Border for the relativistic multiplier

[DontTalk]

Our current KE page states that kinetic energy shouldn't be used for high relativistic speeds. The reason for that is simply that by being close enough to the speed of light any arbitary value smaller than infinite can be reached.

Now "high relativistic speed" isn't a clear definition so the question is how we clearly define it. Instead of picking a speed boarder and saying that anything above that should not be calced at all, the approach I would like to take is that a border in relation (/as function) of newtonian kinetic energy is choosen to limit the values very close to the speed of light to reasonable amounts.

So the idea is that we pick a value and say that relativistic energy values get rounded of to the newtonian kinetic energy times that value.

I would think the reasonable values are in the interval from 2 to 13 times the newtonian kinetic energy (13 times would mean we only stop using the relativistic formula properly for speeds above 99% of the Speed of light, so that the regulation would barely affect any speed feats).

So the question is which value should be used here?

 

[Antvasima]

As I mentioned earlier, I support 2 times the value. We would get less inflated results that way.

 

[Antvasima]

However, we should make a note stating that there are exceptions when explicit power ratings are mentioned for speed feats, such as when the Flash was stated to hit with the force of a white dwarf star.

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

Staff only please. Hm. Yes, Newtonian 2 is preferable as the laws of physics begin to break down when nearing the speed of light and most calcs can't accurately take that into factor.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

well, if we wanted to be precise, in newtonian phys, since there was no limit, the KE could be applied for any finite amount


BUT since fictions dont take effect of speed on to energy into account in MANY cases AND if people are worried about inflated AP, then i guess we can go with 78.6 percent light speed, which gives KE of 2x newtonian value


HOWEVER if most people dont ccare about inflated results, then i think 99 percent is also a potential option

it depends on the community consensus

 

[Alakabamm]

Well, current OBD policy, for reference, is to not use any values close to lightspeed except when the feats are blatantly light speed feats. Even then, it is not always accepted to use KE that way.

But yea, I would use 2x the value, which LT corrected here to be 78.6% lightspeed. The one I had suggested before was 4x newtonian value, apparently.

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

Hmm. I think 2x the value is a good safe range to have. Though what exactly would it be if we go higher to say 3x to 4x the value instead?

 

[Alakabamm]

3x would be 88.9%

4x would be 93.1%

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

• Whistles* Damn

So with the 4x, we'd be dangerously close to the SoL.

3x the value tho? Still close either way but with a slightly lowe value.

I'll settle with the 2x but it can change depending wht the other staff say.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that 78.6% sol seems like a safe distance.

 

[DontTalk]

Personally I would be in favor of using 4 times here.

21.4% of the speed of light seems too large of a range for me. The purpose of the regulation is, in my opinion, to catch the worst cases. As such I think it should be chosen so that the absolte majority of all relativistic feats is not affected.

 

[Antvasima]

Hmm. I suppose that this is a valid point.

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

Ah, good point there DT. So if we really go with only 2x the value, anything calcs (that involve relativistic speeds in anyway) that are higher than 78.6% SoL would affect quite a lot of the others.

I suppose the 4x can work. This way it wouldn't affect too many potential relativistic calcs. Though looking at the 3x value, would that be like our middle ground tho?

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

so 3x newtonian value wud be at ~0.89 C (approx)

and 4 times wud be around ~0.93C to ~0.93C

 

[Alakabamm]

I agree that we should focus on both a small range of values and those that approach infinity rapidly, so 4x is fine for me as well

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

meh im going with 4x only cuz its over 0.9C

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, it seems like 4x is mostly agreed upon then.

 

[CrossverseCrisis]

Well i don't mind as DT pointed out earlier, using the 4x value would allow a lot of potential relativistic calcs to not get affected by this.

So simply put, i'm fine with going 4x the value.

 

[DontTalk]

Okay, I wrote the rule on the page now using 4 times KE.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for the help.