Originally posted by Astner
Where are you getting the past tense from? It's not in the comic.In fact, Superman visibly throws the device and specifies that it would blow up, before it does in the next panel.
Superman held together the damaged device, which still contained the black hole. They generated the magnetic field to alleviate the stress, so that they could travel to the wormhole where Superman could throw the device in.
Why? I don't know. But it's specified to be a containment device.
The comic clearly states the black hole was FULLY (not partially) released in Superman's hands. 😕
Obviously it is reasonable to assume that Superman prevented the black hole from blowing up. When he threw it, he released the pressure and it did what is was going to do if Superman never grabbed it.
The writer, through the story, implies that if Superman didn't do what he did the solar system would be destroyed. So at minimum Superman was preventing the destruction of the solar system.
And you are not using logic. If the device still contained the black hole then there was no reason for Superman to contain it with his hands or for Batman to panic that it is going to destroy the solar system. That would defeat the whole purpose.
Originally posted by Astner
In fact, it's unreasonable to assume that the force exerted to contain the pressure was anywhere near that of a black hole because just two issues earlier in JLA #75, Superman, Wonder Woman, and Martian Manhunter failed to stabilize the Earth's orbit after Orin used his water to change it. And this was after Superman amped himself with sunlight.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Different writer. The writer confirmed that Superman smothered its gravity with his fist.
GG
Originally posted by MrMind
magnon>>astner>>>>>>>infinity>>>>>>>>h1
I'm not calling either of them stupid. But you can't compare me, with an actual background in mathematics and physics, to people who base their understanding of it on documentaries.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Different writer. The writer confirmed that Superman smothered its gravity with his fist.
Originally posted by AstnerI have a masters degree in pure mathematics. I studied physics up to physics III over 23 years ago in college.
In terms of understanding of physics? No. They can only talk about phenomena in physics to the extent that they can Google it.I'm not calling either of them stupid. But you can't compare me, with an actual background in mathematics and physics, to people who base their understanding of it on documentaries.
Fair enough.
Originally posted by Magnon
Ah, so when the first stuff you cluelessly copy-pasted (without understanding it) was proven irrelevant and made you look silly, your intent is to copy-paste even more stuff you don't understand. Maybe if you google-copy-paste enough stuff some may stick, eh? My guess is you would just end up looking like a fool, as usual.Of course most comic book depictions of physical phenomena are flawed when comparing to the actual natural world; black holes are no exception. MU trains and buildings are not like natural trains or buildings, MU planets are not like natural planets, and so on. Therefore, by your criterion, manipulating such objects couldn't ever be considered a "strength feat nor impressive".
But back to the black hole topic. It is indeed possible for a "natural" black hole of that size (speck of dust) to have the potential to e.g. destroy the solar system. There are different types of black holes, with different relationships between their mass and "size". Remember that a black hole is completely characterized by its [B]mass, spin, and electric charge
.(1) The simplest type of a black hole, the so-called Schwarzschild black hole, doesn't spin nor is it electrically charged. Thus all of its properties are functions of its mass, only. In particular, its size is given by the Schwarzschild radius (rs), which is a simple function of mass (M):
(2) More generally, a black hole possesses not only non-zero mass (M) but also non-zero spin (J) and charge (Q). Such black holes are known as Kerr black holes (|J| > 0), Reissner–Nordström black holes (|Q| > 0), or Kerr-Newman black holes (|J| and |Q| > 0). For such black holes, the size becomes a function of not only mass but of all these three properties. These more general black holes are typically "smaller" than the Schwarzschild black hole of equal mass. It has been suggested that the event horizon of black holes with extremely high values of J and/or Q might even "shrink to nothingness", and reveal a naked singularity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_singularityTypically, such black holes are unstable and, if not sustained, they would rapidly decay towards more stable forms of a black hole -- with a much larger event horizon. This would be a nice "natural" analogue to the black hole depicted in the Superman comic. [/B]
Did you by chance study Astrophysics ? And are you math skills up there? I need a little bit of advice.
Originally posted by Astner
In terms of understanding of physics? No. They can only talk about phenomena in physics to the extent that they can Google it.I'm not calling either of them stupid. But you can't compare me, with an actual background in mathematics and physics, to people who base their understanding of it on documentaries.
Fair enough.
Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvilThat means you can't read. I said the size of a black hole's singularity is always the same (not its event horizon).Just when i was about to address H1, i see another poster spanking.
How tf is h1 still allowed to be on this forum when he just said that every black hole that exists is the same size. GTFOH with that shit
As far as I'm concerned. I'm winning the debate here. You nor anyone hasn't successfully rebutted my points.
Originally posted by Astner
In terms of understanding of physics? No. They can only talk about phenomena in physics to the extent that they can Google it.I'm not calling either of them stupid. But you can't compare me, with an actual background in mathematics and physics, to people who base their understanding of it on documentaries.
Fair enough.
I MEAN if you poke a hole in a balloon full of water and then put your finger over the hole the force of the water pouring out is contained. that doesn’t mean the entire ballon exploded.
