Who would be a bigger threat: Thor vs. Superman

Originally posted by h1a8

Trust me I believe Thor is bulletproof, just not aircraft bulletproof.
Sif wasn’t hit by a bullet, she had to block them.

Loki face was scared by a bullet. He healed instantly (maybe it was the staff?)

Sif took a shotgun blast to the hip. Loki was never scarred by a bullet. We kept asking you to post a clip but you never did. You know why? Because it never happened.

You believe Thor is bulletproof, we know Hulk is aircraft bulletproof, we know Thor has comparable if not greater durability to Hulk. Till now, you have yet to prove that aircraft bullets can penetrate Thor

Originally posted by h1a8
I did not ignore anything. I addressed your post with 4points. You basically ignored some of my points. I explained why there is no contradiction.

I answered everything that you could possibly bring up that was important. Except none of your posts are actually important because you're making up math, and ignoring literal proof of the limits of bullets. You're also twisting writer's intention and saying it doesn't count in one case.

There is a complete contradiction. We can't take your word for anything because you literally just argued that 20mm bullets have 313 million tons of psi. You argued with people that questioned that. You're doing the same thing right now with screwy math where you never factored in the mass, did formulas that make no sense, and never explained why you used such and such. Also legitimate converters and sites specifically meant to calculate psi don't count for whatever reason. Kinetic energy figured out by actual ballistics experts is meaningless as well.

You're using a big number that means very little when we can simply look at actual facts and realize that your numbers are meaningless. Why is 3000 tons psi important when it can only penetrate around half an inch of titanium? Uh uh... it deforms and the pressure goes down... 😂

Originally posted by h1a8
You know that pressure = force /area right?

The pressure at the tip may be 2900 tons per square but the bullet is deforming, increasing the area and decreasing the velocity of the bullet.
The pressure decreases by thousands of tons per square in just after an inch of travel. For a 3in plate, I'm surprised that it even penetrated.
The pressure goes from 2900 to 50 in less than 2 inches of travel. There should be no blowing through anything.

Once the tip deforms to the diameter of the bullet (20mm) the pressure is BELOW 50. You are thinking that the bullets stays at 2900 the whole way and thus is suppose to blow right through the plate. Wrong!

The initial pressure just proves that there would be some penetration, even if it is just a little bit. It doesn't prove complete penetration (which needs calculus to prove)

That plate was only 62 tons per square inch. But do you mind actually posting a link that says a bullet goes from 2900 tons of psi to under 50 in under 2 inches?

I mean this is a big defense of your numbers, but I see literally no proof of it. Can you actually post a ballistics link that shows that bullets lose that much psi with a bullet rated almost 60 times higher than the plate it's shooting? That would be literal paper compared to a bullet that powerful. You'd think all those ballistics experts spending their entire life looking for more powerful ammunition would have thought to have ever measured the peak psi of a bullet? I mean, have you ever even heard of anyone else ever doing this and coming up with a number near yours? Do you have any study ever to collaborate your numbers? Why has the army never thought to measure a bullet in this way and come up with numbers close to yours? Why are you not posting extensive studies on the ballistics of a 20mm losing 50 times their psi on plates rated almost 60 times below the psi of a bullet?

You have to realize that no one trusts anything you say, don't you? Why would you ever think you can just get me to believe you when you post zero proof of anything you say? Nothing out there ever agrees with what you're saying here, and your actual logic hasn't changed in the slightest since your 313 million tons argument... only your numbers have. That's not very comforting.

And no, the initial pressure means nothing. All it does is raise confusion. It doesn't prove anything. The actual ballistics prove something. The tests of actual metals prove something. You have proven nothing other than you can bullshit out some completely nuts logic.

You also ignored the ballistics of a gun that by your logic should have around 6000 tons of psi only penetrating 3 inches into a metal rated at 66 tons psi. Completely ignored it too. Literally cropped it out of your response.

Originally posted by h1a8
Please try to understand me. Most of our discussion is just a misunderstanding. I promise you that it is. I'm not arguing that Jessica Jones IS BULLETPROOF. She's not. That's common sense. I was just giving a counterexample for the logic you and others are using.

But you are arguing she should be able to take bullets.

"Jessica Jones should be at least low level bullet proof since her flesh can withstand tens of tons per square inch of pressures and forces."

You're arguing that Jessica Jones should be bulletproof because she can break chains while ignoring all of her durability feats... and therefore Thor isn't bulletproof because... ?

I realize you're not saying Jessica Jones is bulletproof, what a stupid thing to say. You're just saying she should be based on feats. The issue is, she is not. Thor however was never shown to be penetrated by bullets. She has nothing in common with Thor. Thor should be bulletproof, and was never shown on the contrary. Jessica Jones iyo should be bulletproof, but guess what, she isn't. And she was beaten up by thugs. Stabbed. Hurt, etc. Her durability feats are complete shit. All you're arguing is that because she can break chains that she must be bulletproof, ignoring that her skin is still fairly humanoid.

I don't know how I can make this any clearer.

If you're only defense is that Thor isn't bulletproof because he jumped out of the path of bullets and Jessica Jones isn't, then you have zero argument. Also no other feats he has should count... and being as durable or moreso than Hulk and Iron Man don't count either. Because Jessica Jones is not bulletproof.

Do you understand logical fallacies or something? You break at least 10 every post.

Originally posted by h1a8
You guys are saying that Thor is aircraft bullet proof, indirectly, through his other feats, yet writer's intentions clearly shows that he isn't supposed to be.
I can apply that logic for Jessica Jones. She has feats that scientifically proves that she is low level bulletproof, but writer's intentions are that she isn't. And lastly, why does the logic of a character being bulletproof indirectly because of their other feats only apply to the MCU? That's a universal logic as stated. That means I can use counterexamples from other universes (because the logic used was a universal one, and not a one pertaining to a particular universe).

Do you now understand?

Writer's intention and purpose were that Hulk can effortlessly tank bullets off his skin. Writer's intention and purpose is that Thor is at least as strong and durable as Hulk now.

Yet we're under the assumption that again, that something Hulk can tank effortlessly, would shred through Thor in a lower caliber? That doesn't even make sense. Even if he jumped out of the way of that jet, that doesn't prove that a ****ing 20mm bullet would shred him. Those were 25/30mm bullets.
And because Jessica Jones exists - who again is not as durable as anyone in MCU who has taken a bullet - that means that Thor can't be seen as anything less than a pinhole for 20mm even though he is as durable or moreso than people who can tank higher rounds?

And Thor ducking away is easily explained as his first encounter with bullets of that nature. He's not stupid enough to just stand there and take something that may hurt him. There's a reason he blocks things with his hammer regardless of what it is.

"She has feats that scientifically proves that she is low level bulletproof, but writer's intentions are that she isn't"

Are you indirectly arguing that Thor has feats that scientifically prove he can tank aircraft bullets, but because he ducked and because Jessica Jones exists, that means he isn't? But I mean, you're still saying he should tank even 3000 tons of PSI based on his feats?
Get yourself together h1. This is embarrassing.

Because MCU isn't wildly contradicting itself at every turn, and MCU is literally the universe you're talking about. 😂
You wouldn't go into a Bond discussion with talks of how things work in Star Trek.

But yes, sharing feats doesn't count, but using comic examples of characters that aren't even Thor should count?

Originally posted by h1a8
There is no such thing as a great outward force of a star. Forces push or pull. Thor was barely pushed if any.
It was figurative language.
It is faulty to assume that a character's words, in the literal sense, are the writer's intentions when a such thing as figurative language Exists (which creates the possibility) AND there is evidence supporting he used figurative language. The evidence is
the literal sense of the character's words makes little to no sense and that it goes against what we actually see (flames, burning, little to no push or pull, etc) .

It put out a bunch of solar energy that was trapped within a cage. Thor opened a tiny pinhole in that cage and all that energy was forced out at speeds escaping the pull of the sun. Imagine all the energy our sun puts out in a minute only being able to come through in a tiny beam.

As soon as Thor let go he was propelled at high speeds. Which means he was resisting being shot the entire time he was holding on as well. Thor being propelled proves he was subject to pressure, not heat.

Also lol at it not being very fast. That was an entire sun in the cage. The rings were like 2-3 sun distances away. If we assume the sun was the same size as ours, that means Thor traveled at least 3-4 million kilometers in 7 seconds.
It also took 4 seconds for that beam of light to reach it's destination. Even if we assume that was for whatever reason 1/8 the speed of light, it was still incredibly far.
But, let's downgrade it. Let's say the sun is Earth sized. It shot a beam about 4 Earths in length in 4 seconds. It made Thor travel 4 Earth's in length in 7 seconds and that's with the beam being cut off. You ever hear of a bullet travelling 4 Earths in length in 7 seconds? That's a lot of pressure being put everywhere on Thor. And that's ignoring the dense material of the sun.
THERE HAD TO BE PRESSURE. It wasn't just heat. Even if it wasn't a sun, the beam still fired a large distance in a very short time.

Even if that sun was the size of a city. It still fired way faster than any bullet is capable of going. And Thor resisted all that pressure, and got blasted like a bullet.
It literally can't be just heat. That's just sheer ignorance.

The character's words are the only words on that subject. If there were intention to the contrary, there would have been something indicated anywhere else that this was the case. There was zero evidence to the contrary of his words.

And yeah, I'd expect there to be flames and burning when he was hit by the ****ing sun that was heating up a forge. 😂

Jesus Crisps.

Originally posted by h1a8
The point of the video I posted was merely to show that as metal compresses, it can resist more forces and pressure. It was silly of me to bring up. It's not a strong argument anyway so forget about it.

Basically all the calculations I done was unnecessary as we have evidence that Thor isn't aircraft bullet proof and it is faulty to use other feats as an indirect way of showing that he should be bulletproof (because of the JJ example).

Thank you so much for the link and the videos. I really appreciate it. Was looking for things like this. I love that type of stuff.

Thank you so much for ignoring all the links and videos and not using common sense to realize that they strongly go against everything you're saying.

There's more I could say... a lot more, but it's going to fall on troll ears. The funny thing is, is that the sun no exerting pressure when you're ignoring Thor being shot like a bullet is the absolute worst thing you argue.

On more thing, but if the bullets would have went through Iron Man like you're claiming, it would have killed the man in the suit. 😂

The fairly thin suit stopped the bullets. And that's from like his weakest suit. I'd hate to think how being shot in the back would actually go through the suit but not hit the guy underneath?

But can you actually post the damage the bullets made? Show these big old holes please? Would you care to post a still or a picture of the massive damage?

Its been a long time since ive studied physics. But am I missing something, because I recall heat being kinetic energy.

IOW heat as hot as the sun would have to have crap loads of physical force as well would it not? Or am I missing something?

https://www.quora.com/If-temperature-increases-pressure-increases-Does-temperature-increase-if-pressure-increases

Waiting on h1 to cherry pick the response, misrepresent a few answers (to try and divert the direction of the debate), double back some of his answers without acknowledging his errors, post more baseless non sequitur logic and then post semi-answers that don’t really address anything.

As usual. Like I said, waste of time troll.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's writers intentions to be literal because it is. There is sufficient evidence pointing that it is not literal. It borders absurdity if we try to assume literal.

Comic books films absurd? Who would have thought?

That said you basically have no reason to write off the dialogue except that you are butthurt over it.

In any case Ill humour you. Because if you had any notable intelligence you would realise what an insane feat it is to take even the HEAT of a Star.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. Yes
2. In force no. In piercing pressuring yes.
3. Yes, easily (except for heat and lightning)
4. Maybe. Thor is stronger and has Mjolnir (way more power striking). If IM was as strong as Thor and had Mjolnir for boosted striking then I believe IM would damage Thor just as much as he got damaged from Thor.
But know that aircraft bullets put holes through IM.

1. Concession accepted. Taking even the HEAT of that star was a wayyyyyy more impressive durability feat than taking aircraft fire Lmao

2. Semantics. But okay lets play your game. So which has more pressure. Aircraft fire or the kinetic energy from the HEAT of a dying Star.

3. Based on? I posted for you how they traded blows equally. Or do you simply ignore what you dont like.
Also where was it confirmed Thor has some special durability to heat? Last time I checked he wasnt the Human Torch.

4. What the hell? Are you not capable of even basic logic?
Thor was crushing Iron Mans arms when IM was amped 400%. Has even Hulk been able to crush Thors arms.

You are not really proving yourself to be the intellectual you make out you are.

Originally posted by h1a8

You are arguing in circles.

Thats what happens when im silly enough to argue with Trolls.

Originally posted by One Big Mob
Lets follow writer's intention then... again.
Writer's intention was that Thor was hit by bullets in Avengers 2.
Writer's intention is that Thor was on an entire island that blew up in his face at ground zero in Avengers 2.
Writer's intention was that Thor was as strong or stronger than Hulk, and as durable or moreso after his powerup which happened after Avengers 1.
Writer's intention was that Thor took the full force of the star in Avengers 3, after his powerup.

Writer's intention and purpose were that Hulk can effortlessly tank bullets off his skin. Writer's intention and purpose is that Thor is at least as strong and durable as Hulk now.

Yet we're under the assumption that again, that something Hulk can tank effortlessly, would shred through Thor in a lower caliber? That doesn't even make sense. Even if he jumped out of the way of that jet, that doesn't prove that a ****ing 20mm bullet would shred him. Those were 25/30mm bullets.
And because Jessica Jones exists - who again is not as durable as anyone in MCU who has taken a bullet - that means that Thor can't be seen as anything less than a pinhole for 20mm even though he is as durable or moreso than people who can tank higher rounds?

And Thor ducking away is easily explained as his first encounter with bullets of that nature. He's not stupid enough to just stand there and take something that may hurt him. There's a reason he blocks things with his hammer regardless of what it is.

"She has feats that scientifically proves that she is low level bulletproof, but writer's intentions are that she isn't"

Are you indirectly arguing that Thor has feats that scientifically prove he can tank aircraft bullets, but because he ducked and because Jessica Jones exists, that means he isn't? But I mean, you're still saying he should tank even 3000 tons of PSI based on his feats?
Get yourself together h1. This is embarrassing.

Because MCU isn't wildly contradicting itself at every turn, and MCU is literally the universe you're talking about. 😂
You wouldn't go into a Bond discussion with talks of how things work in Star Trek.

But yes, sharing feats doesn't count, but using comic examples of characters that aren't even Thor should count?

Do you think all a sun does is suck in its own energy or something?

It put out a bunch of solar energy that was trapped within a cage. Thor opened a tiny pinhole in that cage and all that energy was forced out at speeds escaping the pull of the sun. Imagine all the energy our sun puts out in a minute only being able to come through in a tiny beam.

As soon as Thor let go he was propelled at high speeds. Which means he was resisting being shot the entire time he was holding on as well. Thor being propelled proves he was subject to pressure, not heat.

Also lol at it not being very fast. That was an entire sun in the cage. The rings were like 2-3 sun distances away. If we assume the sun was the same size as ours, that means Thor traveled at least 3-4 million kilometers in 7 seconds.
It also took 4 seconds for that beam of light to reach it's destination. Even if we assume that was for whatever reason 1/8 the speed of light, it was still incredibly far.
But, let's downgrade it. Let's say the sun is Earth sized. It shot a beam about 4 Earths in length in 4 seconds. It made Thor travel 4 Earth's in length in 7 seconds and that's with the beam being cut off. You ever hear of a bullet travelling 4 Earths in length in 7 seconds? That's a lot of pressure being put everywhere on Thor. And that's ignoring the dense material of the sun.
THERE HAD TO BE PRESSURE. It wasn't just heat. Even if it wasn't a sun, the beam still fired a large distance in a very short time.

Even if that sun was the size of a city. It still fired way faster than any bullet is capable of going. And Thor resisted all that pressure, and got blasted like a bullet.
It literally can't be just heat. That's just sheer ignorance.

The character's words are the only words on that subject. If there were intention to the contrary, there would have been something indicated anywhere else that this was the case. There was zero evidence to the contrary of his words.

And yeah, I'd expect there to be flames and burning when he was hit by the ****ing sun that was heating up a forge. 😂

Jesus Crisps.

lol at you concluding that Jessica Jones is a strong example here when she's literally the definition of a non sequitur.

Thank you so much for ignoring all the links and videos and not using common sense to realize that they strongly go against everything you're saying.

There's more I could say... a lot more, but it's going to fall on troll ears. The funny thing is, is that the sun no exerting pressure when you're ignoring Thor being shot like a bullet is the absolute worst thing you argue.

Lol. He moved forward WITH LITTLE VELOCITY. You are extremely late on this. No one here realized Thor moved forward. I was helping people out by proving a force acted on Thor but that is was small. Thor's acceleration was almost non existent.
bullets because of his other feats while ignoring the writer's intentions.

Originally posted by One Big Mob
I answered everything that you could possibly bring up that was important. Except none of your posts are actually important because you're making up math, and ignoring literal proof of the limits of bullets. You're also twisting writer's intention and saying it doesn't count in one case.

There is a complete contradiction. We can't take your word for anything because you literally just argued that 20mm bullets have 313 million tons of psi. You argued with people that questioned that. You're doing the same thing right now with screwy math where you never factored in the mass, did formulas that make no sense, and never explained why you used such and such. Also legitimate converters and sites specifically meant to calculate psi don't count for whatever reason. Kinetic energy figured out by actual ballistics experts is meaningless as well.

When I first calculated everything, I told everyone to check the math. That implies that I could have made a mistake. I was trying to be transparent.
Average Force = loss in kinetic energy /stopping distance
Peak Pressure = Peak force / area
Notice why I posted the word "PEAK"?
Because I always knew that the pressure and force decreases over distance.

If you disagree with these then the discussion is a waste of time. The concept is sound. The initial calculations were wrong. I don't want anyone to trust what I say without verifying it for themselves. So I could care less about credibility. I rather have 0 credibility than so much that people don't check out my results.

You're using a big number that means very little when we can simply look at actual facts and realize that your numbers are meaningless. Why is 3000 tons psi important when it can only penetrate around half an inch of titanium? Uh uh... it deforms and the pressure goes down... 😂

I realize what pressure is. However, I don't think you understand exactly how little it makes sense for something with 3000 tons of psi being stopped within half an inch in a plate designed to be at the absolute maximum 132 psi. That completely throws into doubt everything you've just said.

That plate was only 62 tons per square inch. But do you mind actually posting a link that says a bullet goes from 2900 tons of psi to under 50 in under 2 inches?

That's easy to prove. When the bullet deforms by 2 inches in length, the tip of bullet will have the size of the diameter of the bullet (20mm) or larger.
The area of the tip now becomes MORE THAN A = pi x (0.01m)^2 = 3.14e-4m^2 =0.49 in^2
The force would also be greatly reduced too. The force would probably reduce to less than half. 55 tons would be reduced to around 20 tons.

20tons/0.49in^2 = 41 tons per square inch. But even if the bullet doesn't slow down any but just deforms (impossible) then the maximum pressure is
55tons/0.49in^2 = 112 tons per square in.

I promise you I'm not the one misunderstanding anything, you are.

But you are arguing she should be able to take bullets.

"Jessica Jones should be at least low level bullet proof since her flesh can withstand tens of tons per square inch of pressures and forces."

You're arguing that Jessica Jones should be bulletproof because she can break chains while ignoring all of her durability feats... and therefore Thor isn't bulletproof because... ?

I realize you're not saying Jessica Jones is bulletproof, what a stupid thing to say. You're just saying she should be based on feats. The issue is, she is not. Thor however was never shown to be penetrated by bullets. She has nothing in common with Thor. Thor should be bulletproof, and was never shown on the contrary. Jessica Jones iyo should be bulletproof, but guess what, she isn't. And she was beaten up by thugs. Stabbed. Hurt, etc. Her durability feats are complete shit. All you're arguing is that because she can break chains that she must be bulletproof, ignoring that her skin is still fairly humanoid.

I don't know how I can make this any clearer.

If you're only defense is that Thor isn't bulletproof because he jumped out of the path of bullets and Jessica Jones isn't, then you have zero argument. Also no other feats he has should count... and being as durable or moreso than Hulk and Iron Man don't count either. Because Jessica Jones is not bulletproof.

Do you understand logical fallacies or something? You break at least 10 every post.

The writer intentions where clear when Thor ran from bullets. The writer's intentions are clear for JJ too. Therefore it's illogical to assume Thor is resistant to aircraft bullets because of his other feats while ignoring the writer's intentions.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Sif took a shotgun blast to the hip. Loki was never scarred by a bullet. We kept asking you to post a clip but you never did. You know why? Because it never happened.

You believe Thor is bulletproof, we know Hulk is aircraft bulletproof, we know Thor has comparable if not greater durability to Hulk. Till now, you have yet to prove that aircraft bullets can penetrate Thor

Sif blocked the shot with armor. I saw the clip. Who are you trying to fool?

Look at 1:17-1:18 as it happens fast.

YouTube video

Hulk tanking aircraft bullets is his highest durability feat. Thor does not automatically get that feat.

And one more thing.
There were bullets holes in I'm armor because it was stated to be.
Arguing why Tony is not dead doesn't erase that fact.
Perhaps the bullets angled and did not hit Tony.

Well look at that, h1 is still lying about the writer's intentions.

With pretty much everyone disagreeing with almost every post he makes, I still don't get why the entire board hasn't blocked H1. Or is that feature gone?

double post

Originally posted by h1a8
Sif blocked the shot with armor. I saw the clip. Who are you trying to fool?

Look at 1:17-1:18 as it happens fast.

YouTube video

Hulk tanking aircraft bullets is his highest durability feat. Thor does not automatically get that feat.

That's his hair, zoom in, you'll see it goes past his ear and behind his head.

https://ibb.co/cQ8uEp

At least that's what it looks like to me, everyone else (likely h1 won't accept it, tho) feel free to look and decide for yourselves.

Looked at it again in HD, def his hair. It goes around his ear and behind his head.

To be fair to h1, it is hard to see if you just look at youtube clips.

Originally posted by h1a8
Sif blocked the shot with armor. I saw the clip. Who are you trying to fool?

Look at 1:17-1:18 as it happens fast.

YouTube video

Hulk tanking aircraft bullets is his highest durability feat. Thor does not automatically get that feat.

That's his hair dumbass. Please stop making stuff up.

As for Sif, her armor doesn't cover her entire hip. You want to claim that it ONLY hit her armor then prove it.

Originally posted by h1a8
And one more thing.
There were bullets holes in I'm armor because it was stated to be.
Arguing why Tony is not dead doesn't erase that fact.
Perhaps the bullets angled and did not hit Tony.

You are still arguing Tonys armour is more durable than Thors skin.

Even though Thor was crushing his arms when amped by 400%. Yet Thor takes repeated punches to the face from Hulk with virtually no damage.

USE..... COMMON..... SENSE

I'll answer later on even though I really don't need to... like I mean really... I feel the points are self defeating at this stage which is why I don't feel compelled to even respond. You answer me telling you that nobody trusts anything you say and post sources with more "trust me" and more ignoring actual facts. It's so trollish. You think you can talk sense into someone and you forget just how much of a troll someone is.
Lol at "ignore it not killing Iron Man" though. Like fuk me... but I'll get to that later today.

Anyway the big one everyone is arguing about. I did a little research. Turns out the star was a neutron star. The smallest a neutron star can be is 20km. Which means if we assume the distance was 80km (4 neutron stars), the speed of the beam was 20km a second since it took 4 seconds to reach the target. Which is almost 20 times faster than a 20mm bullet. Which means that Thor was being bombarded by the pressure of something traveling at that speed.

I wonder how much the matter of a neutron star weighs and what the velocity of it being propelled at 20 000 meters a second is...

But I digress. Even ignoring the matter of the star. He was still being bombarded by "something" traveling at these speeds. It showed pressure by flinging Thor at a speed that took him 7 seconds to travel 80km, so it could not have been just heat. A literal impossibility.

Him not moving shows his massive strength considering he was able to withstand "not being pushed" by this when he was holding on. As soon as he let go he was flung at over 11km a second though, and that's assuming his speed was constant even though the beam turned off halfway.

And he was absolutely blasted away at high speeds as soon as he let go. What are you even talking about here? The fact that he was propelled away at all proves pressure, let alone him looking like someone dropped an apple in front of a jet engine. How much of a liar do you have to be to pretend Thor wasn't fired at high speeds after he let go?
Someone post the scene, or better yet make a gif of Thor the projectile.

😂 100 yards.

Also my typing is terrible on a computer. Too fast to notice errors. I really should use it more. Again, later tonight or tomorrow is when I'll answer the rest. It's so bad I feel no hurry to answer though.

Originally posted by h1a8
Actually, the star is extremely smaller than that by just scaling everything to Thor's size. Star was probably around less than 100 feet in diameter.

This is h1-speak for "I am too lazy to provide proof/compute properly, thus I will throw a completely arbitrary, completely absurd number out there in the hopes that I will annoy you enough to do all the work for me".