I agree. All herald level beings shouldn't have any planetary power. The only reason why some seem to is because of inflation competition.
Inflation competition is when writer's, in order to sell comics, have characters perform higher and higher feats than what they previously done to keep interests up. The Competition part is when a character from a comic would perform higher in order to place him/her above another (most times their immediate counterpart), then the other would perform a feat higher, and this would just go back and forth until both have planetary power or above.
IMO, Superman and all other Heralds should have no more than million ton strength and power. Skyfathers should have no more than planetary power.
Remember when LT was created by Marvel, he was stated to be able to destroy planets. This was considered awesome at the time. Not any more though, because of inflation competition. A dollar isn't worth what it used to be worth.
Earth’s axis has been shifted 6.5 inches because of the Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami, along with numerous aftershocks contributing bit by bit.
Someone like Superman should be able to move the planet since that earth quake managed to move the axis.
Well the axis shifted but Earth still stayed in its normal orbit around the Sun.
But the earthquake didn't do this directly but rather indirectly. The shift of the plates cause the earth mass distribution to change in a way that made the planet speed up (like a figure skater when they pull their arms in). This speed up (by microseconds I believe) in turn help cause the 6.5 in tilt shift in the axis.
Now moving the planet off its plane or to a different location of it's plane (off it's normal orbit) is totally different than just tilting the Earth (Indirectly) by a few inches.
Some fictional characters have caused stars or planets to explode by creating a chain reaction due to creating instability. This is often misconstrued as the being HAVING THE POWER TO DESTROY STARS OR PLANETS. Well it is only true indirectly, but most are thinking directly which makes it misleading.
More like heavy vulnerable mass moving> heavy vulnerable mass breaking.
If one could lift a building then the building would crumble under its own weight and become destroyed. But if one applied a much smaller force (like a bulldozer strike) then the building would be destroyed.
In summary, when objects EXCEED a certain size, then it takes less force destroying them through hitting them than moving them at a considerable acceleration.
But what he means by reasonable is not what is defined by science but defined by your average human mind.
For example, when I was a kid I thought it was reasonable to move a metal toy wagon forward by being in it and holding a strong enough magnet in front in order to pull it forward. But according to science, that is nonsense.
To me it is far more reasonable (not taking science into account) for Spiderman to do the things he does than for a being (like Superman) to move planets with great acceleration or withstand black holes and centres of stars.
Fair point, but I was speaking in terms of general comic-dom, where planets are often durable enough to not collapse in on themselves when being moved. In such a case, breaking > moving.
I think Mr. Majestic having to move planets while wearing special equipment that in effect spread out his force instead of focusing it over the area of his hands is the only instance that i can think of that acknowledges what you are talking about.
And honestly a skyscraper would probably collapse long before the energy needed to lift its weight from underneath it could be generated. I doubt the two would be too different.
__________________
Last edited by CosmicComet on Mar 16th, 2011 at 11:49 PM
No I don't see how they're different in terms of anything but scale.
Spider-Man has the proportional strength of a spider (never mind that the strength of a spider is derived from its morphology and varies wildly between spider species) because its a story. Superman can withstand a blackhole and move a planet because its a story. Now there is such thing as internal consistency, for example Batman, a normal human kicking through metal is less internally consistent than someone with stated superhuman powers doing it. But when it comes to actual stated powers so long as the way those powers work are portrayed consistently this "realm of reason" nonsense is just that, nonsense.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
Comics by virtue of the medium require a willing suspension of disbelief. But there is a threshold for even the most imaginative of minds. I can dig a character lifing say, 100 times their own mass. Real life is full of examples of creatures being many times stronger then there relative mass would suggest. Anything over that, barring gravity control, psionics or some other explanation, I just smh.
then again the Surfer does have an infamous glass jaw in certain cases where he should really have no trouble at all even at his lowest of low showings.
For whatever it's worth, I remember it being stated that the Power Cosmic shielded Norrin from the Black Hole. And it's also been shown that they can amp him.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 16th, 2011 10:32 PM
