Possible issues with Asta's Doom's gate calculation

[DavidTPPM]

That doesn't make sense; your suggestion is to ignore the consistency of the other scenes in favor of one with a better pixel scale.

Not even remotely what I said

 

[Worthless]

Second of all, the word "world" famously has a lot of definitions most of which don't really help here. World can straight up just refer to a specific region, society, or just inhabitants of earth. Which is pretty detrimental as even a kilometer around 1 kilometer in diameter can cause an extinction event.

Thats so true. Even in the manga, multiple characters have used the word “world” to refer to a specific region or society 1, 2, 3, 4, rather than the entire world itself. That’s why this scene exists, to make it clear that "world” this time actually refers to the whole world.

Also heavily agree to this post.

 

[Syncornize]

Shouldn't even need to have a thread to be reinforced if we're being honest like unless you have some sort of stated distance its just that you shouldn't be picking some random arbitrary distance to just throw in a calc to use anyways especially for something like this when the perspective used isn't one that shouldn't be taken for use in calcs due to the obvious inconsistencies

I meant more that without a sensible point of reference, calculations should contain standard dimensions for the object in question or be consistent with the destructive capabilities of the narrative. If this type of disproportionate object is accepted, it would be good to clarify this, but I will trust your judgment.

 

[Syncornize]

Thats so true. Even in the manga, multiple characters have used the word “world” to refer to a specific region or society 1, 2, 3, 4, rather than the entire world itself. That’s why this scene exists, to make it clear that "world” this time actually refers to the whole world.

Also heavily agree to this post.

You should evaluate the context of the sentence itself rather than the general context. The term “world” is polysemous. You would need to evaluate the situation and the sentence to understand exactly what it is referring to.

If I understand David's point correctly, he is saying that regardless of whether this makes sense narratively, you cannot support the calc. because the method used to obtain the magnitude is inflated or incorrect. Supporting it with narrative is, in effect, supporting a calculation with incorrect numbers just because it is similar to things in the past. Even if the author and animators had a different idea, they didn't represent it as they should have in order to represent their idea.

 

[DavidTPPM]

If I understand David's point correctly, he is saying that regardless of whether this makes sense narratively, you cannot support the calc. because the method used to obtain the magnitude is inflated or incorrect. Supporting it with narrative is, in effect, supporting a calculation with incorrect numbers just because it is similar to things in the past. Even if the author and animators had a different idea, they didn't represent it as they should have in order to represent their idea.

Basically. To put it simply, whether or not it's narratively consistent does not have any impact on whether the method used for the calculation is correct.

I'll give you an example. Imagine there's a character who swings a big hammer saying he'll vaporize the planet and I use calc stacking to calc the swing at lower end of 5-B. This result is narratively consistent as it fits the characters stated description, but that does not change the fact that I used calc stacking to get it which is strictly against the our standards. Meaning despite the value being narratively consistent, it does not actually make the calc any less flawed.

 

[Kaydee1648]

Shouldn’t this be a calc thread?

 

[Syncornize]

Shouldn’t this be a calc thread?

Actually, I think it should.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Shouldn’t this be a calc thread?

It absolutely should, I threw it into CRT section out of habit since I mostly post those

 

[Kaydee1648]

snip

Can you please move this

 

[Xinsignia1]

To be all fair, even really small meteors can be seen from almost 1200km, so I think a 100 meters meteor wouldn't be hard to see

This doesn’t even apply to the meteor that was summoned by Doom’s gate, as it’s impossible to see a meteor that's even 100 meters to the naked eye before it stars ablation (burning up via hitting the atmosphere). According the source you posted, the closest a meteor can be to you if you’re directly under it is roughly 100 km, since ablation starts between 85-110km. Using pythagorean theorem you’ll find that the farthest you can see a meteor from the ground looking straight ahead is 1,120 km because that’s the farthest you see even tiny meteorites burn up (the earth is curved after all, you can see meteors ablating at the horizon). FYI the Clover Kingdom's diameter is roughly 1,842.89 km which is well above 1,120 km limit that was listed given how it was summoned at the end of the kingdom yet still visble from everywhere within said kingdom.

The Doom’s Gate Meteor didn’t start ablating until after it descended a bit post leaving the giant door, and everyone in the kingdom saw this giant meteor with their naked before it even started ablating (burning up) which means that it was visible before even entered the earth’s atmosphere and way farther than the distances your source list. At the very minimum it's higher than the lower thermosphere. In order for a meteor to be visible to the naked eye, much less everyone in the entire kingdom from where it emerged it would need to be hundreds of kilometers given how you wouldn’t even see a 20 km meteor before ablation with the naked eye.

The values don't have to be the same for the issue to be the same.

The core problem is that animators and artists usually don't take these distances, whether it's the height of the atmosphere or the distance from the moon, instead inflating sizes for dramatic and stylistic effects. And THAT then creates inconsistencies such as this.

So saying "it's much smaller than the moon" doesn't save it from suffering from the exact same problem.

As noted earlier, the issue is you're comparing a large meteor to the moon. The animators specifically did take the distance in the account given that they're the same studio that animated the Gremmy meteor scene correct? When Gremmy summoned the meteor it was already ablating which is consistent with how a celestial body like that would behave, unlike the Doom's Gate meteor that was summoned and completely emerged + descended before even entering the atmosphere and ablating which is consistent with how it would behave. The reason the 160 km was accepted was specifically shown that meteor was well above the atmosphere since it did not ablate when it started it's initial descent, which actually low balls its size. Studio Perriot does takes these type of things into consideration when it affects the plot, given how it' consistent between both SoTWK and TYBW. So if anything the calc should stay. Also if you ang size any element in animation studio you're going to get variation from scene to scene, at the point we might as well nuke pixel scaling in general.

I used the scene that gives us THE most direct size comparison for the meteor and even explained why that is the case.

um no, you did not. The most direct size comparison is this scene where Asta and the meteor are in an elevational view, which require no weird angular scaling. And as stated earlier Asta's features are indistinguishable.

First of all, your constant use of untranslated novel over the source material is heavily questionable both due to the uncertain canonicity and a lack of a proper translation. So please first clear that up.

Say less. I already posted it in the translation request thread, just waiting to hear back so I have absolutely no issue getting the text evaluated.

Second of all, the word "world" famously has a lot of definitions most of which don't really help here. World can straight up just refer to a specific region, society, or just inhabitants of earth. Which is pretty detrimental as even a kilometer around 1 kilometer in diameter can cause an extinction event.

So the statement itself could have a lot of different meanings all of which would be comparably valid, leaving us no reason to assume it's straight up surface wiping.

No need to guess what Conrad meant considering his initial plan was to destroy the country down to it's continental foundation. He wanted to wipe everyone clean, so if's targeting the country + the world, then his logically that destruction would spread farther than said country so surface swiping is a reasonable estimate, and I'd argue even a low ball. Given how this meteor was visible to the whole country before even entering the atmosphere, it should have the potential to do that.

That's assuming he's surface wiping which we can't prove. I mean the simple fact we don't use thy 646 petatons value inherently tells us that we don't consider the meteor to be a surface wiper.

Furthermore, even if we did assume that, the 646 petaton value is made strictly using our real world's values while BCs earth has a vastly different geography. So even if we were to take the most generous route it still wouldn't mean we can use that value for reference.

We didn't we didn't use 646 petatons is because we have calc that was a reasonable low ball. And even if BC has varying geography, we have countries like the land of the sun which is shaped like japan and is BC's version of Japan, so the results shouldn't be too different.

3 problems with this.

1. I already addressed this. I'm not suggesting the meteor caps at 100 megatons, but that the size is inconsistent and the angsized value can't be used as a result. So at best you're not actually addressing any arguments here while at worst you're further supporting my claim by pointing out how the calculated values are completely off.

Considering Studio Perriot animated the mechanics of Gremmy's meteor accurately the same should be extended to SotWK. They accurately illustrated the ablation mechanics. The fact it's stated Conrad summoned the meteor in space with no air, and that it did not start ablating until it actually hit the air, should tell us the size we see from the ground is accurate. In fact every single time we're shown Asta from another character's perspective he's consistently shown as bright light or black streak.

2. That aside this line of thinking just outright doesn't work because it assumes our values are perfect when many of them are just standard assumptions and measurements. The meteor could be far denser than just basic average meteors and it could be flying far faster than the calculated 17474.31 m/s which would all make up for the difference in values. Hell we don't even know what speed the 100 megaton value from your link used.
I mean generally speaking 90% of meteors completely vaporize before even hitting earth while this one doesn't even seem to be getting smaller which on its own implies it's more durable and likely denser than a standard meteor.

3. It could just not be applicable for calculations. For example, we wouldn't say a human moving at relativistic+ speed only having 7-A kinetic energy makes the calc from because they're stated to have star level AP. We would just say that rel+ speed isn't usable to scale their AP. Meaning the results of a calculation can be VASTLY below the "narratively intended" destruction. However that does NOT mean we should use inaccurate measurements to force a calculation into meeting our expectations.

The fact the meteor can be seen from from anywhere in the country with the naked eye before even entering the earth's atmosphere, tells us it has a lot of material, and it does burn when it actually hit's the atmosphere but because it's so massive it's damn near impossible to even see the size change. Furthermore, Asta was halting it's momentum with the twin dividers so he was slowing it's descent.

It lighting up the sky fits exactly the idea of it being drawn bigger for dramatic purposes. This line just repeats what's already been addressed.

It doesn't seem to be for dramatic purposed given how it' suppose to show what is being seen from a human's perspective. In addition to exhibiting the accurate behavior you would see of a meteor.

Like I said before it's the only actual scene that gives us a direct size comparison. You saying this scene is inconsistent is no different from me saying the angsizing is inconsistent. The only difference is that pixel scaling is way more reliable than angsizing.

And it's not "impossible" to portray Asta and the meteor in the same frame while staying true to their sizes.

Um no, like I pointed out earlier, the most direct size comparison is this shot below which is orthagonal to the screen, not the hot you used earlier.

Because there's a giant glare of light completely covering Asta and his giant swords are stuck inside of the meteor.

The only thing we can truly distinguish there to use for reference is the width of the anti magic trail. Which is actually detrimental because unless the trail coming off of Astas body is for absolutely unknown reasons several hundred times wider than Asta himself and his anti magic sword, the shot would still make meteor would still be nowhere near even 1 kilometer.

There is no glare covering Asta in the shot above. And the anti-magic trail is not the same width a black divider, it's much larger you can't even see it. Asta's radiating a ton of anti-magic since he was given a substantial boost by Liebe, it' litreally leaking out of him. The imperial divider sword is canocally a sword of light, so when it's not being drowned out by anti-magic it glares. Neither of the swords or Asta are distinguishable, all we see is a trail of anti-magic that eclipses Asata and all other features with the exception of the imperial sword when it glares.

Actually this shows the trap behind Asta which shouldn't be much wider than his body and swords is comparable in width to the swords. Hell I'd say it's almost identical in width.

So under the assumption the width of the trail behind asta is comparable to the width of Astas body, this actually completely supports the 100 meter size…

Meanwhile Asta himself but being visible is against, completely fine because he's covered in a giant glare of light from the top and in the anti magic train from the bottom. So this argument actually just solidifies the OP.

This doesn't support the 100 meter size in the lightest. Not only is Asta and other relevant features indistinguishable without the glare, but 100 meters or even 20km would till be too small to see without ablation via naked eye much les above the atmosphere proper.

Even if I were to steelman this and say Conrad wants to surface wipe, that wouldn't justify the use of calculation with an invalid measurement method. Like I pointed out already, we can't justify using incorrect calculations by them fitting our expectations.

The measurement is consistent given how accurately Studio Perriot portrays meteors. And givne where the meteor emerged from it would have to be of an astronomical size to be viewed by the naked eye before entering the planet's atmophere.

Both of these scenes show Asta completely covered by light and therefore invisible. However even if that wasn't the case, that would only mean the meteor size is inconsistent and wouldn't justify using the angsized size.

Like I stated earlier, Asta isn't covered by light in this scene yet he still isn't visible. So again, the shot you used for comparison dratically deflates the calc.

 

[DavidTPPM]

This doesn’t even apply the meteor that was summoned by Doom’s gate, as it’s impossible to see a meteor that's even 100 meters to the naked eye before it stars ablation (burning up via hitting the atmosphere)

All ablation does here is make it brighter which is a question of luminosity not size.

So unless you can show me some research stating that even a 100 meter meteor is invisible 100.1 km above the ground when a 20 meter meter is visible 100 km above the ground, this argument really doesn't hold up.
(ntm the whole "it's invisible" argument falls under the same issue of objects having inflated size for dramatic purposes)

.According the source you posted, the closest a meteor can be to you if you’re directly under it is roughly 100 km, since ablation starts between 85-11km.

That's not what the source says at all…

AS stated noted issue is you're comparing a large meteor to the moon.

And I already told you that it's not. It doesn't matter whether it's a moon or a meteor or a galaxy. Key problem is that animators aren't searching up cosmic distances to accurately draw these objects and instead inflate them for dramatic and stylistic reasons.

The animators specifically did take the distance in the account given that they're the same studio animated the Gremmy meteor scene correct? When Gremmy summoned the meteor it was already ablating which is consistent with how a celestial body like that would behave, unlike the Doom's Gate meteor that was summoned and completely emerged + descended before even entering the atmosphere and ablating.

Except they're 2 vastly different scenes. This does not even remotely imply the animators were angsizing the objectively correct size it should appear exactly 100 kilometers above the ground.

If they did pay that level attention then we wouldn't have the shots that show the meteor only around 100 meters wide would we?

Also if you ang size any element in animation studio you're going to get variation from scene to scene, at the point you might as well nuke pixel scaling in general.

This is extremely misleading. Yes, we do get different values when measuring different shots. However not all shots give us equally good look at an object. So what we use is the most direct shot that leaves the least amount of room for error.

And in the situation where different shots seem to be equally good, we simply use the average of the results. This works because the difference is usually relatively small and not 0.1km vs 160km.

So yes different shots give different results but no, that doesn't mean we have to nuke pixel scaling in general at all.

um no, you did not. The most direct size comparison is this scene where Asta and the meteor are in an elevational view, which require no weird angular scaling.

Sure, and the trail left by Astas body is equally comparable to the meteor as his swords would imply in the scene which is pixel scaled in the OP.

So again unless Asta is making trails hundreds of times wider than his actual body for no reason, this scene further proves the meteor is in the hundreds of meters, not hundreds of kilometers.

And as stated earlier Asta's features are indistinguishable

Yes because he's covered by a trail of anti magic.

Say less. I already posted it in the translation request thread, just waiting to hear back so I have absolutely no issue getting the text evaluated.

Alrighty then.

No need to guess what Conrad meant considering his initial plan was to destroy the country down to it's continental foundation.

So, not surface wiping. So the values isn't even "narratively consistent" like you said, but rather much higher than what Conrad wanted to do.

We didn't we didn't use 646 petatons is because we have calc that was a reasonable low ball.

That just isn't true. If a calc that close to surface wiping was made for a feat that's accepted to surface wipe, ESPECIALLY if it was considered a lowball, the feat would just be scaled to surface wiping.

I mean that is essentially what's going on with Toneri. Him throwing the moon gives 5-C+ values but since he stated it would have completely destroyed the planet we just scale him straight to 5-B.

And even if BC has varying geography, we have countries like the land of the sun which is shaped like japan and is BC's version of Japan, so the results shouldn't be too different.

Having 1 similarly shaped country really doesn't prove the entire planet has comparably large geography.

Considering Studio Perriot animated the mechanics of Gremmy's meteor accurately the same should be extended to SotWK. They accurately illustrated the ablation mechanics.

Man saying they "accurately animated the mechanics" when literally all they did was make the meteor burn is just being misleading. They literally just animated the scene pretty much 1:1 to manga. Same way the same studio animated Madaras meteor 1:1 with the manga and it wasn't burning.

And even if they didn't blatantly just animate exactly what's in the manga, meteors burning when close to earth is common knowledge. That does not in any way even remotely imply that they purposely angle sized the meteor to be 100% accurate from 80-110km away.

The fact the meteor can be seen from from anywhere in the country with the naked eye before even entering the earth's atmosphere, tells us it has a lot of material, and it does burn when it actually hit's the atmosphere but because it's so massive it' damn near impossible to even see the size change. Furthermore, Asta was halting it's momentum with the twin dividers so he was slowing it's descent.

This doesn't in any way address the argument I made which you're replying to. I don't know if you accidentally replied to the wrong part of my comment but this reply doesn't address what I said in the slightest.

It doesn't seem to be for dramatic purposed given how it' suppose to show what is being seen from a human's perspective. In addition to exhibiting the accurate behavior you would see of a meteor.

Is it? Or is it supposed to portray the situation as dire? You're looking at this as a powerscaler searching for some powerscaling purpose but that's just simply not what it is.

You can literally apply this exact logic to celestial bodies.
"It's not meant to be dramatic or cool, it's meant to show how big the moon is from the perspective of people on the ground. This just proves the moon is 20x bigger than our real moon"

Um no, like I pointed out earlier, the most direct size comparison is this shot below which is orthagonal to the screen, not the hot you used earlier.

I'll say this one final time.
1. This shot is not better than the shot pixel scaled in the OP
2. This shot doesn't help you because Asta is covered in anti-magic. You can't say he's "so small in comparison that he's invisible" because he's literally covered.

There is no glare covering Asta in the shot above.

Yeah but his swords are stuck inside of the meteor and his body is covered in anti magic.

And the anti-magic trail is not the ame width a black divider, it's much larger you can't even see it.

Can you prove this?

The imperial divider sword is canocally a sword of light, so when it's not being drowned out by anti-magic it glares. Neither of the swords or Asta are distinguishable, all we see is a trail of ant-magic that eclipses Asata and all other features with the exception of the imperial sword when it glares.

The swords are stuck inside of the meteor and Astas entire body is covered in anti magic.

This doesn't support the 100 meter size in the lightest. Not only is Asta and other relevant features indistinguishable without the glare, but 100 meters or even 20km would till be too small to see without ablation via naked eye much les above the atmosphere proper.

Okay first of all, yes they're indistinguishable BECAUSE THEY'RE COVERED IN ANTIMAGIC. That is why I used a shot where he's NOT COVERED BY IT.

Second of all, I already asked you this before and I'm asking you again, prove that the meteor couldn't be visible like that. You keep claiming that it's be invisible unless it's this arbitrary size without providing any evidence at all. Meanwhile others have already sent you research and calculations proving that even far smaller meteors sub-100m in diameter can be seen from all across a country.

And last but not least, you have once again not actually addressed the argument I made. Instead of addressing what I said you just repeated the same thing for the 3rd time in the same reply. I really don't want to sound rude but all this does is unnecessarily stretch out the comments, making them harder to follow for others, and waste time.

Like I stated earlier, Asta isn't covered by light in this scene yet he still isn't visible. So again, the shot you used for comparison dratically deflates the calc.

Yeah and like I said in both this and my previous comment, he's not visible because he's completely covered in anti magic.

Regardless of whether the meteor was 1000 kilometers or 50 meters in diameter, Asta still wouldn't be visible because his anti magic is undeniably fully covering his body in that shot. So while the shot I used in the OP blatantly proves the meteor isn't that much bigger than Asta, this shot at best can't prove anything because we can't quantify how much wider the trail is compared to Astas body, and at worst is only about as wide as Asta and further proves that the meteor is in the 100 meter range.

Your own edit where you overlapped these 2 shots implies the latter is the case.

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

It's talking about meteors that get destroyed even before hitting the ground lol. Plus, the biggest meteor to hit earth in modern days was the Chelyabinsk meteor, which was 18 meters long

Lost the notifications of this thread but David seems to have responded my part, but I want to note that the Chelyabinsk was seen even from 100 to 200 km away

 

[DavidTPPM]

@Xinsignia1 I really don't want to sound rude, but a massive portion of what you replied was either completely unrelated to the argument you were replying to or just pointlessly repeated the same thing over and over again (you mention the Asta shot where he's covered in anti-magic about 5-6 in a single reply all of which without adding any new arguments about it).

So I'd like to ask you to please actually address the arguments that you're replying to, and try to keep things concise so we don't repeat the same thing 5x in a single argument. Because otherwise it just clutters the thread without actually progressing the discussion

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

Yeah, arguments are best served concise and digestible, if you want people to be convinced by your arguments you gotta ensure it’s something they actually read and not gloss over

 

[Floxy178]

I'm currently leaning towards OP. As it was already stated by others, narrative consistency point that was brought up later doesn't make sense either because size isn't only defining factor in destructive capability.

 

[DavidTPPM]

I'm currently leaning towards OP. As it was already stated by others, narrative consistency point that was brought up later doesn't make sense either because size isn't only defining factor in destructive capability.

This seems fine to me

Can I write you down as agreeing with the thread or are you still waiting for more counter-arguments/discussion?

 

[Xinsignia1]

All ablation does here is make it brighter which is a question of luminosity not size.

So unless you can show me some research stating that even a 100 meter meteor is invisible 100.1 km above the ground when a 20 meter meter is visible 100 km above the ground, this argument really doesn't hold up.
(ntm the whole "it's invisible" argument falls under the same issue of objects having inflated size for dramatic purposes)

Ablation makes it visible to the naked eye, you can't see the object without it. The point i'm stressing is that there's a giant door in space with, and everyone in the kingdom can see that door an it's features as well as the meteor it released. Literally above the lower thermosphere. Do you think you could see a 100-200 meter door 160+ kilometers in the sky, would you even be even to tell there's a door?

That's not what the source says at all…

It was a typo I meant 85-110 km z(not 11km) and i'm saying this article says ablation occurs with the ranges I stated.

And I already told you that it's not. It doesn't matter whether it's a moon or a meteor or a galaxy. Key problem is that animators aren't searching up cosmic distances to accurately draw these objects and instead inflate them for dramatic and stylistic reasons.

And i'm saying that we should stop treating the meteor like a cosmic distance. 100-1000k is much closer to the planet then the moon, considering the moon is considered our closest astronomical object. Bleach isn't focusing on the moon or sun for scale. THEY'RE NOT the focus of the scenes you're using fas examples, while the scene the Doom Gate cene that's used for the calc DOES use the meteor as the focus.

Except they're 2 vastly different scenes. This does not even remotely imply the animators were angsizing the objectively correct size it should appear exactly 100 kilometers above the ground.

If they did pay that level attention then we wouldn't have the shots that show the meteor only around 100 meters wide would we?

How are they vastly different scenes? They're both scenes have a meteor as the focus, not some background astrological object. If the door and meteor are a 100 meters, why can they clearly be viewed by people on the ground despite the fact they're both located in space? and why are they both described a large object in space that everyone can see in the kingdom below?

You even said:

Now this might be dismissed to be a case where a character is only visible for the watcher so we know where the character is, rather than to show the size of an object

(which is the Asta the actual case since it wasn't focused on size)

Then go against what you originally aid:

but I don't believe this is the case here. Unlike situations like those where the argument would actually be invalid, here Asta (or rather his swords and wings) is VERY large, nowhere near the small speck that he should be if they just wanted to show his location.

The close up scene are meant to show Asta's location, and not focus on the size of the objects, hence why they're not specs, so why exactly is this so hard for you to follow or even comprehend?

This is extremely misleading. Yes, we do get different values when measuring different shots. However not all shots give us equally good look at an object. So what we use is the most direct shot that leaves the least amount of room for error.

And in the situation where different shots seem to be equally good, we simply use the average of the results. This works because the difference is usually relatively small and not 0.1km vs 160km.

So yes different shots give different results but no, that doesn't mean we have to nuke pixel scaling in general at all.

How is this misleading? Your entire argument hinges on the shots that don't focus on size, while ignoring the shots that do focus on size.

Sure, and the trail left by Astas body is equally comparable to the meteor as his swords would imply in the scene which is pixel scaled in the OP.

So again unless Asta is making trails hundreds of times wider than his actual body for no reason, this scene further proves the meteor is in the hundreds of meters, not hundreds of kilometers.

Again if we focus on shots that focus on size, and not the character we get the proper scale of the object. Whenever we see Asta from the perspective of the people on the ground, he looks like cluster of light, and a trail of anti-magic. Both clusters of light and trails of anti-magic dwarf Asta's physical stature in size since it's being emitted by him. Again, the Doom's Gate door + meteor in space is visible to everyone on the surface
in the clover kingdom without even entering the atmosphere. It is impossible to see something that large unless it' hundred of kilometer long. Things that are much smaller can only be seen normally because they spark when they collide with the atmosphere.

Yes because he's covered by a trail of anti magic.

Asta appears as clusters of light and anti-magic to the people watching on the surface of planet. Which is still smaller than giant door that floating above the entire country in space.

So, not surface wiping. So the values isn't even "narratively consistent" like you said, but rather much higher than what Conrad wanted to do.

How does destroying the country down to it' continental foundations not imply destroying surface at bare minimum? Earlier in the series we weaker have attacks that straight up said there wouldn't be anything left

That just isn't true. If a calc that close to surface wiping was made for a feat that's accepted to surface wipe, ESPECIALLY if it was considered a lowball, the feat would just be scaled to surface wiping.

I mean that is essentially what's going on with Toneri. Him throwing the moon gives 5-C+ values but since he stated it would have completely destroyed the planet we just scale him straight to 5-B.

Then that's something that would need to discussed later then. My main point is that Conrad intended to use a meteor to wipe out the world.

Having 1 similarly shaped country really doesn't prove the entire planet has comparably large geography.

That doesn't mean we can't make logical assumption given how we still use averages of the our own planet to make calcs for fictional series . IIRC, even in Naruto, the moon hollow. Internally it's nothing like ours yet we still use averages to scale it, do we not?

Man saying they "accurately animated the mechanics" when literally all they did was make the meteor burn is just being misleading. They literally just animated the scene pretty much 1:1 to manga. Same way the same studio animated Madaras meteor 1:1 with the manga and it wasn't burning.

And even if they didn't blatantly just animate exactly what's in the manga, meteors burning when close to earth is common knowledge. That does not in any way even remotely imply that they purposely angle sized the meteor to be 100% accurate from 80-110km away.

There aren't any crazy inconsistencies with the summoning. Studio animators know that a giant door and a meteor is visible outside of the planet's atmosphere. I'm pretty sure they have a decent inkling of the sizes they're drawing. These are giant objects that are clearly visible despite the fact they're located in space. It's possible see something from that distance and to the scale that' conveyed if it was "one hundreds of meters"

This doesn't in any way address the argument I made which you're replying to. I don't know if you accidentally replied to the wrong part of my comment but this reply doesn't address what I said in the slightest.

1. Your first argument suggests the meter could far dense, that's cool and all could be true. However, we're simply told that it's a meteor. So we don't need to make an other assumptions about it's makeup other than it's a large rock. You were saying that it's density/makeup can alter it's speed ect and i'm saying we don't need to guestimate. The point they're trying to communicate is that it's a very big rock and he wants to wreck the world, so we can just go off of that.

2. You also said that 90% of meteors vaporize before hitting earth, and this one doesn't seem to get smaller. What I said was the meteor's descent was being slowed by Asta hence why it didn't seem to get smaller. I also wonder why that's even relevant? A meteor of the size we're discussing wouldn't even evaporate in the earth' atmosphere considering we've been truck by large meteors in the pat since it they didn't "burn up" like the meteor from the Permian impact which is suggested to be between 6-12 km wide.

Is it? Or is it supposed to portray the situation as dire? You're looking at this as a powerscaler searching for some powerscaling purpose but that's just simply not what it is

You can literally apply this exact logic to celestial bodies.
"It's not meant to be dramatic or cool, it's meant to show how big the moon is from the perspective of people on the ground. This just proves the moon is 20x bigger than our real moon"

Come again? I'm looking at this from a narrative stand point. To say i'm looking at this as "power scaler" is bit tone deaf and ironic coming from you, don't put you projections on me bruh. I'm looking at this from the perspective of the audience as spectators (like the kingdom) is supposed to see. The way the meteor is described, and the way that it is shown seem more aligned with the scale that's currently accepted.

I'll say this one final time.
1. This shot is not better than the shot pixel scaled in the OP
2. This shot doesn't help you because Asta is covered in anti-magic. You can't say he's "so small in comparison that he's invisible" because he's literally covered.

And i'll say this one final time for you to understand:
1.Whenever Asta is portrayed from the viewpoint of the spectator (like the citizens on the surface of the planet) he is shown as a cluster of light and trail of anti-magic. The aura of the objects eclipse hi physical stature and it's the only way these citizens can perceive him.

2. NO one and I mean NO one from the planet is seeing Asta and the meteor in the detail at scale you initially posted. As I stated your entire argument relies on dismissing any scene that is meant to convey the scale of these objects and that's the problem I have with your approach.

Yeah but his swords are stuck inside of the meteor and his body is covered in anti magic.

And they're so tiny that you can't even see them, The swords aren't even that width of the sword doesn't even cover Asta's full height. They're long yes, but not THAT wide. Nobody is seeing the width of black divider or the imperial word in space from the the surface of the planet.

Can you prove this?

Absolutely, the swords don't even cover Asta's full height (close) unlike the giant Black Divide he created when he fought Naalith. Black Divider does not leak anti-magic. In fact it's a sword that doesn't leak and condenses anti-magic into a solid form to cut things down. When Asta first tried to use Black Divider he had issues make it take shape since it kept leaking ant-magic however, after the elf arc he no longer has that issue. So all the anti-magic we're seeing is leaking from Asta's body and away from the sword which has always been the case.

The swords are stuck inside of the meteor and Astas entire body is covered in anti magic.

The anti-magic that's leaking flows away from Asta's body, not towards the swords. And those swords aren't even visible in the posted scene.

Okay first of all, yes they're indistinguishable BECAUSE THEY'RE COVERED IN ANTIMAGIC. That is why I used a shot where he's NOT COVERED BY IT.

And ima say this again. the leaking anti-magic is flowing away from Asta's body, not towards the swords.

Second of all, I already asked you this before and I'm asking you again, prove that the meteor couldn't be visible like that. You keep claiming that it's be invisible unless it's this arbitrary size without providing any evidence at all. Meanwhile others have already sent you research and calculations proving that even far smaller meteors sub-100m in diameter can be seen from all across a country.

Meteors by definition become visible when they make contact with the atmosphere this "meteor" was visible before it even entered the atmosphere and the door that spawned it was too.

And last but not least, you have once again not actually addressed the argument I made. Instead of addressing what I said you just repeated the same thing for the 3rd time in the same reply. I really don't want to sound rude but all this does is unnecessarily stretch out the comments, making them harder to follow for others, and waste time.

I did address the argument you made. Your main argument is

You said:

we determined ang sizing shots shots of things in space is inconsistent and gives inaccurate results, especially applying for this case as both BC and Bleach were done by the same studio. These shots are usually made for dramatic effects and style rather than to showcase the actual size of an object.

I suggested :Don't treat Dooms Gate as a celestial such since it' much closer to the and it plays a much different role than the background objects you're sizing.

You said:

Now this might be dismissed to be a case where a character is only visible for the watcher so we know where the character is, rather than to show the size of an object but I don't believe this is the case here. Unlike situations like those where the argument would actually be invalid, here Asta (or rather his swords and wings) is VERY large, nowhere near the small speck that he should be if they just wanted to show his location. One might also defend it saying it is a perspective shot but that is not the case because with perspective shots things of the same size extending away from the POV shrink in pixel count. And we see Astas sword remains essentially identical throughout so we can safely say the visible size isn't messed up by perspective.

I suggested: The scene where you're finding discrepancies are meant to focus on Asta and what he' doing, not the size of the meteor. This is also supported by the fact that all of that shots that focus on size portray Asta, the Doom' Gate Door and meteor from the perspective of the people in the kingdom, do not hare the same discrepancies.

You yourself even even stated that it could be dismissed by saying that scene is not mean to focus on size, but then immediately you turn around and use a scene that's NOT focused on size to support your argument? Again, you're essentially chunking out every single scene that focuses on size, in order to use one of the few shots that don't.

Yeah and like I said in both this and my previous comment, he's not visible because he's completely covered in anti magic.

The leaking anti-magic does not flow towards the swords, it flows away from Asta' body which the sword are well ahead of.

Regardless of whether the meteor was 1000 kilometers or 50 meters in diameter, Asta still wouldn't be visible because his anti magic is undeniably fully covering his body in that shot. So while the shot I used in the OP blatantly proves the meteor isn't that much bigger than Asta, this shot at best can't prove anything because we can't quantify how much wider the trail is compared to Astas body, and at worst is only about as wide as Asta and further proves that the meteor is in the 100 meter range.

Your own edit where you overlapped these 2 shots implies the latter is the case.

1. Asta isn't visible, anti-magic that's leaking away from his body is (and not towards the sword)

2. Black Divider's very purpose is to not leak anti-magic and condense it into a clean form. Insisting that the stream we see is Black Diver run contrary to that.

Edit: The Bleach scenes that are used to "debunk" the Doom's Gate calc do not use the sun or the moon as the focus of the scene while the shots of the image that's used for the Doom's day calc DOES use the meteor as the focus of the scene. So why are we even comparing them in the first place?

 

[Xinsignia1]

Lost the notifications of this thread but David seems to have responded my part, but I want to note that the Chelyabinsk was seen even from 100 to 200 km away

From what I found (and even in the link you posted) it's stated it approached earth undetected until atmospheric entry.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Ablation makes it visible to the naked eye, you can't see the object without it. The point i'm stressing is that there's a giant door in space with, and everyone in the kingdom can see that door an it's features as well as the meteor it released.

And I'm telling you that the only real issue with visibility without ablation is light or the lack of, not size. Ablation literally reduces the size of meteors by vaporizing them (vaporization so intense 90% of meteors don't even reach the ground) so this has nothing to do with their size.

Literally above the lower thermosphere. Do you think you could see a 100-200 meter door 160+ kilometers in the sky, would you even be even to tell there's a door?

I don’t know, do you have any research or calculations that we could use to determine so?

Also let's say you're correct and actually do finally provide evidence to these empty claims you've been making. You know what that proves? It proves that the scene is not scientifically accurate and therefore using angsizing that relies on scientific accuracy is completely illogical. Because for the final time, the issue isn't a lack of size but the lighting.

It was a typo I meant 85-110 km z(not 11km) and i'm saying this article says ablation occurs with the ranges I stated.

Yes ablation occurs in those ranges. But that doesn't mean that's "the closest a meteor can get to you".

And i'm saying that we should stop treating the meteor like a cosmic distance. 100-1000k is much closer to the planet then the moon, considering the moon is considered our closest astronomical object. Bleach isn't focusing on the moon or sun for scale. THEY'RE NOT the focus of the scenes you're using fas examples, while the scene the Doom Gate cene that's used for the calc DOES use the meteor as the focus.

I'm sorry but this outright does not address my argument. I already told you many times that the distance IS NOT THE ISSUE and you keep repeating the same size argument over and over again.

How are they vastly different scenes?

They're 2 different characters from 2 different series using 2 different abilities to achieve 2 different results.

They're both scenes that deal with meteor drops and what happens when you drop them.

And both the scene of Boruto peeing and Katara blood bending are scenes that deal with bodily fluids and their manipulation. So I guess they're the same as well

If the door and meteor are a 100 meters, why can they clearly be viewed by people on the ground despite the fact they're both located in space? and why are they both described a large object in space that everyone can see?

Again I'll say it one final time. You're not addressing my argument.

I'm not claiming the meteor is STRICTLY 100 meters, or 200 meters, or 5 meters.
I'm saying the size of the meteor is INCONSISTENT and the current calc uses one of if not the least reliable way to measure it which makes it invalid. You keep attacking the argument that it's strictly 100 meters when that isn't what I'm claiming at all.

The meteor could be 500 meters, it could be 5 light years, or it could be 50 meters. All of which would make the current calculation inaccurate. You're replying under this false dichotomy that either it's 100 meters or 160 kilometers which is just incorrect and not what I'm saying.

You even said:

(which is where Asta the actual case since it wasn't focused on ize)

Then go against what you originally aid:

The close up scene are meant to show Asta's location, and not focus on the size of the objects, hence why they're not specs, so why exactly is this exactly so hard for you to follow?

I think you're confused here. Him BEING a speck would tell us it's just showing us his location.

Him being very clearly visible implies the exact opposite. And I explain why multiple times in both the comments and the OP.

How is this misleading?

I explain how it's misleading in the very section you're replying to.

Arguments which you ONCE AGAIN fully ignored.

Both clusters of light and trails of anti-magic dwarf Asta's physical stature in size since it's being emitted by him.

Do you have any evidence for this? If you can prove to me the trails behind Asta when he moves are like 2 kilometers wide then sure I'm open to it.

However if they're not then it contradicts the angsized diameter.

How does destroying the country down to it' continental foundations not imply destroying surface at bare minimum? Earlier in the series we weaker have attacks that straight up said there wouldn't be anything left

I think you don't understand what surface wiping refers to here. It's not about wiping out the surface of a country but the entire surface of an entire planet.

Pulverization of a country is cool but it's not anywhere near pulverization of the entire planets surface.

Then that's something that would need to discussed later then. My main point is that Conrad intended to use a meteor to wipe out the world.

So, you were wrong about the surface wiping being something that's accepted which is MY point.
Since otherwise "destroying the world" is extremely vague and could mean many different things.

That doesn't mean we can't make logical assumption given how we still use averages of the our own planet to make calcs for fictional series . IIRC, even in Naruto, the moon hollow. Internally it's nothing like ours yet we still use averages to scale it, do we not?

We don't just randomly make assumptions.

We consider the Naruto moon to be as wide as our moon for many reasons, not just through sheer assumptions.

There aren't any crazy inconsistencies with the summoning. Studio animators know that a giant door and a meteor is visible outside of the planet's atmosphere. I'm pretty sure they have a decent inkling of the sizes they're drawing.

Once again this does not address the argument I'm making in the section you're replying to.

1. Your first argument suggests the meter could far dense, that's cool and all could be true. However, we're simply told that it's a meteor. So we don't need to make an other assumptions about it's makeup other than it's a large rock. You were saying that it's density/makeup can alter it's speed ect and i'm saying we don't need to guestimate. The point they're trying to communicate is that it's a very big rock and he wants to wreck the world, so we can just go off of that.

I'm not making any assumptions. I'm pointing out that you are.

To claim that a meteor of a certain diameter couldn't have possibly achieved that level of destruction you MUST assume it's density is identical to regular irl meteors. I'm saying that this is just an assumption and the actual density could ve different.

2. You also said that 90% of meteors vaporize before hitting earth, and this one doesn't seem to get smaller. What I said was the meteor's descent was being slowed by Asta hence why it didn't seem to get smaller.

Actually this would most likely cause the meteor to appear to shrink even faster. Normally a meteor would be getting closer to earth which would make it appear larger (since the closer an object is the larger it appears). However since Asta stops it, it means it won't be appearing any bigger as a result of getting closer and instead should just be shrinking due to vaporization.

I also wonder why that's even relevant? A meteor of the size we're discussing wouldn't even evaporate in the earth' atmosphere considering we've been truck by large meteors in the pat since it they didn't "burn up" like the meteor from the Permian impact which is suggested to be between 6-12 km wide.

That is not correct. 6-12 kilometers is the size of the meteor when it hit earth and it's based on the craters and other geological evidence on earth.
It does not mean it entered the atmosphere at the same size. We actually have absolutely 0 ways of estimating how big it entered the atmosphere as atmospheric entry doesn't leave any physical effects that we could study millions of years later.

Come again? I'm looking at this from a narrative stand point.

Is the narrative standpoint is "If you take the approximate distance at which a celestial object begins to burn up when approaching earth, measure the ratio between the height of the screen and the diameter of the meteor, you can use a mathematical formula that tells us the meteor is 160 kilometers!"

Or is it "Oh shit a scary meteor is coming and it'll destroy the country!!"
?

And i'll say this one final time for you to understand:
1.Whenever Asta is portrayed from the viewpoint of the spectator (like the citizens on the surface of the planet) he is shown as a cluster of light and trail of anti-magic.

Which doesn't give us any information that could allow us to measure the difference between him and the meteor. Ultimately making it a big useless.

Also this reply does not address the argument I made in the section you're replying to… again.

2. NO one and I mean NO one from the planet is seeing Asta and the meteor in the detail at scale you initially poste

Because Asta leaves a trail of light and anti magic while the meteor is burning, which emits a ton of light that'd further make Asta difficult to see.
This isn't really an argument for anything, you're basically just explaining what standing in front of an extremely bright object does.

. As I stated your entire argument relies on dismissing any scene that is meant to convey the scale of these objects and that's the problem I have with your approach.

No it doesn't. Nothing even remotely suggests the perspective that gives us 0 points of reference is what conveys the size of the meteor. It makes much more sense for a scene with a direct point of reference to do that. The only thing saying that the from-earth perspective is what "conveys the size" is you.

Also once again, this does not even remotely address the argument in the section that you're replying to. The section you're replying to is me talking about Asta being covered in anti magic in the panel you keep bringing up while this response you made to it doesn't even talk about the same shot…

And they're so tiny that you can't even see them,

Yes because for the last time, in that show the sword are INSIDE OF THE METEOR. Of course a sword inside of a meteor won't be visible outside the meteor…

Absolutely, the swords don't even cover Asta's full height (close) unlike the giant Black Divide he created when he fought Naalith. Black Divider does not leak anti-magic. In fact it's a sword that doesn't leak and condenses anti-magic into a solid form to cut things down. When Asta first tried to use Black Divider he had issues make it take shape since it kept leaking ant-magic however, after the elf arc he no longer has that issue. So all the anti-magic we're seeing is leaking from Asta's body and away from the sword which has always been the case.

This doesn't even attempt to prove the trail left behind Asta is unfathomably wider than Asta or his sword…
I don’t know if I'm misunderstanding but how does "Asta can make a big sword and his anti magic leaks away from his sword" even remotely compare the trail left behind Asta to his width? It doesn't even mention the 2 things in question.

The anti-magic that's leaking flows away from Asta's body, not towards the swords. And those swords aren't even visible in the posted scene.

So? I'm saying ASTA is covered by the AM trail (which objectively MUST be the case because the trail is visibly touching the meteor) and his swords are inside the meteor.

Meteors by definition become visible when they make contact with the atmosphere this "meteor" was visible before it even entered the atmosphere and the door that spawned it was too.

No that's not what the link says at all. Like it straight up doesn't even mention visibility it just explains that a meteor is considered a meteoroid before it enters the atmosphere of a planet…

I did address the argument you made.

No. I talked about Asta not being visible due to being covered by AM and light, and you replied by talking about the glare and the visibility of a meteor before ablation.
In other words you replied with something completely unrelated to the argument you were replying to.

(side note, how tf did I make THAT many typos in a single comment? I really gotta stop making these replies when sleep deprived)

You yourself even even stated that it could be dismissed by saying that scene is not mean to focus on size, but then immediately you turn around and use a scene that's NOT focused on size to support your argument?

I specifically explained why this counter argument does not apply to this issue. I genuinely don't understand why do you keep acting like I switched up or something when I literally mentioned a potential counter-argument so I can explain why it doesn't apply here.

Edit: The Bleach scenes that are used to "debunk" the Doom's Gate calc

They're not used to debunk the DG calc. They're used to showcase this exact problem has already been addressed recently.

do not use the sun or the moon as the focus of the scene while the shots of the image that's used for the Doom's day calc DOES use the meteor as the focus of the scene. So why are we even comparing them in the first place?

I explained that in the OP and several times in the comments. Please reread those comments because I'm really not going to keep going back and forth repeating what I already said.

 

[Dalesean027]

If possible could the two of you make summary post with all relevant information for both arguments

 

[DavidTPPM]

I'm going to make my summary after Xinsignia posts his. My main points are in the OP, and any other argument is more so a counter-argument to what he said meaning I have to see what he considers the "relevant information" first.

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

Ima get chatgpt to do it for both of yall

 

[Damage3245]

I'll wait for the final posts/summaries before going through the rest of the thread.

 

[Xinsignia1]

Hey all, i'll try to post my response to @DavidTPPM later tonight or (possibly tomorrow night) and then I can post my summary. I'm currently tied with irl obligations that take priority, and it's a heavy week but just know that this is still on my radar. Thanks all.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Hey all, i'll try to post my response to @DavidTPPM later tonight or (possibly tomorrow night) and then I can post my summary.

Honestly you can probably just skip the response and go straight to the summary.

I honestly don't think any staff is going to sit through another round of Bibles going back and forth so it's better to just summarize everything for now

I'm currently tied with irl obligations that take priority, and it's a heavy week but just know that this is still on my radar. Thanks all.

Yeah no hurry, glad to know you didn't forget about this

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Asta would be still 200 exatons more of less if we use all the multipliers in the verse page and the verse is still waiting for the manga to end

For the rest of the thread, do as you please, we can pile this up with the "lightspeed cap" and after the ending, solved everything

Fa Jin + Gear shift GG >

 

[Shadowslash125]

Fa Jin + Gear shift GG >

Desire Amp GG

 

[Robo432343]

im pretty sure this can be applied

 

[Kazuma_kuwabara]

im pretty sure this can be applied

Are you even reading the thread? Wait for the final post of david and insignia

 

[DavidTPPM]

Hey all, i'll try to post my response to @DavidTPPM later tonight or (possibly tomorrow night) and then I can post my summary. I'm currently tied with irl obligations that take priority, and it's a heavy week but just know that this is still on my radar. Thanks all.

Do you know when approximately you'll be free to drop your summary?

 

[Xinsignia1]

Do you know when approximately you'll be free to drop your summary?

bout to post in like 5-10 min.

 

[Xinsignia1]

Hey all apologies, it's been pretty busy week and as you can see below I also had a quite a bit to prepare when I became available. Nevertheless, see the conclusion below:

My Summary/Conclusion:

Issue 1:

The OP argues that Studio Pierrot’s inconsistent scaling of celestial background objects like the sun and moon in TYBW anime are just for a dramatic effect and should call into question the ang sizing of Doom’s Gate meteor since-----

Rebuttal 1:

However, I strongly disagree for quite a few reasons. It's eluding me why we're even treating the Dooms Gate meteor as a background celestial object in the first place when the "celestial objects" the OP references (like the sun and moon) are measured using cosmic distances and units (LD-Lunar Distance & AU- Astronomical Unit) and none of these objects are remotely in the earth’s atmosphere. The distance between a grain of sand in the Sahara Desert to the Karman line (the edge of space that marks the beginning of the earth's main atmosphere which is roughly 85-110 kilometers) is thousands of times closer than the distance from earth to the moon and even millions of times closer than the earth is to the sun. They're comparing background objects that are astronomically farther than Doom's Gate meteor to a NON-background object that's astronomically closer to the planet and falling within its atmosphere. So I’m failing to see the relevant connection here. If that’s the case then any pixel scaling of objects within the earth’s atmosphere should be nuked (which I don’t agree with, I’m just making a point). To be honest, this shouldn't even be a point of contestation given these substantial differences. The argument that it's an object for “dramatization” falls extremely flat and is simply unsupported. The ang sizing of the Doom's Gate meteor was calc’d after it entered the planet's atmosphere, not when it was millions or thousands of kilometers away.

If the OP wanted to use a relevant and comparable example, they should have used Gremmy’s meteor, which also includes anime original scenes that are calc’d on this site and added to Bleach’s main profile. You could argue that Kubo’s role in TYBW is why they were scaled that way however, Tabata also had a significant role in SOTWK as well, it even has an official manga volume. Nevertheless, we should not treat the Doom’s Gate meteor as a background celestial object that isn’t part of the narrative given it was literally in the atmosphere. We already have far more relevant examples like anime exclusive scenes of Gremmy’ meteor.

I also prepared 3 additional calcs from two different perspectives that support the current meteor’s size. They are extremely consistent with currently accepted calc since they all have negligible differences, which you can see in Rebuttal 2.

Issue 2:

The OP argues that the scene in space where Asta slashes the meteor shows the true scaling and that all others are exaggerations. They insist that the scene they used to “debunk” the calc was the best scene to get the most accurate scale. They also suggest that this could possibly be dismissed as a scene where Asta is the focus (and not the size of the meteor) so us (the watchers) can know where he is. However, they go on to say that is not the case since Asta and the size of his twin dividers are not the specs that they should be in comparison to the meteor-----

Rebuttal 2:

However, I strongly disagree since this requires you to ignore the vast majority of scenes that do focus on scale where human sized characters are respectively shown as “specs”. It's also important to remember that our site standards does acknowledge that inconsistent sizing should be accounted for in regard artistic reasons, which the instance the op called out should fall under:

Inconsistent Measurements​

When evaluating the size of objects depicted by an author, it's important to consider that the author may have depicted them inconsistently for artistic reasons. A primary example occurs if the author has to show a large object and a comparatively small object at the same time. In such a case they might have to depict the two objects as similar in size for the sake of making both easily visible to the reader. When deciding on the appropriate size scaling to use, such inconsistencies should be taken into account.

The OP also overlooked that the scene they pixel scaled focuses on Asta and his actions and not the size of the meteor. Furthermore, we do have scenes that show Asta’s and his twin dividers as “specs” relative to the meteor. These scenes aren’t exclusively found from the perspective on the surface of the planet, but also in space the same location the OP tries to use to debunk the validity of the ang sizing.

1. The left side of Asta’s body is coated in magic and light, and the imperial sword generates an enlarged blade of light. As a result, the left side of Asta’s body constantly emits a very bright light in contrast to his right side that radiates a black and red anti-magic aura. The glare that’s produced from the magic on his left can be seen from the surface of the planet despite the fact Asta’s essentially in space. Every single character in the story that sees Asta and the meteor from the surface of the earth perceives him as a glare of light blocking an astronomically large figure in the sky. All those shots do focus on the size of the meteor and the size of the flickering glare, including the scenes in space. ​

2. We see a direct comparison of the meteor’s size in relation to Asta much earlier than the skewed instance the OP pointed out. Keep note that the glare radiating from Asta’s left side is, if not hundreds, thousands of times larger than his own body and the giant twin dividers he carries. This shouldn’t be surprising considering later in the series we see Asta producing anti-magic attacks that are in the ranges of thousands of kilometers, which is wayyyy wider than the 210 kilometer meteor in question.​

a. Right after Asta halted the momentum of the meteor, Conrad immediately began to push down on it to increase its falling speed and overpower Asta.​

​

b. As a result, giant trails of anti-magic and flickering specs of light are emitted like a propulsion system as Asta began to output more power to resist Conrad’s push and then we zoom in to Asta's actions. ​

​

c. Both of Asta’s “aura’s” are WAY too large to be the size of his body considering the giant imperial word isn’t even visible. His left profile is concealed by the glare since we’re viewing the left side of Asta which radiates magic.​

​

d. If you play through the sequence of scenes and zoom you’ll see that a tiny glare of light that envelopes Asta’s left side expands and contracts with large variations to even tinier specs just like we saw from the surface of the planet, while the trail of anti-magic wax and wane to extremely wide and thin proportions. For a brief moment you can also see source of the flickering and it’s a tiny white glare that’s intersected with the face meteor which is Asta’s location yet we still can’t see him, much less the swords.​

​

Spoiler: SEQUENCE

​

Spoiler: ZOOM IN OF SEQUENCE

​

Spoiler: ZOOM IN OF ASTA

​

e. The shots of the sequence in the spoiler block above are orthogonal, and they are not at an odd angle meaning this is the most direct comparison we will ever get for a size comparison between Asta and the meteor in space. They also align with that fact that Asta is seen as a glare of light from all observers. ​

​

Given that scene is facing Asta’s left profile (which is the side of the imperial sword) we can 100% conclude that Asta, and both of his giant swords are within the circumference of this tiny white circle that can easily be if not hundreds thousands of times greater than the physical proportions of his body and the twin dividers. When you pixel scale that scene the light that glare that engulf Asta’s profile end up being roughly 1.879 km while the anti-magic trail ends up being 5.990 km in relation to the 210 km diameter meteor: ​

​

Spoiler: SEE CALC

​

If you’re looking for “Asta and his giant swords” they’re right in that “spec”. If Asta was as large as the OP is suggesting in relation to the meteor, the dimming light would have revealed the imperial sword and left side of Asta’s profile since they’re the source of the light.​

The official light novel supports the visuals we see in the movie:

According this except from the official light novel that was vetted through the official translation thread (courtesy of SeijiSetto) it was stated (and supported by the movie) that the Doom’s Gate door, the black hole it produced and the meteoroid that emerged from it were so large they could be seen from anywhere in entire kingdom as shown in the image below:

Spoiler: DOOM'S GATE HOVERING OVER THE PLANET

The light novel specifically states that the Doom’s Gate door was summoned in a place with no air or mana. So the door and meteor were summoned OUTSIDE of the planet’s gases or at least where the molecules no longer behave like gases. The text in the link above above is the first part of the quote in the box below that was vetted through the official translations thread (FYI I wanted to to the text in bold translated in the same thread as well but apparently you cant only post once a week, regardless it wouldn't change much) it goes:

"far above in the sky why there is no air or mana-

an absurdly huge door appeared in mid-air.

"What the-...!!" Asta was lost for words upon seeing such a thing. Shortly after, he was assaulted by a powerful gust of wind and was blown out of the sky, landing in the middle of a forest.

"I will not give up. I will not give up... Asta..." While repeating Asta's words from that time, Conrad turned to the door and began floating upwards. Simultaneously, a pitch-black hole appeared directly in front of the door, and out of it began to peek a gigantic meteorite, big enough that it could be seen no matter where you were in the kingdom.

It began to descend.”

The meteoroid’s diameter is about 1/3rd of the length of the giant door that summoned it. Mind you, this is before the meteoroid began to descend into the atmosphere of the planet and ablate (which is a result of colliding with the planet’s atmosphere) which suggests the Doom’s Gate door was summoned in the exosphere. According to NASA the exosphere is at 700km (some sources even say 600k) nevertheless, in this region molecules are extremely low in density and no longer behaves like gases and where satellites orbit which is aligned with the description from the official light novel of it being in a place with no air or mana since mana dwells in all things including gases. The meteor’s diameter is roughly the length of the compass-star shaped sigil’s on the door. I did two pixel scales of two different perspectives (which also include the size of the door and magic circle) and quite frankly they're both extremely consistent with the calc used for the current Doom’s Gate calc (210 km) despite the fact they’re two different view depths and locations from the planet’s exosphere (700k)

Calc1: From the surface of the planet to the exosphere(700k) which yielded a diameter of 217.61 km

Spoiler: SEE CALC 1

Calc2: From on top of the demon skull which is roughly 58.8 meters from the ground to the exosphere (699.941k) which yielded a diameter of 238.91 km

Spoiler: SEE CALC 2

Meteors aren’t seen with the naked eye until they enter the atmosphere, because they’re literally a luminous phenomenon and defined by such. According to this article the Chelyabinsk meteor from 2013 wasn't even visible until to the naked eye until it entered the earth's atmosphere. Furthermore, the closer Doom’s Gate meteor got to surface of the planet, the more it began to affect the Clover Kingdom’s gravitational field as rocks and other debris began flying up. Conrad’s original plan in the movie and even 10 years ago was to use the imperial sword to destroy the entire country down to its continental foundations and start anew, he believed that destroying everything then using the imperial sword to resurrect the dead souls he chose to revive can lead to a more ideal and fair world. During his final attack he sacrificed the remainder of his life-span to summon Doom’s Gate meteor not just to destroy the country, but the world (see translation below courtesy of SeijiSetto):

“This would be the end of everything.

Given Conrad was using Forbidden Magic and sacrificing his very life, he had little time remaining.

Before he died, he would save this country.... no, this world...!!

"I.... I won't give up either!!" Asta, lying face down in the middle of the forest, picked up his Demon-Slayer sword once more.”

So that damage that was originally reserved for the Clover Kingdom should logically extend to the rest of the world when he switched his method for destruction (changing from the imperial sword the meteor) and goal(from country to the entire world) which suggests surface swiping capabilities and reinforce the enormous size of the meteor. Furthermore, the calc for planet swiping that’s referenced on this site for common feats (646.5 petatons) and the Doom’s Gate calc (594.1 petatons) are not too far apart in AP value.

Doom's Gate Calc:

Final Result​

Conrad's Doom's Gate = 594.1 petatons (High 6-A)

Meteor's Force = 1.626996e+19 kg (Class E)

Reference For Common Feats:

However, in the case of a ground-based explosion where the explosion is generated on the ground, we use the following formula:

W = R^3*((27136*P+8649)^(1/2)/13568-93/13568)^2, where W is the yield in tons of TNT, R is the radius and P is the shockwave pressure in bars, where we generally use 1.37895 bars or 20 psi of pressure. There is no need to halve the explosion yield result in the case of ground-based explosions.

R = 20037.50 km or 20037500 m

P = 1.37895 bars

W = 20037500^3*((27136*1.37895+8649)^(1/2)/13568-93/13568)^2 = 6.46570851e+17 tons of TNT or 646.57085 Petatons (Multi-Continent level)

The current Doom’s Gate calc should remain in place at the very minimum since at least two top scans yields sizes consistent with the bottom scene aka current calc before it's initial descent. SOTWK uses CGI so I’m not surprised about the meteor’s consistency since it uses digital modeling.

Spoiler: SEE IMAGE

1. The meteor is not a background celestial object like the sun or moon, and it should not be treated as such given their substantial differences and context. It is a deliberately large object that entered the earth’s atmosphere and got closer to the planet' surface. It is far more consistent than the Bleach example (which had like 5x-30x difference) given what was stated above about the relatively consistent diameter of the meteor regardless of the changing distances due to it's descent .

2. All scenes from the observer’s perspective whether they be from the surface of the planet, or even in space focus on the size of the meteor and portrays Asta as a tiny glare. Therefore, we should not scale the one scene with ONE odd angle, meant for the watchers to communicate Asta’s action, rather than the size of the meteor. This discrepancy it covered in the site's standards.

Inconsistent Measurements​

When evaluating the size of objects depicted by an author, it's important to consider that the author may have depicted them inconsistently for artistic reasons. A primary example occurs if the author has to show a large object and a comparatively small object at the same time. In such a case they might have to depict the two objects as similar in size for the sake of making both easily visible to the reader. When deciding on the appropriate size scaling to use, such inconsistencies should be taken into account.

Therefore, using it as a basis creates severe inconsistencies that are narratively and visually contradictory as it’s impossible to portray both Asta and the meteor in the same scene at the true scale with high legibility since they’re so vastly different in size. Either Asta would be a dot or the meteor would just be an orange background.

3. Doom’s Gate meteor was going to destroy the world. Not only was its descent affecting the gravitational field of the kingdom, but the meteor itself, the black hole it emerged from and the door that summoned it were large enough to be viewed by the naked at every location in the kingdom despite the fact they were summoned outside of the earth’s atmosphere in space. The glow from the giant magic door itself turned the entire Kingdom’s atmosphere crimson red, which affirms its massive size.

4. The idea that a GIANT door, the black hole it produced and the meteor that emerged from it could be visible from everyone in the kingdom from the exosphere/space would be 100-300 meters in size makes absolutely NO sense given how contradictory premise is, in itself.

 

[DavidTPPM]

I'll try to drop my summary tonight
…Is what I said before seeing the summary is over 2600 words long…

 

[Xinsignia1]

FYI i'm trying to collapse the images into the little "spoiler" box thingy but I don't know how, help. Lmao sorry for my images being obnoxiously large. I'm trying to do something like the text below:

nvm, I figured it out.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Maaaaan this isn't a summary this is straight up just repeating the last 3 novel sized replies. A summary is supposed to be quick and to the point

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

You’re supposed to condense not combine

 

[DragoZeroNova]

It's a Chariot sized summary

 

[Dalesean027]

I've been busy myself anyways so just lmk when your reply is ready as well @DavidTPPM and I'll ping other CGMS to look over both of your replies

 

[DavidTPPM]

Ngl I completely forgot about this. I'll try to write the summary by the end of the week

 

[Dalesean027]

Ngl I completely forgot about this. I'll try to write the summary by the end of the week