Originally posted by Silent Master
You'll notice that at no time during h1's post did he actually refute the videos numbers.
2. The ratio of the amount of power that Thor was getting hit with and the total power output of a neutron star should be the same ratio as the cross sectional area of Thor and the total surface area of a neutron star. This ratio is
R=1.4/[4pi(10^4)^2]= 1.11e-9 (assuming Thor is 2m x 0.7m rectangle)
So Thor experienced 0.024 x 1.11e-9 = 2.67e-11 times the power of the Sun.
Thor had it opened for less than 60s (from the timestamp).
So Thor tanked less than 2.67e-11 x 3.828e26 x 60s = 6.14e17 J of heat energy.
Very impressive.
This is making some assumptions though as one source states that some neutron stars have millions of times less luminosity than that of the Sun and can reach surface temperatures of about 50,000k.
Originally posted by Silent Master
You'll notice that he didn't cite any sources, it's because he's making things up.
Here’s one source
read page 4
Neutron star’s temperature drops over time.
We know Hela had Mjolnir before Thor was born.
That star could be anywhere from thousands to millions of years old.
Anyway, using the 10^6 k estimate would result in a similar result (and still contradicts his statements).
Other numbers I used were common knowledge.
Surface temperature of the sun can be found everywhere, as both the radius and power output of the Sun can be too.
But again, the feat shows that Thor is incredibly heat resistant.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Notice how he tries to move the debate to lowballing Thor’s “feat” now rather than accepting my BZ challenge?
Lowballing a feat is a form of lying. No where did I lie. Check the math yourself.
And giving a feat props and calling it impressive is certainly not lowballing.
Originally posted by h1a8
Lowballing a feat is a form of lying. No where did I lie. Check the math yourself.
And giving a feat props and calling it impressive is certainly not lowballing.
I notice how you constantly try to move the debate to a different direction other than the BZ challenge I issued you that is relevant to this thread (Thor is not even in this thread). You are baiting people by lowballing Thor's "feat" to engage with you to bury my posts, and you're baiting me so that I'd be distracted but I'm not really gonna fall for that.
I issued that challenge h1. Either accept or admit your previous calcs are full of BS.
Originally posted by h1a8Accept the challenge you insufferable pussy. You’re so full of shit. I can smell the weakness from you all the way over here in Ohio. Man the **** up.
Lowballing a feat is a form of lying. No where did I lie. Check the math yourself.
And giving a feat props and calling it impressive is certainly not lowballing.
Originally posted by NibedicusYou didn’t read the previous posts before mine. You will see that I wasn’t the one who brought up Thor in this thread. I was basically RESPONDING to a someone’s post about Thor’s neutron star feat.
I notice how you constantly try to move the debate to a different direction other than the BZ challenge I issued you that is relevant to this thread (Thor is not even in this thread). You are baiting people by lowballing Thor's "feat" to engage with you to bury my posts, and you're baiting me so that I'd be distracted but I'm not really gonna fall for that.I issued that challenge h1. Either accept or admit your previous calcs are full of BS.
The bz challenge was about Hulk’s feat. You are defining the bz in faulty ways.
The wording you used is not what my calculation measured. Basically you are creating a strawman.
Originally posted by h1a8You complete and utter *****.
You didn’t read the previous posts before mine. You will see that I wasn’t the one who brought up Thor in this thread. I was basically RESPONDING to a someone’s post about Thor’s neutron star feat.The bz challenge was about Hulk’s feat. You are defining the bz in faulty ways.
The wording you used is not what my calculation measured. Basically you are creating a strawman.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He’d punch that shitty cgi right off and we would see Superman’s true mustached form.
Hardest I've laughed in quite some time on here. That is a good one, Quan.
Supes would be sent flying and would possibly be stunned, but he'd get back up and him and Hulk would have a very cinematic fight involving lots of collateral damage, Superman grimacing, and IHOP.
Just to shut h1 up, I did a quick google on typical luminosities of neutron stars. As calculated by:
Jonathan Devor, PhD Astronomy, Harvard University (2008)
And I quote:
To figure out the luminosity of such neuron stars we’ll assume they all have a radius of R= 10 km, and that they behave like black bodies. If so, we can apply the Stefan–Boltzmann law:
L=4πσR2T4≈(T1K)4⋅71.3W≈(T106K)4⋅0.186Lsolar
So a typically neutron stars will have a luminosity of about 0.186 times solar luminosity, though very young neutron stars can have a luminosity that is much much higher than that.
Source: https://www.quora.com/In-which-regi...tron-stars-fall
Note: the cut/paste of the computation doesn't translate well from the post. Just click on the source to look at it.
So the Because Science guy was slightly off but pretty close. It is not 1/4 but around a little under 1/5th.
Also, dialogue between Thor and Eitri.
Eitri: With the iris closed, I can't heat the metal.
Thor: How long will it take to heat it?
Eitri: A few minutes, maybe more. Why?
Thor: I'm gonna hold it open.
While time stamps put it at 55 seconds, writer's intent is clear as Eitri mentions that it takes more than a few minutes to heat up the metal. And time skips most likely have occurred between cuts cuz ppl sitting and waiting for 3 minutes while the metal heats wouldn't be the most dramatic. Means at least 3+ minutes. NOT below 1 minute, so lol on the attempted lowballing there.