m > 0) they can be expressed with help of the Lorentz factor γ i.e. the components depend on γ. However, the length |P| and thus the mass is manifestly Lorentz-invariant, independent of γ. Einstein himself supported these notions once special relativity had been put on a rigorous Minkowski-space footing.

What does that have to do with this thread? Really? Are you arguing, for an object with rest mass m, that p (momentum) won't be magnitudes greater than m*v for very large v (very close to the speed of light)?

This is pretty interesting. I didn't know this at all

https://youtu.be/z4O-5eV4LiA

Actually I think I might be misremembering the value for the pressure for black holes. It exists, but it might be really small. I'll have to check the program I wrote for it when I get home.

In the white martian's case

Pretty sure the comic itself actually never called it "Infinite Mass Punch" in the white martian's case

Rather, the description seems more likely a "its mass can increase infinitely punch", and Flash punched the white martian at near lightspeeds which packed enough force to koe him

So it's indeed not a "infinite mass punch", since Flash only punched him at near lightspeeds and Flash's mass only approaching/toward infinity(not his mass is infinity)

I'm at work, so I'm just citing these feats off memory.

I'm fairly certain I got the "dwarf star" feat wrong too based off h1a8's comment. It probably does specify it to be a "white dwarf star," (technically a white dwarf isn't a star, but whatever).

Originally posted by Astner
I'm at work, so I'm just citing these feats off memory.

I'm fairly certain I got the "dwarf star" feat wrong too based off h1a8's comment. It probably does specify it to be a "white dwarf star," (technically a white dwarf isn't a star, but whatever).
The White Martian scene
https://ibb.co/6FFdLBT
https://ibb.co/Z1h38bW
https://ibb.co/1XHFsP7
https://ibb.co/ggLh9wr

Thawne's scene
https://ibb.co/P6fQVjP

Originally posted by carver9

Saitama and Garou destroyed stars and left a hole in space and Saitama endured those same punches onwards. I don't know why you keep mentioning star level punches. Who has Flash punched at star level hits?

Brooooo, nooooo, that's not what happened during that fight. You read that super wrong.

That wasn't a hole in space. Look at all the images of space before that. The artist drew it always as a pitch black space with only Earth visible. Saitama and Garou attached each other and Blast used his worm holes to absorb their energy. We also saw how residue of their energy flew outward (which is what you believe to be stars) and the "black hole" in the middle of it is just empty space, where Blast teleported the energy away.

It was drawn poorly and I understand why you think that was stars destroyed in the space, but no. Absolutely no. And that's straight up not even up for discussion. Look at the manga again while keeping in mind what I just explained.

Originally posted by h1a8
I cant QUOTE you. Can you please not use the ios apostrophe. Use a different keyboard.
It's the superscripts that the issue, they're non-ASCII.

Originally posted by h1a8
Anyway there are clearly exceptions to the rule. The writer clearly didn't know how much energy was in 123 Richter scale. Clearly it wasn't his intent. Writer's know how much white dwarf mass are. Writer's intent is usually clear.
No, you don't know that. It's an arbitrary assessment on your part.

Originally posted by h1a8
Galan stated that lack of collateral damage doesn't always imply lack of power. You can choose to ignore that. That's your choice.
It doesn't always imply a lack of power. But there has to be an explanation for why there is no collateral damage if we are to infer the feat to be on a particular scale. If there is no such explanation then you shouldn't rely on it, especially not if the character in question have no explicit feats on that scale.

That said, Galan has also taken a stand against the author's intent.

Originally posted by Galan007
I'm guessing this is why writer interviews and whatnot aren't admissible as evidence on the forums. Carey is inadvertently trying to faux-retcon decadeS-worth of canon history in a single formspring response, lol.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's not an issue. If the writer wanted a character to strike with planet busting power but doesn't want the character hit out of the solar system because that would wreck the story then that's his right to do so.
I don't care about the author's intent. I care about what's on the page, and explicit feats should always be the foundation for a character's power.

This isn't even a controversial take on my part. Al Ewing is one of those writers that have been bombarded by powerscale tweets, and even he is clear in that his (or any other writer's) interpretations shouldn't matter to any powerscaler.

https://i.imgur.com/YhJ62La.jpg

Originally posted by h1a8
Nearly all feats shit on real world physics far worse than the issue you have with collateral damage.
Right, but we're applying it locally. If a planet is destroyed we don't get overly stringent as to whether it was depicted correctly. We simply agree that the planet was destroyed, and that the scale of the feat roughly corresponds to the least amount of energy required to destroy such a planet.

Originally posted by h1a8
You can't always reliably infer from writers intent. But that doesn't mean you can't ever either. We use common sense and logic.
I don't think you have reasonable grounds for assuming that the Flash's statement isn't hyperbole. It could very well be, and the Flash has no explicit feats anywhere near this scale. You may think it's common sense, but I disagree.

Originally posted by h1a8
You missed my point. Thor is clearly a high class 100 level being. That means any strike to Hulk should send him flying over a mile away. Many strikes don't even take Hulk off his feet. Does that mean Thor hits Hulk 99% of the time with less than 1000lb of force? Does Hulk hit Thanos and other strong beings with less than 1000lb of force?
Please answer that question.
No. I understand what you meant. My points was that there's no reason to assume that every time Thor strikes the Hulk he hits him as hard as he can. It's not like Thor's power is consistent across all stories, nor can we discern how hard Thor strikes unless it's explicitly made clear.

If there is sufficient evidence, e.g. the shock-wave from the impact brings down surrounding buildings, then we can have oversight with the fact that the Hulk isn't knocked off the ground and focus on the energy of the shock-wave instead. But that's it.

Originally posted by Astner
It's the superscripts that the issue, they're non-ASCII.


No, you don't know that. It's an arbitrary assessment on your part.


It doesn't always imply a lack of power. But there has to be an explanation for why there is no collateral damage if we are to infer the feat to be on a particular scale. If there is no such explanation then you shouldn't rely on it, especially not if the character in question have no explicit feats on that scale.

That said, Galan has also taken a stand against the author's intent.




I don't care about the author's intent. I care about what's on the page, and explicit feats should always be the foundation for a character's power.

This isn't even a controversial take on my part. Al Ewing is one of those writers that have been bombarded by powerscale tweets, and even he is clear in that his (or any other writer's) interpretations shouldn't matter to any powerscaler.

https://i.imgur.com/YhJ62La.jpg


Right, but we're applying it locally. If a planet is destroyed we don't get overly stringent as to whether it was depicted correctly. We simply agree that the planet was destroyed, and that the scale of the feat roughly corresponds to the least amount of energy required to destroy such a planet.


I don't think you have reasonable grounds for assuming that the Flash's statement isn't hyperbole. It could very well be, and the Flash has no explicit feats anywhere near this scale. You may think it's common sense, but I disagree.


No. I understand what you meant. My points was that there's no reason to assume that every time Thor strikes the Hulk he hits him as hard as he can. It's not like Thor's power is consistent across all stories, nor can we discern how hard Thor strikes unless it's explicitly made clear.

If there is sufficient evidence, e.g. the shock-wave from the impact brings down surrounding buildings, then we can have oversight with the fact that the Hulk isn't knocked off the ground and focus on the energy of the shock-wave instead. But that's it.

Again. 1000lb of force wouldn't tickle Hulk. Yet Thor dazes Hulk with hits that doesn't take Hulk off his feet. This is just one example, you can use other examples where Thor is clearly trying to kill (Mangog, Destroyer, etc). Or millions of other examples all over fiction. Characters (who can't fly) who are class 100 beings known to withstand forces well over 100 tons being koed by strikes that doesn't take them off their feet.
Millions of examples. And you are telling me that in all those cases those characters were koed with forces LESS than their weight? That goes against all common sense.

If a writer gives a force of application then that supercedes the distance a character travels. Everyone here would agree with me on that.

And if you still disagree then you have to chalk up any feats well above weight level as PIS since that vast majority of showings have characters strike other characters with distances less than weight level force. That means almost no one has superhuman strength.

Last thing. The Imp implies infinite. Not moon level, not planet level, and not star level. It's based of SR. The writer's intent is clear. Flash can literally gain any mass below infinite mass. Flash doesn't kill. So you won't see him striking humans with moon level mass. Flash can casually move his fingertip faster than a bullet. In his mind he can barely touch you and his finger passes through you like you are a ghost, which would cause your body part to explodes due to all the kinetic energy imparted in you. Like watching a bullet penetrate a watermelon in slow motion.

H1, so you agree Hulk punched the moon with Universal power?

Originally posted by h1a8
Bro you are wrong here. If the comic states a particular force is being used but the collateral damage (using real world physics) contradicts it then we ignore the collateral damage.

Glad you agree Hulk withstood 100 thousand exploding stars. We debated pages about this and you just didn't want to accept it, hypocrite.

Originally posted by Astner
That said, Galan has also taken a stand against the author's intent. Nah, I was taking a stand against people who use a writer's Twitter responses and the like, as a means of attempting to refute canon/published material. It doesn't work like that(which, interestingly enough, Ewing seems to agree with.) At best, said interviews(like guidebook entries) can be used as supplementary evidence so long as they do not contradict the source material.

Anyway, I certainly agree that trying to apply real world physics to a form of media that is entirely fictional is not always a reliable endeavor. Comic book writers aren't physicists, nor do they always make an effort for their works to mesh with real world logic. That's the thing with this type of fiction: it doesn't have to make any sort of logical sense, and rarely does. Comics are not scientific textbooks, and should never be regarded as such.

I also believe that writer intent should be the primary metric we use when discussing comic book feats -- and writers typically make their intent clear/known(be it narratively or artistically.) However, there are of course instances where the writer's intent isn't explicitly stated, and/or the feat(s) in question are rather ambiguous. That, I believe, is when logical power-scaling and whatnot holds more validity... Because at that point we are just trying to make sense of what is going on, rather than trying to refute what the writer has already told/shown us within the material itself.

Originally posted by carver9
Glad you agree Hulk withstood 100 thousand exploding stars. We debated pages about this and you just didn't want to accept it, hypocrite. That was clearly hyperbole since Tony explicitly states to be trying to DRAIN Hulk of all his gamma radiation (and hence was succeeding at one point). Plus Hulk was being manipulated (and inhabited) by a supernatural being. That's like chaos king inside Zeus. So it might not be kosher to cleanly give Hulk any feats while he is compromised in such a way.

100 thousand exploding stars is such a weak sauce. Supergirl took 1 billion dB in the face, that's unimaginably more power.

Originally posted by h1a8
That was clearly hyperbole since Tony explicitly states to be trying to DRAIN Hulk of all his gamma radiation (and hence was succeeding at one point). Plus Hulk was being manipulated (and inhabited) by a supernatural being. That's like chaos king inside Zeus. So it might not be kosher to cleanly give Hulk any feats while he is compromised in such a way.

He was draining Hulk while at the same time attacking him which makes the ft even more impressive.

Hulk wasn't being manipulated there and Titan IS the Hulk. Titan only took control at the end of the series. Full control. Stop making up stuff.

Originally posted by carver9
He was draining Hulk while at the same time attacking him which makes the ft even more impressive.

Hulk wasn't being manipulated there and Titan IS the Hulk. Titan only took control at the end of the series. Full control. Stop making up stuff.

According to the comic that Hulk was compromised by a supernatural being. That's why Odin was trying to stop Thor. Read the comic.

The draining of Hulk was the attack.

You do not have any strong evidence that it was meant to be literal (and not hyperbole). In fact, There is stronger evidence that supports hyperbole than the other way around.

Originally posted by h1a8
According to the comic that Hulk was compromised by a supernatural being. That's why Odin was trying to stop Thor. Read the comic.

The draining of Hulk was the attack.

You do not have any strong evidence that it was meant to be literal (and not hyperbole). In fact, There is stronger evidence that supports hyperbole than the other way around.

Hulk was not compromised in that scene, you nut. When Titan took over (compromised), he took complete control of Hulk. Also, Hulk defeated Titan at the end of the fight anyways. Hulk>Titan. Odin was trying to stop Thor because Banner showed Odin what happened. Hulk was innocent but Thor and Ironman was still trying to take him out. Odin didn't try to stop Thor because Titan was taking over, lol.

No it wasn't. The blast was the attack. Ironman was just draining his power at the same time. Draining some doesn't destroy Celestial bodies.

So Flash and Superman chain ft is hyperbole? Gotcha.

Originally posted by carver9
Hulk was not compromised in that scene, you nut. When Titan took over (compromised), he took complete control of Hulk. Also, Hulk defeated Titan at the end of the fight anyways. Hulk>Titan. Odin was trying to stop Thor because Banner showed Odin what happened. Hulk was innocent but Thor and Ironman was still trying to take him out. Odin didn't try to stop Thor because Titan was taking over, lol.

No it wasn't. The blast was the attack. Ironman was just draining his power at the same time. Draining some doesn't destroy Celestial bodies.

So Flash and Superman chain ft is hyperbole? Gotcha.

Before I rebut this, let me ask a question.
What is your point?
That everything stated in comics is to be taken literally?
That everything in comics is to be taken as hyperbole?
Or there are rules for knowing the difference?
If the latter, then what are your rules for determining which is which?

Originally posted by h1a8
Before I rebut this, let me ask a question.
What is your point?
That everything stated in comics is to be taken literally?
That everything in comics is to be taken as hyperbole?
Or there are rules for knowing the difference?
If the latter, then what are your rules for determining which is which? oooooooOOOOOH, GREAT Post!

🤦🏿

Originally posted by Astner
https://i.imgur.com/YhJ62La.jpg https://media.tenor.com/G01xSEkdm7EAAAAd/the-office-thank-you.gif

This thread proves battleboards are pointless and answers on them have little bearing on comics.