• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Thor withstands the full force of the star of Nidavellir

The calc is wrong on several fronts, as it assumes that the beam/glowy whatever emitted is made of pure neutronium (it's not) and then E=MC^2 that to get an energy value.

A more accurate measure would be the wattage of light a neutron star produces, inverse-square law by the distance to get watts per m2, and then multiply by the cross-sectional area of Chris Hemsworth.
 
The calc is wrong on several fronts, as it assumes that the beam/glowy whatever emitted is made of pure neutronium (it's not) and then E=MC^2 that to get an energy value.

A more accurate measure would be the wattage of light a neutron star produces, inverse-square law by the distance to get watts per m2, and then multiply by the cross-sectional area of Chris Hemsworth.
The visual effects team confirmed that it's a Dyson sphere, a hypothetical mechanism that captures a large percentage of a star's energy and concentrates it in a single direction. With this in mind, it's clear that Thor undoubtedly had to withstand at least the majority of the star's energy. Furthermore, the fact that the star is housed within a Dyson sphere would explain why it doesn't appear to have any of the characteristics of a real neutron star, since Dyson spheres aren't real. This detail would also lend credibility to any claim. Whoever flatly claimed that they believed they would withstand the star's full force.

Especially considering Eitri confirmed it and has been living there and forging weapons with the exact same process for a millennium, so he obviously knows what he's talking about.
MCU - Thor endures the full force of the star of Nidavellir
 
The visual effects team confirmed that it's a Dyson sphere, a hypothetical mechanism that captures a large percentage of a star's energy and concentrates it in a single direction. With this in mind, it's clear that Thor undoubtedly had to withstand at least the majority of the star's energy. Furthermore, the fact that the star is housed within a Dyson sphere would explain why it doesn't appear to have any of the characteristics of a real neutron star, since Dyson spheres aren't real. This detail would also lend credibility to any claim. Whoever flatly claimed that they believed they would withstand the star's full force.

Especially considering Eitri confirmed it and has been living there and forging weapons with the exact same process for a millennium, so he obviously knows what he's talking about.
MCU - Thor endures the full force of the star of Nidavellir
Nothing about what you just said would explain why the light is made of neutronium. And there's no reason why "The majority of the star's energy" would mean Mass-Energy Equivalence rather than the wattage.
 
Just use the wattage value and save us some trouble man, this is getting annoying at this point.
 
I already made a mistake once about death, I don't want to do it again with Thor.
 
Dawg be patient, they got a lot of other stuff to do other than review your specific calc; just chill for a bit, give the calc members a few days to respond on their own, and don’t spam them. Trust me, it’ll only make them not want to review your case more.
 
Dawg be patient, they got a lot of other stuff to do other than review your specific calc; just chill for a bit, give the calc members a few days to respond on their own, and don’t spam them. Trust me, it’ll only make them not want to review your case more.
Ok, I understand, I've learned my lesson about waiting, I already messed up with death, I'm not going to do it again with Thor.
 
Wattage is joules per second, you don't need to multiply by 60, so it should be 60x lower.
You are right about the mass-energy conversion, it is incorrect, but it only takes into account the heat or the luminosity, but you are not taking into account what Eitri said about "you will receive all the force of a star", look, I have been investigating that 5 ml of a neutron star generates 1.5e+27 J.
Neutron Star
When referring to the full force of the star Eitri, it refers to the energy it has, and it must be taken into account that it is a Dyson sphere.

To calculate the volume, the formula would be:

V = 4/3 πr³

The radius is 1127.5 m

V=4/3 π 1127.5 m³= 6003980548 m³

With this, we apply the rule of 3: 1 ml equals 1e-6 m³

(6003980548 m³/5e-6 m³)*1.5e+27 J= 1.801194164e+42 J (4-C: Star Level)
 
You are right about the mass-energy conversion, it is incorrect, but it only takes into account the heat or the luminosity, but you are not taking into account what Eitri said about "you will receive all the force of a star", look, I have been investigating that 5 ml of a neutron star generates 1.5e+27 J.
Neutron Star
Did you actually read the context of the question being asked? It's in the event neutron star material is on Earth.

The kinetic energy of the neutronium can only be released when the gravity of a neutron star isn't keeping all of the particles packed together. That's not what's happening here.
When referring to the full force of the star Eitri, it refers to the energy it has, and it must be taken into account that it is a Dyson sphere.
It being a dyson sphere doesn't change the fact that when someone says "the full force of a star," they mean the output of a star's light. The only people who would think that refers to the kinetic energy of every single subatomic particle within the star are those with Type II Powerscaler Brainrot who can only think in terms of [Get Bigger Number].
To calculate the volume, the formula would be:

V = 4/3 πr³

The radius is 1127.5 m

V=4/3 π 1127.5 m³= 6003980548 m³

With this, we apply the rule of 3: 1 ml equals 1e-6 m³

(6003980548 m³/5e-6 m³)*1.5e+27 J= 1.801194164e+42 J (4-C: Star Level)
Congratulations, you just calculated the kinetic energy of every single neutron in a neutron star.

That still has absolutely nothing to do with the energy Thor withstood.
 
Did you actually read the context of the question being asked? It's in the event neutron star material is on Earth.

The kinetic energy of the neutronium can only be released when the gravity of a neutron star isn't keeping all of the particles packed together. That's not what's happening here.

It being a dyson sphere doesn't change the fact that when someone says "the full force of a star," they mean the output of a star's light. The only people who would think that refers to the kinetic energy of every single subatomic particle within the star are those with Type II Powerscaler Brainrot who can only think in terms of [Get Bigger Number].

Congratulations, you just calculated the kinetic energy of every single neutron in a neutron star.

That still has absolutely nothing to do with the energy Thor withstood.
Energy
 
You're right, so I searched again, and this time I got it right, and I found this:

In 0.1 s, a neutron star releases the same amount of energy that the sun releases in 100,000 years.

https://streetscience.com.au/the-power-of-the-sun/#:~:text=Well, the Sun produces about,consumes in an entire year!

the Sun produces about 3.8 x 10²⁶ joules of energy every second.

100,000 years are 3.1536e+12 s, now we do the calculation

(3.1536e+12 s/1 s)*3.8 x 10²⁶ joules= 1.198368e+39 Joules

This is the energy released by a neutron star in 0.1 s

Now let's calculate the energy released by a neutron star in 1 s

(1 s/0.1 s)* 1.198368e+39 Joules= 1.198368e+40 Joules

This is the energy released by a neutron star in 1 s

Then, this would be the energy released by a 20,000 neutron star, now let's calculate with the 2255 m one which is that of Nidavellir.

(2255 m/20000 m)* 1.198368e+40 Joules= 1.35115992e+39 Joules
SGR 1806-20
Furthermore, a Dyson sphere captures all the energy of a star and concentrates it in a single direction.
And the explosion was real
And it has to do with the fact that when Eitri tells Thor "you will receive all the strength of a star", he is not only referring to its luminosity, he is referring to all the energy it contains, and also the Dyson sphere is responsible for capturing all the energy of a star and concentrating it in a single direction.
 
You're right, so I searched again, and this time I got it right, and I found this:

In 0.1 s, a neutron star releases the same amount of energy that the sun releases in 100,000 years.
During a starquake it does that, that does not represent the normal output of a neutron star.

Not only that, but you didn't just use a typical starquake, you used the single most powerful starquake on record! Nice try slick, but we have a freaking page about it.
https://streetscience.com.au/the-power-of-the-sun/#:~:text=Well, the Sun produces about,consumes in an entire year!

the Sun produces about 3.8 x 10²⁶ joules of energy every second.

100,000 years are 3.1536e+12 s, now we do the calculation

(3.1536e+12 s/1 s)*3.8 x 10²⁶ joules= 1.198368e+39 Joules

This is the energy released by a neutron star in 0.1 s

Now let's calculate the energy released by a neutron star in 1 s

(1 s/0.1 s)* 1.198368e+39 Joules= 1.198368e+40 Joules

This is the energy released by a neutron star in 1 s

Then, this would be the energy released by a 20,000 neutron star, now let's calculate with the 2255 m one which is that of Nidavellir.

(2255 m/20000 m)* 1.198368e+40 Joules= 1.35115992e+39 Joules
SGR 1806-20
Furthermore, a Dyson sphere captures all the energy of a star and concentrates it in a single direction.
And the explosion was real
And it has to do with the fact that when Eitri tells Thor "you will receive all the strength of a star", he is not only referring to its luminosity, he is referring to all the energy it contains, and also the Dyson sphere is responsible for capturing all the energy of a star and concentrating it in a single direction.
What you have effectively said is this:
  1. Character A got hit by a Pinto going 50 MPH.
  2. We're going to scale A's durability to the energy released from if all the gas in the Pinto's tank combusted.
  3. We're using the energy value of the gas combusting rather than the KE of the momentum imparted by the car, even though the gas tank didn't explode, because Character B said "A got hit with the full force of a car!" and Pintos can explode, so if we used the energy of a car crash then it wouldn't really be "the full force."
  4. And also we're gonna use the biggest gas tank of any Pinto ever manufactured, rather than a normal Pinto, because I really want Character A's durability to be Big Number.
Stop it.
 
Last edited:
During a starquake it does that, that does not represent the normal output of a neutron star.

Not only that, but you didn't just use a typical starquake, you used the single most powerful starquake on record! Nice try slick, but we have a freaking page about it.

What you have effectively said is this:
  1. Character A got hit by a Pinto going 50 MPH.
  2. We're going to scale A's durability to the energy released from if all the gas in the Pinto's tank combusted.
  3. We're using the energy value of the gas combusting rather than the KE of the momentum imparted by the car, even though the gas tank didn't explode, because Character B said "A got hit with the full force of a car!" and Pintos can explode, so if we used the energy of a car crash then it wouldn't really be "the full force."
  4. And also we're gonna use the biggest gas tank of any Pinto ever manufactured, rather than a normal Pinto, because I really want Character A's durability to be Big Number.
Stop it.
Bro, not only Eitri, in fact the Russo brothers have already confirmed that Thor did withstand the full force of the star wave, furthermore, Eitri has lived there for over a millennium and he knows what he's talking about, and if you think that calculations made by fans are a more reliable source than those of someone who has lived there for a long time, well, I don't know what to tell you.
Bothers Russo
 
Bro, not only Eitri, in fact the Russo brothers have already confirmed that Thor did withstand the full force of the star wave, furthermore, Eitri has lived there for over a millennium and he knows what he's talking about, and if you think that calculations made by fans are a more reliable source than those of someone who has lived there for a long time, well, I don't know what to tell you.
Bothers Russo
That still does nothing to connect the feat Thor did with the premise for your calculation.

I'm talking to a wall at this point. Or an AI. Or a middle schooler. Can someone close the thread?
 
Jesus F-u-c-k-i-n-g Christ is this shit still going on?

Elaj, I beg on my knees just make the calc yourself and save us the agony. Or else I can just ask an admin/thread mod to close this thread.
While the Lifting Strength section is nonsense, the calc that gets Thor's strength is actually fine as far as I can tell, ignoring the fact that they misspelled durability. (If this part of the blog gets changed in the future, note that this originally had Thor having Country level durability, which doesn't affect his current ratings and would just be a supporting feat).

The problem is that now they wanna go back and use a different method that makes no sense and yields way higher results.
 
...Is that your actual argument? One word and a link to highlighted text that has nothing to do with your previous point?

Are you really saying that Thor should scale to a starquake that never happened in the story, because starquakes exist?

Again;
Okay, your win will be as you say "for now", so the feat is at the country level, so can I make the changes now, in Thor's profile?
I clarify, for now
 
While the Lifting Strength section is nonsense, the calc that gets Thor's strength is actually fine as far as I can tell, ignoring the fact that they misspelled durability. (If this part of the blog gets changed in the future, note that this originally had Thor having Country level durability, which doesn't affect his current ratings and would just be a supporting feat).

The problem is that now they wanna go back and use a different method that makes no sense and yields way higher results.
Look, I've accepted "for now" what you're saying, but I'll just say this, saying that this feat is Country level when Eitri says that Thor withstood the full force of the star, is like saying that character A withstands an attack and character B says that he withstood the attack equivalent to the bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but in the calculation it comes out at building level, I just want to say that no matter the result, if it contradicts what happens in the movie it's unusable, because it's contradicting the original material.
 
Please spare me further second-hand embarrassment from this calc, I just want to sleep in peace
 
Please spare me further second-hand embarrassment from this calc, I just want to sleep in peace
51J1u91ie4S._SL1080_.jpg
 
Okay, your win will be as you say "for now", so the feat is at the country level, so can I make the changes now, in Thor's profile?
I clarify, for now
He already scales above that. There wouldn't be a change.
Look, I've accepted "for now" what you're saying, but I'll just say this, saying that this feat is Country level when Eitri says that Thor withstood the full force of the star, is like saying that character A withstands an attack and character B says that he withstood the attack equivalent to the bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but in the calculation it comes out at building level, I just want to say that no matter the result, if it contradicts what happens in the movie it's unusable, because it's contradicting the original material.
Star level is the energy required to blow up a star, not the energy that a star outputs.

The Sun's output is only Multi-Continent level, and the Neutron Star- while proportionally way more luminous given it's small size- is a speck compared to the Sun.

It's not contradicting anything, your brain just refuses to accept that one thing can't equal another thing because they both sound alike.
 
It's not contradicting anything, your brain just refuses to accept that one thing can't equal another thing because they both sound alike.
Gonna be honest we are getting a lot of people like this. Need I remind you all of this upgrade thread.
If I was conspiratorial, I would say we are being raided by trolls, but it is more likely these guys are a bunch of 13 y/o's trying to get big numbers so they can say their verse stomps someone else's.
 
He already scales above that. There wouldn't be a change.

Star level is the energy required to blow up a star, not the energy that a star outputs.

The Sun's output is only Multi-Continent level, and the Neutron Star- while proportionally way more luminous given it's small size- is a speck compared to the Sun.

It's not contradicting anything, your brain just refuses to accept that one thing can't equal another thing because they both sound alike.
Ok, I didn't know that, forgive me for this, but I see that I was wrong and I accept my mistake, I hope without hard feelings.
 
Back
Top