Originally posted by pym-ftw
Thor is STRONGER than Supes, now whether it's a full 16x or not I don't care really but it's a tangible difference.
http://img.pandawhale.com/105146-Ice-Cube-Friday-what-gif-dafuq-N9vG.gif
Originally posted by pym-ftwYou said that destroying a planet requires as much force as dragging 16 Earths.
the difference between lifting it in orbit and striking it out of orbit?
I have proven this statement wrong. That's all that matters. I still don't really know what your problem with the way I proved you wrong is, to be honest.
Originally posted by pym-ftwNo, I'm talking the force needed to stop the Earth's momentum is over ten times what it requires to destroy it. It requires much more to then pull it out of orbit (IIRC pushing Earth past Mars requires about five hundred times as much force as destroying it).
Moving 16 non orbited planetary weights.Your talking a single blast force to send a planet careening off orbit.
It's like saying the force needed to bend a rubber band is the same to punch through it.
As for your "non-orbited planetary weights" statement, I assume you're referring to Superman benching the Earth's weight on that machine?
Pym are you talking about the time that Thor, and Herc had an arm wrestling competition, and they knocked the planet off of its axis point? The writer say orbit, but that never really made much sense to me. If so that does make Thor very strong, but I'm not sure if he is stronger than Superman. My gut says no, but he isn't a full tier below Superman in strength. As for this topic, Hercules, and Diana are about the same strength, durability, and their fighting skills are nearly even. Diana is faster though, she can fly, has the lasso, and a tiara that can do some very real damage to him. She wins IMO.
Originally posted by NemeBroIf what you say is true, does that mean Hyperion could one-shot a planet 10x the size of Earth since he caught the Rogue Planet?
No, I'm talking the force needed to stop the Earth's momentum is over ten times what it requires to destroy it. It requires much more to then pull it out of orbit (IIRC pushing Earth past Mars requires about five hundred times as much force as destroying it).As for your "non-orbited planetary weights" statement, I assume you're referring to Superman benching the Earth's weight on that machine?
Originally posted by NemeBroYes I'm referring to Supermans benchpress feat vs Thor's multi planetoids/planet moon busting strikes.
No, I'm talking the force needed to stop the Earth's momentum is over ten times what it requires to destroy it. It requires much more to then pull it out of orbit (IIRC pushing Earth past Mars requires about five hundred times as much force as destroying it).As for your "non-orbited planetary weights" statement, I assume you're referring to Superman benching the Earth's weight on that machine?
Sure but moving a planet 3 feet or what ever Superman's wingspan is, is significantly less not to mention he didn't physically move the planet. He benched 6.6 quadrillion tons.
Originally posted by pym-ftw
ok you want me to make you look dumb in front of everyone here you go.Weight is the transference of momentum from one object to another, even light which once was thought to be massless has a very small impact.
With nothing holding the earth in place literally the only weight of the earth is the amount of gravity that the earth exudes. The earths relative momentum in a vacuum has no effect on it.
For whatever reason you think the numbers given are not taking into consideration the Suns effect on planet I'm telling you I already accounted for it, you are pissing and moaning because it disproves baseless assumptions you made.
Sorry grow up "kid"
Photons don't have weight kid. Any one saying so isn't worth replying for.
And the speed at which the earth rotates has nothing to do with it, right? That would just magically disappear.
So much but there at a feat. Sad.
