Originally posted by Silent MasterIt doesn't have to be more powerful in order for WW to absorb Thor's lightning. Absorbing something and resisting damage are two different things. IM had no trouble absorbing it.
I've now seen the movie, what feats make you believe that Ares' lightning is either as or more powerful than Thor's?
Originally posted by h1a8
It doesn't have to be more powerful in order for WW to absorb Thor's lightning. Absorbing something and resisting damage are two different things. IM had no trouble absorbing it.
The question was "what feats make you believe that Ares' lightning is either as or more powerful than Thor's?"
We can deal with your argument after you answer my question.
Originally posted by Silent Master
The question was "what feats make you believe that Ares' lightning is either as or more powerful than Thor's?"We can deal with your argument after you answer my question.
By feats only, I'm not sure if we can determine if Ares lightning is more powerful. I don't recall him striking anything of known durability to compare (he probably did but I don't remember). What things of known durability did Thor strike with standing lightning (he pointed Mjolnir at target and shot lightning)?
I'm of the opinion that all lightning that comes from the sky is equal in quality.
I'm not really trying to debate right now, but trying to agree on a common ground as to create a basis on which we all can debate.
Originally posted by h1a8
By feats only, I'm not sure if we can determine if Ares lightning is more powerful. I don't recall him striking anything of known durability to compare (he probably did but I don't remember). What things of known durability did Thor strike with standing lightning (he pointed Mjolnir at target and shot lightning)?I'm of the opinion that all lightning that comes from the sky is equal in quality.
I'm not really trying to debate right now, but trying to agree on a common ground as to create a basis on which we all can debate.
So you think normal lightning can power Iron-man up to 475% power and take out leviathans?
Originally posted by Silent Master
So you think normal lightning can power Iron-man up to 475% power and take out leviathans?
Don't see why you make it sound unreasonable. Do you think "regular" lightning is weak or something?
Is it unreasonable to believe 1 ton of TNT can damage a Leviathan? Because that is roughly how much energy a single lightning bolt can contain.
A single lightning stroke can last up to 50 micro seconds (0.000050 sec).
Now imagine if regular lightning were to behave like Thor's lightning (continuous electric arc) for, lets say 5 seconds...?
According to what I've found, lightning strikes generate between .5 and 5 gigajoules of energy. Tony's original arc reactor produced 3 gigajoules per second and could only power a suit for 15 minutes. yet Tony's new arc reactor can easily power his new suits for hours and yet a few seconds of Thor's lightning powered it up to 475%.
Doesn't sound like normal lightning to me.
Originally posted by Silent Master
According to what I've found, lightning strikes generate between .5 and 5 gigajoules of energy. Tony's original arc reactor produced 3 gigajoules per second and could only power a suit for 15 minutes. yet Tony's new arc reactor can easily power his new suits for hours and yet a few seconds of Thor's lightning powered it up to 475%.Doesn't sound like normal lightning to me.
There are 3 issues I will give. But the 3rd one is the one that really matters. The 1st two are not necessary.
1.
If the arc can hold more than 100% (as shown in the scene) then Tony could have started above 100% initially before being struck by Thor's lightning. We see the percentage start to increase after 300%. But that doesn't mean Tony started at 300% or higher before Thor struck. But only it's a possibility. For the sake of debate, let's assume Tony's armor started at or close to 100%.
2. Tony's first suit was a lot heavier. It was made of real iron and much bigger. The new suit is made of lighter materials and much smaller. Also the newer suit is more efficient on power (like newer iphones are faster but have the same battery capacity and last the same amount of time as older iphones).
But the biggest issue is (the one that really counts)
3. Lightning strikes lasts for a fraction of a second (about 50 microseconds). Thor continuously absorbed lightning for over 3 seconds. This is more than 60,000 times more. So only giving Tony 475% is less than we should expect. Thus Thor's lightning is either normal lightning or less than it.
Originally posted by h1a8
There are 3 issues I will give. But the 3rd one is the one that really matters. The 1st two are not necessary.1.
If the arc can hold more than 100% (as shown in the scene) then Tony could have started above 100% initially before being struck by Thor's lightning. We see the percentage start to increase after 300%. But that doesn't mean Tony started at 300% or higher before Thor struck. But only it's a possibility. For the sake of debate, let's assume Tony's armor started at or close to 100%.2. Tony's first suit was a lot heavier. It was made of real iron and much bigger. The new suit is made of lighter materials and much smaller. Also the newer suit is more efficient on power (like newer iphones are faster but have the same battery capacity and last the same amount of time as older iphones).
But the biggest issue is (the one that really counts)
3. Lightning strikes lasts for a fraction of a second (about 50 microseconds). Thor continuously absorbed lightning for over 3 seconds. This is more than 60,000 times more. So only giving Tony 475% is less than we should expect. Thus Thor's lightning is either normal lightning or less than it.
1) Why are you assuming the arc reactor absorbed the energy and not the suit?
2) You're forgetting that he also had to use the original arc reactor to power his new suit in the final battle of Iron-man 1, so weight or efficiency had little to nothing to do with it.
3) The 3 gigajoules per second was from his original reactor, his new ones are literally thousands of times more powerful.
Originally posted by FrothByte
In any case, WW was made specifically to counter Ares. So assuming she can absorb Thor's lightning because she did so against Ares is a weak argument. Better instead to cite her absorbing and redirecting Doomsday's energy blasts.
This is a fallacy, saying "she can only counter Ares lightning" she was the daughter of the Zeus, the most powerful god, and the god of the thunderbolt.
Its a weak arguement to now shift from "we go by screen feats here" to "you can't use these screen feats."
She can absorb lightning and she will again.
Originally posted by Sable
This is a fallacy, saying "she can only counter Ares lightning" she was the daughter of the Zeus, the most powerful god, and the god of the thunderbolt.Its a weak arguement to now shift from "we go by screen feats here" to "you can't use these screen feats."
She can absorb lightning and she will again.
Oh we're still going by screen feats. Screen feat has her blocking/absorbing Ares' lightning. Ares, for whom she was specifically built to defeat. Ares' lightning for whom we never really see just how powerful or destructive it is.
Originally posted by Silent Master
According to what I've found, lightning strikes generate between .5 and 5 gigajoules of energy. Tony's original arc reactor produced 3 gigajoules per second and could only power a suit for 15 minutes. yet Tony's new arc reactor can easily power his new suits for hours and yet a few seconds of Thor's lightning powered it up to 475%.Doesn't sound like normal lightning to me.
Also, regular lightning is not capable of destroying acres of land mass like Thor's Jotunheim strike.
Laughable defense, she can block a Principle eternal god's lightning, but not a god that isn't really considered a god as Odin said. She the daughter of the god of the thunderbolt. The more I debate with you, the more I noticed you squirm around looking for ways you can exploit certain feats that benefit your argument, and discount others that don't, even if its coming from the same char.
Originally posted by Sable
Laughable defense, she can block a Principle eternal god's lightning, but not a god that isn't really considered a god as Odin said. She the daughter of the god of the thunderbolt.
Like I said, screen feats count. Name me a lightning strike feat from Ares that can compare to Thor's leviathan or Jotunheim strikes.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Like I said, screen feats count. Name me a lightning strike feat from Ares that can compare to Thor's leviathan or Jotunheim strikes.
Jotunheim strike was a chain reaction due to it being an ice shelf, and the leviathan he needed the Empire State building to amp his attack, it also wore him out.