• 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.

Addressing Earthquake calcs from Meteor Impacts

I read the reply and I honestly don't get what you mean. Could you expand?

What you're saying doesn't address near impact if I'm reading it correctly.
 
I read the reply and I honestly don't get what you mean. Could you expand?

What you're saying doesn't address near impact if I'm reading it correctly.
atmospheric drag isn't relevant for the final result as the formula is for finding the kinetic energy of a meteorite when it impacts based on the seismic effects.
The point of the thread is that we have to be more clear on what kind of feats are allowed to use the meteor impact formula. An attack that's called a meteor but hits the ground at subsonic speed, and doesn't have the same level of environmental effects that a meteor falling from outer space at hypervelocity and hitting the ground would have, should be disqualified.
 
Last edited:
What are the staff opinions here so far, and do we need further evaluations here? 🙏
 
What are the staff opinions here so far, and do we need further evaluations here? 🙏
As far as I can tell, it goes
Agree: M3X_2.0
Disagree: DontTalkDT

Further evaluation is needed
@Executor_N0 @Mr. Bambu @Therefir @Ugarik @DMUA @Damage3245 @TheRustyOne @Armorchompy @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @KLOL506 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings @Agnaa @Dalesean027 @DemiiPowa @Flashlight237 @SeijiSetto @Naito-desu @Floxy178 @ElJoaki5 @Drite77

Do any of you have an opinion about this suggested revision? 🙏
 
Not very knowledgeable on this, but I agree with mentioning that it should have at least 11.2 km/s of speed. Otherwise we'll go way out of the data that formula is based on, outer space part is probably not necessary though (if we somehow know that object had such speed).
 
Back
Top