Originally posted by One-PunchActually, no. The calculus was not right.
Darksaint already did that. He actually had the right numbers in the first place.
I know you're a marvel slurper, but jumping on bandwagons ignorantly will only get you called out and made to look like a fool.
Like here.
Let's begin.
The mass of the moon is 7.34767309 × 10^22.
The speed of the moon was 7,614,000 km/h. That's 2115 km/s. That's 2,115,000 m/s.
The total energy that needed to be cancelled out was thus, according to the KE formula (mass * velocity^2)/2.
That's..
(7,34*10^22*4,473,225,000,000)/2
Which is aproximately 1.5 * 10^35 Joules.
That's one thousand times the power to destroy the Earth.
Originally posted by One-Punch
How's he not right?He said it took [b]1.23E29
Joules to destroy a stationary moon.Astronomers say it takes 1.2E29 Joules to destroy a stationary moon using the real mass of the moon.
1.23E29 vs. 1.2E29? They're approx the same number.
He accounted for the speed of the moon and added 1.6E26 Joules to 1.2E29 and got 1.29E29 Joules.
1.29E29 Joules to destroy the moving moon <<<<<<<<< 2.2E32 Joules needed to destroy a stationary planet.
Not surprising because it takes 1800x more energy to destroy a planet than a moon according to the astronomy article. The moon moving fast ain't gonna change it by much.
---
PS: Surfer didn't die. [/B]
He didn't just unravel the moon by releasing enough energy to dissipate the gravitational energy. He completely and utterly atomized the moon to the point it left no traces.
That takes astronomical more power than to just turning it into rubble.
Philo:
Your equation is wrong. The brackets are in the wrong place.
It should be 0.5 x mass x velocity squared, not (0.5x mass x velocity) squared.
edit: for all those saying I used the wrong mass, I didn't. Not in my calcs. I used the true moon mass, not 81 billion tons, AND accounted for the speed.
My post said 81 billion, but my calcs didn't use that. I guess you could say I pulled a McDuffie.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85What?
Philo:Your equation is wrong. The brackets are in the wrong place.
It should be 0.5 x mass x velocity squared, not (0.5x mass x velocity) squared.
(mass * velocity^2)/2 is exactly the same thing with what you typed.
equation/2 is the same thing with 0.5 times equation.
We both squared velocity and multiplied it by mass.
I'm not squaring the entire paranthesis.
Read again.
As for your mistake in calculus earlier in the thread..
I'm gonna have a guess and say that your mistake was letting it at km/s, instead of m/s, which is what velocity is measured at in the formula.
Am I right or am I right?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
My mistake indeed! I DID use 81 billion tons as per Batman in my KE calculations.Meh, I stand by my numbers. I do not question Bats. Writer interviews are inadmissible.
That's a small ass moon considering most mountains weigh more than that.
Damn Darksaint, pull it together man!
You had One-Punch swearing on his life that you were right, and now he's going to have to wipe his chin and crawl away.
Originally posted by abhilegendHe's joking, I'm sure.
So does the real mass of the moon is 81 billion?That's a small ass moon considering most mountains weigh more than that.
Well, here's the thing.
To calculate the energy required to blow the Moon up, I didn't use 81 bilion tons.
I used the real mass.
THAT much, One Punch checked, and THAT'S correct.
When calculating the added energy of the movement, I used 81 billion.
To reconcile Batman's and every other statement, one should read it as Batman CORRECTING someone.
Person A : It has the mass of the real moon
Batman (whilst checking his computer): 81 billion (unsaid: Actually, its 81 billion, idiot).
Ignoring writer statements, of course.
