Originally posted by Silent Master
Even if Superman can absorb some of the energy, for all we know if could end up overloading him and causing him to explode, much like Ares did when Wonder Woman overloaded him with his own lightning.
That is a fair point. Thor is my favorite character, I just dont feel he is Superman level. He is close but I just think Superman wins 7/10. I think he is stronger and faster. Thor is a better fighter but not enough to make up the difference.
Originally posted by WolvesofBabylon
That is a fair point. Thor is my favorite character, I just dont feel he is Superman level. He is close but I just think Superman wins 7/10. I think he is stronger and faster. Thor is a better fighter but not enough to make up the difference.
I don't think he's as strong or fast. but Thor is more powerful, more skilled, agile and durable.
Originally posted by Josh_AlexanderOh yeah?
Well it makes sense. Considering that it moves through the atmosphere. It aint as fast as light. But it is faster than anything Diana or even Superman have portrayed on screen.
2:29, then 2:59.
Diana can block natural lightning from Ares after it has been fired. Yet she was a statue to Clark.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Oh yeah?2:29, then 2:59.
Diana can block natural lightning from Ares after it has been fired. Yet she was a statue to Clark.
Thors Lightning》》》》Ares.
Also, Ares is like "I WILL DESTROY YOU" ..."HERE DIANA, AM ABOUT TO ATTACK YOU, PLEASEEE DONT COVER YOURSELFF!!!" before each strike 😂
I believe you should understand the concept.
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
I think Superman beats any version of Thor, except the Infinity War version...Once Thor got Stormbreaker, he was able to
Spoiler:...
mess up Thanos with the Full Infinity gauntletI'm sorry, but I cant see Superman being able to beat someone capable of doing that...
Infinity War Thor wins 10/10...
Hmmmm...The thing is we don't know what a blast of the IG is capable of. Hell as sure it is a mighty shot. But i don't know, doesn't convince me.
But I agree, I don't know if Superman could rival that.
Originally posted by Psychotron
It wasn't minutes, Rage. You know very well I can time it.Besides, not only is the core far less hot, it also doesn't have the blast force of a nuke.
Thor was literally dying, which was confirmed by characters in the movie. He didn't tank it.
1) If you set a timer from when he starts the feat, to when he ends it, it'll be a few minutes would it not?
2) This is a silly argument. Do you not understand how time dilation works in movies? Are we assuming Superman/Flash aren't super-fast because we can see them? The dwarf said it would take at least a few minutes.
A nuclear weapon at it's core flash heat is hotter yes, but briefly. It is like a fire cracker compared to an inferno. The core of a Star is a continuous process that is magnitudes more powerful than a nuclear weapon.
For example, if we threw, every Nuclear Weapon at the planet at the Sun and detonated it at the same time in a hypothetical scenario, it would be indistinguishable from the random thermal noise from the sun. It would be equivalent to the energy the Sun generated in like 0.00001 seconds.
Originally posted by h1a8
The star was a dwarf.Let's ignore that Thors clothes were not disintegrated.
Thor only experienced a fraction of the heat since most of it went around Thor to heat the metal.And it took a few seconds. Not minutes. Unless you believe that movie time should be inflated in that scene (I'll be ok with that).
Also Etri could possibly be using hyperbole in stating Full Force of a star.
It's a good feat showing Thor resistance to heat.
Oh yea, it was said to be a Neutron Star, no? I remember it being a main sequence Star tbh. I have to re-watch the movie.
If we started considering the gravitational forces in play of a Neutron Star that we would apply to Thor if we used a Neutron Star....would he not just atomize Superman with a punch based on his strength? This would get ridiculous quickly.
A neutron star can be up to 4 times larger than the Sun squeezed into a much smaller volume (40% larger than Earth) so the density is ridiculous. They are also hotter than a main sequence Star like the Sun IIRC....
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
based on his strength? This would get ridiculous quickly.A neutron star can be up to 4 times larger than the Sun squeezed into a much smaller volume (40% larger than Earth) so the density is ridiculous. They are also hotter than a main sequence Star like the Sun IIRC....
Totally agree. The size of such star was immensily small. I mean, even dwarf stars are several times bigger than planets.
That star is being shrunk. That's likely what that metal structure surrounding it is for. Why? To harvest it's energy better and to waste less resources on the size of the rings that surround it.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Oh yeah?2:29, then 2:59.
Diana can block natural lightning from Ares after it has been fired. Yet she was a statue to Clark.
Hmm...I don't know man. That's a lot like saying Thor can block energy blasts after they are fired so he has to be hella fast too.
100% Captain America for example could've blocked that imo.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusIf you have any idea how fast those energy blasts are then sure, you could use that feat for Thor. I recall him deflecting the Destroyer's beam, which does indicate superhuman reaction-time, though nothing on par with this.
Hmm...I don't know man. That's a lot like saying Thor can block energy blasts after they are fired so he has to be hella fast too.100% Captain America for example could've blocked that imo.
That's cool, but you have nothing backing that opinion as far as I'm aware my man, so of what use is it in a versus thread?
Why is lightning different from bullets? No one fronts on Diana deflecting those as evidence for her speed.