Originally posted by Mindship
Sorry for the double post, but I ran out of time. What I meant to say (for my main point) is that, given the power required, some feats just seem too over-the-top, especially when such powerful characters are written inconsistently (eg, Superman).
Superman's power level isn't THAT inconsistent.
Originally posted by h1a8I think you're overcomplicating this (as a result, in one breath you're telling me I'm "too focused on power and not total energy," yet you also say the sites I've linked to "emphasize energy"😉. Let's start over.
You are too focused on power and not total energy.
My emphasize is on force or energy and not so much power. This is because power alone can't determine the effect of something. For example, I can apply a tremendous amount of power over an infinitesimal length of time. I will practically achieve no effect.
Power is only the speed in which the energy is being put out and not the total energy (unless we know the amount of time the power was being put out).The sites you linked to emphasizes energy
Energy (your emphasis as well, as noted by "my emphasis is on force or energy," so we're on the same page) is defined as the capacity to do work. The work here is to make a planet explode. How much energy does that take? On the order of 2x10E32 joules (joule being a unit of energy).
The total energy output of the Sun each second is on the order of 4x10E26 joules: about 1/500,000th what's required to bust a planet in that same amount of time.
Simple. Straightforward.
But again, this is beside my main point: if that is the energy required (even if 1/000th is needed), then I personally think that a 1-punch planetbust should be placed on the shelf with basking in star cores and surviving black holes. Save it for the trans-heralds. But that's me.
Originally posted by -Pr-Well, you get my point, I hope.
Superman's power level isn't THAT inconsistent.