I don't understand why I don't have the premise to make such an assumption. I know you understand the power of an AT-AT blast, and I think it would be illogical to say that Kun's amulet blasts are more powerful. Different nature yes but more powerful? Yes they blast through Sith wyrms and buildings, but you're saying AT-AT lasers do not?
It's not always as simple as power. A bullet has no more momentum/power than a sword, but are you saying you can block a bullet if you can block a sword?
They are different in nature, it's not a logical assumption to assume that if he can block something of nature A, then he for sure can block something of nature B. Is it possible Luke can do it? Certainly. But to make the deduction requires a stronger premise.
Originally posted by Illustrious
It's not always as simple as power. A bullet has no more momentum/power than a sword, but are you saying you can block a bullet if you can block a sword?They are different in nature, it's not a logical assumption to assume that if he can block something of nature A, then he for sure can block something of nature B. Is it possible Luke can do it? Certainly. But to make the [b]deduction
requires a stronger premise. [/B]
Ok I understand what you're saying although I don't agree with the bullet/sword comparison because I'll start analyzing how those two are completely different and you can't make an assumption from that. I am just saying that we have witness Luke as a nobody in DE block an AT-AT blast which is unheard of. So we have evidence of him blocking 1 powerful blast. I agree that an amulet blast is completely different because it's a manifestation of the force, but it's hard to believe a blast from that amulet is greater and more destructive than a huge AT-AT blast.