• 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.

Ben 10 - Questionable Armadrillo Calc

Damage3245

He/Him
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
31,232
27,435
I noticed a potential issue while examining this calculation:

Armadrillo' species destroy their homeworld: 2.599386266666667e+28 J (High 6-A)

The calc relies on two assumptions for the figures used which is derived from this section of the image linked in the calc:

Polona Luncas is not a planet but an asteroid belt in the Andromeda galaxy - a cluster of irregular chunks of rock the size of small moons - formed when, at some long-forgotten point in the past, the alien species known as Talpaedans jack-hammered their own homeworld into pieces!

1) The result debris from the destruction of their planet formed an asteroid belt. Therefore there must be around 1.1 to 1.9 million asteroids in an asteroid belt (the same as our IRL asteroid belt).

2) The irregular chunks of rock are the size of small Moons. Therefore every piece of the asteroid belt has the same volume as Europa.

The original mass of the Talpaedan's homeworld is then found by simply multiplying the mass of 1.5 million asteroids but the volume of Europa, using the density of the Earth. Which gets the GBE.

While there's technically no solid basis for the assumption of the number of asteroids present in the Talpaedan's asteroid belt, I can understand that assumption being used, but it seems problematic that Europa is being taken as the baseline for what a "small Moon" is for the calc. A quick example here shows that Europa is far from the smallest Moon in our Solar System:

9ogwxrF.png


I think a more conservative mass value should be used for the average asteroid in this asteroid belt formed from the destruction of the Talpaedan's homeworld.
 
Are you opting for a mid range mass/moon?
I'm thinking that we could average out at least a dozen small Moons from the Solar System such as the ones from the list in the OP and use that as the average figure of the asteroids in the Talpaedan's asteroid belt.

Europa is just a little bit smaller than Earth's own Moon, so not what I'd automatically consider if I had to use a "small Moon" for the calc.
 
I'm thinking that we could average out at least a dozen small Moons from the Solar System such as the ones from the list in the OP and use that as the average figure of the asteroids in the Talpaedan's asteroid belt.

Europa is just a little bit smaller than Earth's own Moon, so not what I'd automatically consider if I had to use a "small Moon" for the calc.
I'm not a calc member but I'm fine with this approach unless it can be proven these "small moons" should be comparable to Europa. I'll see what the Ben 10 supports and other calc members say but right now I agree with using the average.
 
Couldn't we use the fact that there was an atmosphere on that "asteroids" I mean, If I'm not wrong, there's need to be a minimum size for a body to have an atmosphere.

If not, then I agree with using a more average standard for "small Moon"
 
Back
Top