Idiot, if we accept what that scientists ( writer) said, then we must accept ALL statements in comics. You come here crying for Superman as a undercover fan. Superman did not bench the earth. No one cares about a machine or a statement UNLESS it concerns superman RIGHT?? You were one to call that planet gladiator destroyed a freaking large rock!! Yet pictures and statements showed that the planet was large and had several moons and very durable. But for the sake of superman, you cried like a girl trying to lowball that feat. Want more?
Do I have to explain Tchalla isn't real? The human writer used impossible science which was clearly wrong even as per your own link. THAT'S THE POINT
YOU APPLIED REAL WORLD SCIENCE IN YOUR FIRST POST.
Also nice dodge. I repeat..a supernova only releases 10^44 joules (about magnitude 26). Cho unleashed a 123.2 magnitude and was climbing...so you believe that hit was multiple magnitudes higher then a super nova? I like how your ok using real world science to determine power but when real world science proves it wrong???? No no no no your crying
Oh nice so Hulk has high level matter manipulation now. Good argument
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 02:31 AM
If so, you probably want to look at and read this showing again. This scan shows Martian Manhunter and Superman crashing into the side of the ship and they are pushing.
Sorry, no redirect. I didn't mean dead stop. But the sheer gravity of the ship alone appearing by the earth would cause massive massive damage to earth being that close. Then to move a ship bigger then the earth is ridic and don't mean that in a good way
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 02:49 AM
From real world science point of him? Silly. Would have to stabilize so many aspects including structures, temperature, gravity, etc. Have you seen me argue for it?
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 02:54 AM
Correct. But I repeat he is using real work science for this thread. You can't simply deny or ignore real world science that disproves it. Have you ever seen me argue th validity of that feat?
What?! Not sure if your being serious but that is very wrong. The trusters were going a different direction and then you still need enough force to move the object
Newton's second law. Change in motion is proportinal to the applied force and parallel to it
Newton's third law to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 02:59 AM
Lol...they pulled the Earth from a being that was pulling in the opposite direction. That should not have happened, especially with earth not being torn apart. It only happened because comics allows the impossible. I could easily just say Lantern and Supes didn't move the Earth due to the planet still being intact but I took the words that was mentioned as what really happened.
Again have you seen me argue th validity of it before? But here with Hulk he is using a science scale completly wrong. Yes comics are not the real world. Writers can and will make mistakes. But we can't try to apply real world science and then say people are crying when it contradicts what happened
I recently posted in another thread how there is zero consistency in comics nowadays. Powers and abilities and even characterization changes even in subsequent appearances
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 03:06 AM
Newton's second law. Change in motion is proportinal to the applied force and parallel to it
Newton's third law to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction
Now the amount of force to move the object and counteract the forward motion? *shrugs* It's impressive for a comic book feat, but real world science the earth should have been destroyed soon as when the ship arrived
-----
This post hit the nail on the head
__________________
Last edited by -K-M- on Sep 29th, 2017 at 03:10 AM
That's so much nonsense. When a character pushes a planet, he or she is considered by all as pushing a planet with all of the mass that planet should logically have. No one argues that the planet is not a planet. I posted what a 123 rictor entails. You're arguing the lack of real world consequences which is what real world science arguments are.
You see, if a 100 megaton nuke goes off, it is not a real world science argument to describe the power of an actual 100 megaton nuke. It's real world science arguing when you claim it's not as powerful as a real world nuke because it doesn't leave a crater.
The nuke that hits Cho actually doesn't leave a crater. So do we discard that nuke tanking? Throughout the years of comic book battle boards, power output is generally taken at face value. Lack of surrounding damage is not. Here it is done inconsistently depending on which argument favors the D.C. character.. Can you link to where you have vehemently argued against the planet pulling Carver references?