Originally posted by quanchi112
It did happen. The funny thing is you won't ever see so by me.Your calculations are a complete waste of time. writers don't generally break out the calcs when coming up with these stories. The fact you try to break it down when most things in comics vary and go against real world physics also makes you even more ignorant.
The rest of your post made no sense. Keep up the ignorant work.
My calculations are a waste of time? With your silly logic you don't even see that u were caught in a lie. I don't support my opinions you said.
Almost everything in comics is based off some real world physics. What does class 100 mean? Can a class 100 being lift a tank? Why? You just used real world physics. If A is harder than B and character X breaks A with physical force then can he break B? Again, you just used real world physics. Does Odin destroying a galaxy implies that he >>>>>>>>> so and so character. Again, you just used real world physics. In almost every argument here, there is some form of real world physics.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
magneto is a class 100 when he bolsters his physique with electromagnetic energy, can't really find that in a physics textbook.
This is onslaught not magneto. Onslaught might not need to do such to be as strong as he is. Maybe he does. Speculation though. If so then magnetism will play a part, but not for Odin.
Energy is the ability to do work. The more the energy the more the work can be done. Thus using electromagnetic energy to bolster one's physique is indeed based on physics in some form.
Originally posted by h1a8Yes, because most writers don't take into this under consideration.
My calculations are a waste of time? With your silly logic you don't even see that u were caught in a lie. I don't support my opinions you said.Almost everything in comics is based off some real world physics. What does class 100 mean? Can a class 100 being lift a tank? Why? You just used real world physics. If A is harder than B and character X breaks A with physical force then can he break B? Again, you just used real world physics. Does Odin destroying a galaxy implies that he >>>>>>>>> so and so character. Again, you just used real world physics. In almost every argument here, there is some form of real world physics.
A writer actually told me he doesn't pay any attention to the handbooks when creating a story. The handbooks seem way off and are a poor tool to use to debate with.
Whether or not Odin can destroy a galaxy or not does not decide the majority of these outcomes in my case anyways. I don't argue like I am on cbr.
Based on real world physics....
Like being abled to punch a planet and destroy it with a punch....when your mass is incredibly tiny in comparison...
Or that you can have an "ice breath" while in space... And the science in that is???
Or being hit with gamma rays and one person becomes incredibly smart... Another incredibly strong... When physics sys your gonna die from radiation bombardment...
Oh... Or 100 ton strength and lifting up a battleship... Physics tells us that you are more likely to break through the hull of the ship and ending up inside of it before you actually lift it up when you take into account surface area, tensile strength, structural integrity... Etc!!!!
and physics vs regeneration... You realize that overproduction or cells may explain rapid healing but it doesn't explain hair regrowing all over the body as hair itself is dependent upon time as a "dead" follicle rather than a living one...
Orrrrrrr..... Keep trying the real world shtick and I'll throw out more examples o by applying real world science in conic is flat out stupid
Originally posted by rotiartMaybe h1 will catch on and realize his calculations are a complete joke and have no place in the comic universe.
Based on real world physics....Like being abled to punch a planet and destroy it with a punch....when your mass is incredibly tiny in comparison...
Or that you can have an "ice breath" while in space... And the science in that is???
Or being hit with gamma rays and one person becomes incredibly smart... Another incredibly strong... When physics sys your gonna die from radiation bombardment...
Oh... Or 100 ton strength and lifting up a battleship... Physics tells us that you are more likely to break through the hull of the ship and ending up inside of it before you actually lift it up when you take into account surface area, tensile strength, structural integrity... Etc!!!!
and physics vs regeneration... You realize that overproduction or cells may explain rapid healing but it doesn't explain hair regrowing all over the body as hair itself is dependent upon time as a "dead" follicle rather than a living one...
Orrrrrrr..... Keep trying the real world shtick and I'll throw out more examples o by applying real world science in conic is flat out stupid
Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, because most writers don't take into this under consideration.A writer actually told me he doesn't pay any attention to the handbooks when creating a story. The handbooks seem way off and are a poor tool to use to debate with.
Whether or not Odin can destroy a galaxy or not does not decide the majority of these outcomes in my case anyways. I don't argue like I am on cbr.
Writers don't take it into consideration? Okay then well I guess Namor can only lift 100tons maximum in water and less out of water. Any feats showing greater than 100ton strength through physics can not be considered since writers didn't take it into consideration. 🙄
Many stats (not all) from handbooks came from either the original writers or the ones current to the creation of the handbook. Nearly all writers (especially those pre 1985) had no official training in science, math, or real world facts. So writers didn't take into consideration many feats. This is almost like the flash feat where the writer specifically says light speed but flash is shown to move much faster than that in the same panel.
Also there is the artistic license. Which means a specific writer can make any character as strong or weak as they want. This is why you sometimes see Spider-man performing >class 50 feats and other times (by a different writer) being weaker than class 10. Each writer has a different opinion on how powerful a character should be.
Its hard to argue with different posters due to the lack of non agreed upon unwritten rules. Some posters believe in averages, some believe in using only the best feats a character has performed, some very bias ones always seem to use low showings against the character they are debating against. I've heard stuff like this before (or similar)
"Superman got koed by a gas station so Namor would stomp him".
I very much like to argue with those who are non bias or at least would not lie to themselves or be prideful when someone mentions a good argument. For example, I'm pretty sure that most if not all people know on here that Juggs is more durable than Odin. Yet some people would have Odin being more durable just to win the argument.
Lastly, what's more impressive to a person is usually based off some physics understanding (in elementary form).
Originally posted by h1a8
Writers don't take it into consideration? Okay then well I guess Namor can only lift 100tons maximum in water and less out of water. Any feats showing greater than 100ton strength through physics can not be considered since writers didn't take it into consideration. 🙄Many stats (not all) from handbooks came from either the original writers or the ones current to the creation of the handbook. Nearly all writers (especially those pre 1985) had no official training in science, math, or real world facts. So writers didn't take into consideration many feats. This is almost like the flash feat where the writer specifically says light speed but flash is shown to move much faster than that in the same panel.
Also there is the artistic license. Which means a specific writer can make any character as strong or weak as they want. This is why you sometimes see Spider-man performing >class 50 feats and other times (by a different writer) being weaker than class 10. Each writer has a different opinion on how powerful a character should be.
Its hard to argue with different posters due to the lack of non agreed upon unwritten rules. Some posters believe in averages, some believe in using only the best feats a character has performed, some very bias ones always seem to use low showings against the character they are debating against. I've heard stuff like this before (or similar)
"Superman got koed by a gas station so Namor would stomp him".I very much like to argue with those who are non bias or at least would not lie to themselves or be prideful when someone mentions a good argument. For example, I'm pretty sure that most if not all people know on here that Juggs is more durable than Odin. Yet some people would have Odin being more durable just to win the argument.
Lastly, what's more impressive to a person is usually based off some physics understanding (in elementary form).
This is from a writer when I asked him about the strength about Thor and Superman.
I'm not big on power stats, quanchi. I don't think it's a bad idea for the publishers to have a rough idea of power levels, but I thought it was a terrible mistake for them to codify them and publish them publicly.
They don't even make sense half the time -- if a stat in the Handbook says that Character A can lift 120 tons, most artists don't know what 120 tons looks like, and they don't go and check whether a particular airplane or tank or whatever is within the character's stated limits; they just figure that means "wicked strong" and draw what looks to them appropriately "wicked."
I think that system works better than assigning numbers -- all that happens when you do that is that someone says Spider-Man can lift 40 tons (or whatever) because of that humongous machine he lifted once with incredible effort, and then bang, all of a sudden it's his standard strength, and fans who use to see Spider-Man go up against three guys with lead pipes and think it was an okay fight are going, "No way! He can lift 40 tons! That means he can juggle Buicks.
You are what's wrong with comics debating. You don't realize the general nature of storytelling and that theses writers don't give a damn about power charts and one feat from ten years ago when they are writing a story today.
The handbooks are off as well. What you don't realize is they don't take into account a lot of feats and are just a general guideline for fans. You look at them as the ultimate answer which is completely foolish.
No one who I have ever seen has used this reasoning against Superman. if you go based on this one lone feat you will be pounced on based on 99 percent of his other showings.
In closing most writers don't take physics into consideration and just draw things that look very heavy imo. I am not saying some don't but if you apply real world physics to most of this stuff it cannot happen hence the laughing I do when you start cracking out numbers.
Originally posted by rotiart
Based on real world physics....Like being abled to punch a planet and destroy it with a punch....when your mass is incredibly tiny in comparison...
Or that you can have an "ice breath" while in space... And the science in that is???
Or being hit with gamma rays and one person becomes incredibly smart... Another incredibly strong... When physics sys your gonna die from radiation bombardment...
Oh... Or 100 ton strength and lifting up a battleship... Physics tells us that you are more likely to break through the hull of the ship and ending up inside of it before you actually lift it up when you take into account surface area, tensile strength, structural integrity... Etc!!!!
and physics vs regeneration... You realize that overproduction or cells may explain rapid healing but it doesn't explain hair regrowing all over the body as hair itself is dependent upon time as a "dead" follicle rather than a living one...
Orrrrrrr..... Keep trying the real world shtick and I'll throw out more examples o by applying real world science in conic is flat out stupid
No you don't understand. There is a balance. We shouldn't use 0% physics. Otherwise, how would one know who is stronger or faster than another? How would one know who is more powerful? There should be a balance. There would be no structure and thus reducing everything to nonsense.
What you are saying is really irrelevant anyway as it has nothing to do with the quantitative (how much how many). I don't argue against feats unless they go against the quantitative. I have no problem with someone destroying a planet with a punch. Just as long as it is understood that moving the same planet with good speed takes more force.
My physics related posts are only to calculate stuff, assuming the possibility, and not just to say that it is impossible. So your post here is off the mark.
Originally posted by h1a8No, he is on the mark. It's you who is off the mark.
No you don't understand. There is a balance. We shouldn't use 0% physics. Otherwise, how would one know who is stronger or faster than another? How would one know who is more powerful? There should be a balance. There would be no structure and thus reducing everything to nonsense.What you are saying is really irrelevant anyway as it has nothing to do with the quantitative (how much how many). I don't argue against feats unless they go against the quantitative. I have no problem with someone destroying a planet with a punch. Just as long as it is understood that moving the same planet with good speed takes more force.
My physics related posts are only to calculate stuff, assuming the possibility, and not just to say that it is impossible. So your post here is off the mark.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This is from a writer when I asked him about the strength about Thor and Superman.I'm not big on power stats, quanchi. I don't think it's a bad idea for the publishers to have a rough idea of power levels, but I thought it was a terrible mistake for them to codify them and publish them publicly.
They don't even make sense half the time -- if a stat in the Handbook says that Character A can lift 120 tons, most artists don't know what 120 tons looks like, and they don't go and check whether a particular airplane or tank or whatever is within the character's stated limits; they just figure that means "wicked strong" and draw what looks to them appropriately "wicked."
I think that system works better than assigning numbers -- all that happens when you do that is that someone says Spider-Man can lift 40 tons (or whatever) because of that humongous machine he lifted once with incredible effort, and then bang, all of a sudden it's his standard strength, and fans who use to see Spider-Man go up against three guys with lead pipes and think it was an okay fight are going, "No way! He can lift 40 tons! That means he can juggle Buicks.
You are what's wrong with comics debating. You don't realize the general nature of storytelling and that theses writers don't give a damn about power charts and one feat from ten years ago when they are writing a story today.
The handbooks are off as well. What you don't realize is they don't take into account a lot of feats and are just a general guideline for fans. You look at them as the ultimate answer which is completely foolish.
No one who I have ever seen has used this reasoning against Superman. if you go based on this one lone feat you will be pounced on based on 99 percent of his other showings.
In closing most writers don't take physics into consideration and just draw things that look very heavy imo. I am not saying some don't but if you apply real world physics to most of this stuff it cannot happen hence the laughing I do when you start cracking out numbers.
What you don't understand is that the pioneers of this forum were the ones who set up this style of debate. I was a mere follower learning from them. They were (and some still are) are considered the best debaters on the entire forum. Many many members here argue this way, yet u pick with me? The most notable debater that was one of the first of this style is DarkCrawler. He single handily proved that namor is class 100 with this style.
It would not be possible to determine who is more stronger, faster, powerful without analyzing feats.
Current writers do take physics into consideration very heavily (not all the time though). Comics has received a overhaul and now has become heavily physics based. So what you say is completely false.
Originally posted by h1a8Give me an example then. Please do so.
What you don't understand is that the pioneers of this forum were the ones who set up this style of debate. I was a mere follower learning from them. They were (and some still are) are considered the best debaters on the entire forum. Many many members here argue this way, yet u pick with me? The most notable debater that was one of the first of this style is DarkCrawler. He single handily proved that namor is class 100 with this style.It would not be possible to determine who is more stronger, faster, powerful without analyzing feats.
Current writers do take physics into consideration very heavily (not all the time though). Comics has received a overhaul and now has become heavily physics based. So what you say is completely false.
Most of your post ignores a writer's perspective on handbooks and power stats. Most feats don't prove who is stronger anyways as they are isolated incidents only available to one particular character.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Give me an example then. Please do so.Most of your post ignores a writer's perspective on handbooks and power stats. Most feats don't prove who is stronger anyways as they are isolated incidents only available to one particular character.
The fact that writers use correct Relativity theory to explain the IMP is one.
1 writer isn't the boss. Actually the original writers should hold more weight most of the time. But again, each writer is different so 1 writer's opinion doesn't hold enough water.
And you don't make the rules here. You are nearly unique in the feat issue. Most posters on here disagree with you regarding the use of feats to show who is better.
Originally posted by h1a8h1 no one agrees with you ever. You compared Odin's durability to butter when you compared him to his weaker son and Superman.
Child like argument eh? OkNo, both of you are off the mark.
Originally posted by h1a8Give me an example.
The fact that writers use correct Relativity theory to explain the IMP is one.1 writer isn't the boss. Actually the original writers should hold more weight most of the time. But again, each writer is different so 1 writer's opinion doesn't hold enough water.
And you don't make the rules here. You are nearly unique in the feat issue. Most posters on here disagree with you regarding the use of feats to show who is better.
Ok, let's try the feat thing. What feats prove to you Superman is the strongest.
Look. The point is there us a general basis to some real world ideas... But writers and artists do not do research into every little item to justify the on panel feats of all characters...
You provided an incredibly detailed mathematically argument for supermans punch having billions of tons of force...
What about captain america stopping a semi truck with a throw of his shield... Do you think any Olympic level person couldstop a semi moving...if I provided the math for you on that would you then agree about the new tons of strength I can use now for cap?
Or the infamous batman taking down or even hurting people who take hits from 100 tonners...
Yes there are some real world physics in comics... But the majority of the feats in comics defy logic. And your issue i'd that you don't know when to apply the actual physics... And when to extrapolate artists rendition of events
Reading comics is like a roleplaying game. They set the rules very clearly... Cast heal and peoPle heal.. Cast life and peoe come back from the dead. Now explain that to poor aeris in her final fantasy vii cutscene...
Sometimes they have to break the rules to make the story fit..
Originally posted by quanchi112Superman used an IMP to bust the shadow moon. The narration specifically used Special Relativity theory. Flash IMPs are explained by the comic to be based on Special Relativity too.
h1 no one agrees with you ever. You compared Odin's durability to butter when you compared him to his weaker son and Superman. Give me an example.
Several people (if not all) have agreed with me some of the time. No one seems to agree with you though. It seems you got a Superman is not the strongest. But he is definitely stronger than most humanoid beings. Potentially (sundipped, mental blocks off, and full willed) he is the strongest of all non abstract beings.
Ok, let's try the feat thing. What feats prove to you Superman is the strongest.
Some feats of why I believe in Superman's strength
Superman moving planets
Superman casually lifting mountains
Superman moving structures bigger than the Earth Moon system
Superman punches so strong that he's altering reality and destroying planets with the shockwaves alone.
Superman casually punching 1600lb beings into orbit and through thick and highly durable walls in space.
Superman breaking thru highly durable GL shields (Hal's and Stewart's)
Superman bending WW's braces
Superman hurting DD
and more
I believe Superman is only on par with CM and BA only because of his mental blocks. But potentially he is much higher than them.