Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Actually, it's not, I did the math, and let's not forget, Elephants do that shit all the time.2.1 KJ. Not that impressive.
Right, cause elephants are used to pull over very large, ALIVE, trees with ropes attached at the base, and they do it in a couple of seconds, right?
😬
Here's your elephants, much much higher on the tree, on much smaller trees, with tiny roots, in comparison, pushing trees up in dry soil
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/28492-natural-born-winners-elephants-strength-video.htm
Also, show your work. I'm willing to bet that your math is not only wrong, but you used incorrect numbers.
As fact, there's no way to properly calculate that feat with any degree of accuracy other than guessing.
Additionally, your "unit" of measure is completely off: we don't want energy, we need newtons.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Dadudeman is being intellectually dishonest, as someone who spends a lot of time maintaining the use of atleast semi-accurate physics in the Games v.s. forum, it was kinda hardcore to actually see someone claim class 100+ for pushing over a tree.
Nah, but you just tried to pass off elephant strength feats as being comparable, even in the slightest, to what Edward did.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Yeah, I was having my doubts on that feat. Still the nicest by far out of the Twilight feats but 1000 tons is just not believable. Now, if Edward had picked up a giant ****ing black rock and throw it, that would be another story. awesome
Nah, it's not "1000 tons."
It's 1000 tonne-force.
Additionally, it's really far up there due to the crappy leverage position. A more appropriate measure is newtons or kilonewtons.
Secondly, he did not do anything that resembles something useful. His answer was in energy. 😬
Finally, it's much closer to 1000 than it is 100, that's for sure.
Edit -
ahahahaahhaahah
Vertically uprooting a similar tree (norway spruce)
http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/full/sf44/sf444681.pdf
They are using CRANES to uproot tree stumps of diameters of < or = 61 CM and the forces mentioned are between 400 kNm and 60kNm.
Keep in mind that these are STUMPS and some are split.
Here's the formula for vertical uprooting of TREE STUMPS:
FS = FH × LH × LS–1
Additionally, it indicates that it is much harder to laterally uproot the tree:
Given that trees have evolved to withstand lateral forces but not vertical ones, it seems likely that greater forces are required for lateral uprooting of stumps than for vertical uprooting. The studies reviewed in Biller and Baumgras (1987) corroborates this hypothesis, since at least five times more force is required for laterally uprooting 25 cm stumps compared to the mean values in this study. It seems, thus, that stumps should preferably be uprooted vertically to minimize force requirements.
So, about 5 times the force to laterally uproot the tree.
So, let's go with the lowest end showing: 60kNm.
multiply by 5, what is that?
350 kNm.
Granted, I should clarify that I was just referring to kilogram force, not torque.
Conclusion = Edward is very far into a 100 class category. hahahahaha. I win.
Placidity, could you please look over this and let me know if I can make a better case for my measures?
Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, cause elephants are used to pull over very large, ALIVE, trees with ropes attached at the base, and they do it in a couple of seconds, right?😬
Here's your elephants, much much higher on the tree, on much smaller trees, with tiny roots, in comparison, pushing trees up in dry soil
http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/28492-natural-born-winners-elephants-strength-video.htm
Also, show your work. I'm willing to bet that your math is not only wrong, but you used incorrect numbers.
As fact, there's no way to properly calculate that feat with any degree of accuracy other than guessing.
Additionally, your "unit" of measure is completely off: we don't want energy, we need newtons.
Nah, but you just tried to pass off elephant strength feats as being comparable, even in the slightest, to what Edward did.
Nah, it's not "1000 tons."
It's 1000 tonne-force.
Additionally, it's really far up there due to the crappy leverage position. A more appropriate measure is newtons or kilonewtons.
Secondly, he did not do anything that resembles something useful. His answer was in energy. 😬
Finally, it's much closer to 1000 than it is 100, that's for sure.
I did show my work, I found the approx volume of the tree and from there the approx force required to cause critical failure. Maybe you didn't see it? I provided the Newtons, I converted to Joules directly afterward for people familiar with games versus, where it's used as a general way of rating strength feats.
Yes, I guessed, I even said so in my post, but there's simply no way this feat comes close to even class 100+ strength, shit, elephants can move 7 tons with their trunks by admission of your own video. They regularly push trees over using their heads and bulk, pulling one down with it's trunk is not the most effective method available to them. did you some how miss my entire post? Did nothing useful? Lol. Pushing over a tree =/= 1000 tonne force.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
IF that tree is a full meter thick (it's not), and he snapped it near the base (he didn't) this would require 40MPa of stress, pinewood's UTS is 40MPa, so yeah.Since Pa = Newton per meter squared, and 1 newton = 1 joule that'd be 40 MJ or 8 992 357 pounds of force. Luckily! The tree is not that big. ... And...! Elephants push trees over consistently with their heads, the trees don't break their roots give. Granted the trees are smaller.
IE, the tree should not have snapped before it's roots gave. We can't see the roots but logicly let's just be real, here, even if the vampires do sparkle. The numbers for just pushing a tree over are MUCH less impressive.
Now for a more realistic set of numbers, looking at the tree it's probably about .6-7 of a meter thick, Sooo.
Here's something that happens in nature, a tree grows at too extreme of an angle to support it's own weight. This results in stumps uprooting themselves, not the trees breaking, everyone who's ever been in a forest has seen a stump like this.
Let's assume a 45 degree angle is typicly where the give happens. In a tree this size, *looks again, just eyeballing, guesstimate*
A freezeframe at 0:59 reveals it's /not that big/.
It looks about 7-9 meters and tapers, as trees do. So, to find it's volume:
Base (0.6) x height (8) x width (Pi*r^2) /2.
13.57 M^2Now if we find the density of soft wood
the density of common softwoods varies from 450 to 640 kg/m3 so, let's go big or go home. 13.57 x 640 kg = 8685.8 kg.
Now, if a tree's hit 45 degrees to fall over, that means it root structure cannot horizontally support 50% of it's weight, approx. Sooo.. /2
4342.9 kg.
9554.46 lbs, or 4.7 tons of force. Equivalent to 2140.19 Newtons, 2.1 Kj. Not very high scale.
Remember this?
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Watch the video again, isn't a very big tree, and elephants are able to, and have, displaced larger trees than your video displays. Sure, remark on leverage, but if you think the extra 5 feet of height an elephant has on Eddie is a difference of nearly a thousand tonnes of force you're delusional. 😬I did show my work, I found the approx volume of the tree and from there the approx force required to cause critical failure. Maybe you didn't see it? I provided the Newtons, I converted to Joules directly afterward for people familiar with games versus, where it's used as a general way of rating strength feats.
Yes, I guessed, I even said so in my post, but there's simply no way this feat comes close to even class 100+ strength, shit, elephants can move 7 tons with their trunks by admission of your own video. They regularly push trees over using their heads and bulk, pulling one down with it's trunk is not the most effective method available to them. did you some how miss my entire post? Did nothing useful? Lol. Pushing over a tree =/= 1000 tonne force.
Remember this?
I just pwned you, hardcore.
Check my last post.
I was right, you were wrong.
I can look through you work and tear it to pieces, if you'd like.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Watch the video again, isn't a very big tree, and elephants are able to, and have, displaced larger trees than your video displays. Sure, remark on leverage, but if you think the extra 5 feet of height an elephant has on Eddie is a difference of nearly a thousand tonnes of force you're delusional. 😬
Yeah, the height difference would be about 5 feet and, yes, the power difference would be astounding. Guess you're not familiar with levers?
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
I did show my work, I found the approx volume of the tree and from there the approx force required to cause critical failure. Maybe you didn't see it?
I didn't see it.
I looked for it and could not find it. Seriously.
Additionally, you were horribly wrong. Apples to oranges.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
I provided the Newtons, I converted to Joules directly afterward for people familiar with games versus, where it's used as a general way of rating strength feats.
K
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Yes, I guessed, I even said so in my post, but there's simply no way this feat comes close to even class 100+ strength, shit, elephants can move 7 tons with their trunks by admission of your own video. They regularly push trees over using their heads and bulk, pulling one down with it's trunk is not the most effective method available to them. did you some how miss my entire post? Did nothing useful? Lol. Pushing over a tree =/= 1000 tonne force.
And yet, you were horribly wrong in the most direct way possible. Sure, it's not 1000 tonne force, but keep in mind I was just guessing. I DID state it was hundreds if not over a thousand, so I get to fall back on "hundreds" and say that one of my guesses was correct. Granted, it's torque.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Remember this?
No.
Originally posted by dadudemonOh,look. Your last post which PROVES that uprooting a tree verticly, which is harder to do than horizontally, requires less than 100 tons of force? Yeah, you sure pwned me. haermm
I just pwned you, hardcore.Check my last post.
I was right, you were wrong.
I can look through you work and tear it to pieces, if you'd like.
Go ahead, no matter what you do to my work, it's a guesstimate, and one that outlines what your own post said a moment ago:
Eddie boy isn't class 100+
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Oh,look. Your last post which PROVES that uprooting a tree verticly, which is harder to do than horizontally, requires less than 100 tons of force? Yeah, you sure pwned me. haermmGo ahead, no matter what you do to my work, it's a guesstimate, and one that outlines what your own post said a moment ago:
Eddie boy isn't class 100+
Wrong. Doing it horizontally is about 5 times as hard.
Eddie boy is calls 100+. That goes for all of the other twivamp haters.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
IF that tree is a full meter thick (it's not), and he snapped it near the base (he didn't) this would require 40MPa of stress, pinewood's UTS is 40MPa, so yeah.Since Pa = Newton per meter squared, and 1 newton = 1 joule that'd be 40 MJ or 8 992 357 pounds of force. Luckily! The tree is not that big. ... And...! Elephants push trees over consistently with their heads, the trees don't break their roots give. Granted the trees are smaller.
IE, the tree should not have snapped before it's roots gave. We can't see the roots but logicly let's just be real, here, even if the vampires do sparkle. The numbers for just pushing a tree over are MUCH less impressive.
Now for a more realistic set of numbers, looking at the tree it's probably about .6-7 of a meter thick, Sooo.
Here's something that happens in nature, a tree grows at too extreme of an angle to support it's own weight. This results in stumps uprooting themselves, not the trees breaking, everyone who's ever been in a forest has seen a stump like this.
Let's assume a 45 degree angle is typicly where the give happens. In a tree this size, *looks again, just eyeballing, guesstimate*
A freezeframe at 0:59 reveals it's /not that big/.
It looks about 7-9 meters and tapers, as trees do. So, to find it's volume:
Base (0.6) x height (8) x width (Pi*r^2) /2.
13.57 M^2Now if we find the density of soft wood
the density of common softwoods varies from 450 to 640 kg/m3 so, let's go big or go home. 13.57 x 640 kg = 8685.8 kg.
Now, if a tree's hit 45 degrees to fall over, that means it root structure cannot horizontally support 50% of it's weight, approx. Sooo.. /2
4342.9 kg.
9554.46 lbs, or 4.7 tons of force. Equivalent to 2140.19 Newtons, 2.1 Kj. Not very high scale.
I agree with your mass, there abouts. But it's still an incorrect measure, as the research shows.
First, here is the link to the thread in which I estimated the mass of the tree, which, for me, did more than enough to prove my point that he was a 100+ class beause he just had to push it over and exert enough force to do so, if we just use the mass of the tree, alone. Proving how much force would be required because of the roots would be useless, at that point, because we only need the mass to prove AROUND the mass of a tree.
Here is that posting:
So, I used the diameter of the tree at about 1 meter (3 feet.) as seen here:
Next, I used a density of about .72 (or 720, depending on how you prefer your volume).
Then I used the radius to measure it's volume based on a height of 25 (originally, I used 35 meters, but that's too tall, so I'll change it) meters, or about 80 feet.
You can get your answer to this, easily, by using the "cone" formula because it eventually tappers off into nothing, but it does NOT take into account the branches, which was still "water-under-the-bridge" at this point, because we just needed to show that the mass of the tree approaches 100 tons without getting into the petty forces required to tear the roots and uproot the tree at the same time.
So here is the volume:
6.54 m3
Just in case you don't believe that number, here is a quick calculator:
http://www.treeworld.info/treesurfaceareavolumecalculator.html
4708.8 Kg
Or 4.7 tonnes or about 5.2 tons. I added in about 5% more mass for the branches. So that's about 5.4 tons.
I do not know how I got to 73 tons. In fact, I may have done the math in my head.
Edit = Looking back, I know exactly what I did wrong: I was off by a factor of ten because i put the tree height at 35 meters.
35 meters = 9.16 m3
9.16 m3 * 720 = 6.6.2 tonnes = 7.3 tons
Somewhere along the lines, I was off by a factor of ten and I don't know where I went wrong.
Not a big deal, in hindsite, because it was not the best measure. If it WERE closer to 73 tons, yeah, it would have been a reall good measure to prove that he's well above class 100.
Since we have the actually torque required, there abouts, to uproot a tree horizontally, it's really a moot point: 5 times that amount used to vertically uproot and tree stumps of about the same size (radius of .61 meters all the way down to .32 meters) which is about 60 kNm. Horizontally is much harder so he's definitely several magnitudes of 100 ton lifter.
Let it be known throughout all of the MVF that Edward is definitely a 100+ class character. Granted, not that far about like say...Thor is.
It makes sense, now, why Bella was sayng cars are like styrofoam to the vampires: exerting 300+kNm of torque is almost easy (Edward pushed it over pretty darn quickly. People like Felix, Newborns, and Emmett are supposed to be much stronger than Edward. In fact, Edward is not very strong for a vampire: his strength is lots of speed.)
Originally posted by dadudemon
I agree with your mass, there abouts. But it's still an incorrect measure, as the research shows.First, here is the link to the thread in which I estimated the mass of the tree, which, for me, did more than enough to prove my point that he was a 100+ class beause he just had to push it over and exert enough force to do so, if we just use the mass of the tree, alone. Proving how much force would be required because of the roots would be useless, at that point, because we only need the mass to prove AROUND the mass of a tree.
Here is that posting:
So, I used the diameter of the tree at about 1 meter (3 feet.) as seen here:
Next, I used a density of about .72 (or 720, depending on how you prefer your volume).
Then I used the radius to measure it's volume based on a height of 25 (originally, I used 35 meters, but that's too tall, so I'll change it) meters, or about 80 feet.
You can get your answer to this, easily, by using the "cone" formula because it eventually tappers off into nothing, but it does NOT take into account the branches, which was still "water-under-the-bridge" at this point, because we just needed to show that the mass of the tree approaches 100 tons without getting into the petty forces required to tear the roots and uproot the tree at the same time.
So here is the volume:
6.54 m3
Just in case you don't believe that number, here is a quick calculator:
http://www.treeworld.info/treesurfaceareavolumecalculator.html
4708.8 Kg
Or 4.7 tonnes or about 5.2 tons. I added in about 5% more mass for the branches. So that's about 5.4 tons.
I do not know how I got to 73 tons. In fact, I may have done the math in my head.
Edit = Looking back, I know exactly what I did wrong: I was off by a factor of ten because i put the tree height at 35 meters.
35 meters = 9.16 m3
9.16 m3 * 720 = 6.6.2 tonnes = 7.3 tons
Somewhere along the lines, I was off by a factor of ten and I don't know where I went wrong.
Not a big deal, in hindsite, because it was not the best measure. If it WERE closer to 73 tons, yeah, it would have been a reall good measure to prove that he's well above class 100.
Since we have the actually torque required, there abouts, to uproot a tree horizontally, it's really a moot point: 5 times that amount used to vertically uproot and tree stumps of about the same size (radius of .61 meters all the way down to .32 meters) which is about 60 kNm. Horizontally is much harder so he's definitely several magnitudes of 100 ton lifter.
Let it be known throughout all of the MVF that Edward is definitely a 100+ class character. Granted, not that far about like say...Thor is.
It makes sense, now, why Bella was sayng cars are like styrofoam to the vampires: exerting 300+kNm of torque is almost easy (Edward pushed it over pretty darn quickly. People like Felix, Newborns, and Emmett are supposed to be much stronger than Edward. In fact, Edward is not very strong for a vampire: his strength is lots of speed.)
ITA
Originally posted by Nephthys
My god, what have I wrought........
I don't think you did anything wrong: I think that ScreamPaste agree on the mass of the tree...there abouts.
I did find a website that talks about the lateral force exerted on stumps, however...so that discussion is fairly "done" at this point.
But I'd like to point out.... I WAS RIGHT!* WEEEEEEEE!
*Partially. I said that it was in the hundreds...possibly over 1000. It turns out that it is just the hundreds.
Originally posted by NephthysWell, they are, just not all in one place.
I really doubt that. Trees get blown over in storms and shit. Storms are not class 100+.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't think you did anything wrong: I think that ScreamPaste agree on the mass of the tree...there abouts.I did find a website that talks about the lateral force exerted on stumps, however...so that discussion is fairly "done" at this point.
But I'd like to point out.... I WAS RIGHT!* WEEEEEEEE!
*Partially. I said that it was in the hundreds...possibly over 1000. It turns out that it is just the hundreds.
Given that trees have evolved to withstand lateral forces but not vertical ones, it seems likely that greater forces are required for lateral uprooting of stumps than for vertical uprooting. The studies reviewed in Biller and Baumgras (1987) corroborates this hypothesis, since at least five times more force is required for laterally uprooting 25 cm stumps compared to the mean values in this study. It seems, thus, that stumps should preferably be uprooted vertically to minimize force requirements.The force required to uproot a stump horizontally is /quite/ different from an actual tree for several reasons.
Looking at the shot of the tree as it falls shows that it is not 1m at the base. <_<
So, about 5 times the force to laterally uproot the tree.From the stump.
You are clearly aware it takes less force to do so with an actual tree present because you've gone on about leverage before, really, the only thing to be laid to rest here is the exact way that leverage would scale.
If 5 feet of lever can make that significant of a different that your math does not imply super-elephants I'll merrily concede, but I doubt it'll happen. I'll come back to it in a few days most likely, though. Stuff to do. --->Bender--->concert--->Pursue female I have no chance with ----> THEN internet math.