Earth-Quaking, But Literally

[SeijiSetto]

tl;dr
current shaking the earth calc says the waves have to travel half the circumference, for some reason, despite the fact that (certain types of) seismic waves can travel just fine through the planet's core.
i remade it using diameter instead of circumference/2.
i want to replace it.

everyone who's rated Low 6-B for shaking the earth would be dropped down to High 6-C.

 

[SeijiSetto]

summoning uhhhhh
@Agnaa @Armorchompy @Flashlight237 @KLOL506
you 4

 

[Flashlight237]

This isn't in my field of expertise, sorry.

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah I agree with that replacement.

Even though some can't travel through the core, they wouldn't just travel around the circumference of the Earth, they just wouldn't end up on the other side in any meaningful amounts.

 

[KLOL506]

@DontTalkDT

 

[SeijiSetto]

bump.

@DontTalkDT

does DT approve every single calc on that page? the man's activity here is sporadic cuz he's busy a lot, relying on him for literally anything to go anywhere is not a good thing

this is a simple change of "the math is correct but one of the assumptions is wrong - here's a version with a corrected assumption"

 

[KLOL506]

does DT approve every single calc on that page?

Yes. If he says no, you're corked.

 

[KingTempest]

This was brought up last time by ByAsura

Shaking The Earth Reloaded

This calculation is currently Small Country level, but it assumes the radius of the earthquake is half the circumference of the planet. That's not how it'd work, though, because earthquakes/quakes (unless stated otherwise) travel radially from a centre point (presumably because that's just how...

vsbattles.com

Which DT tackled
The earthquake formulas take curvature into account, which is why we use half the circumference, which is why he said the calc is fine as it is.

 

[SeijiSetto]

This was brought up last time by ByAsura

Shaking The Earth Reloaded

This calculation is currently Small Country level, but it assumes the radius of the earthquake is half the circumference of the planet. That's not how it'd work, though, because earthquakes/quakes (unless stated otherwise) travel radially from a centre point (presumably because that's just how...

vsbattles.com

Which DT tackled
The earthquake formulas take curvature into account, which is why we use half the circumference, which is why he said the calc is fine as it is.

in that case
all i'd like is a note on the earthquake calcs page stating explicitly that the distance formulas take curvature into account so this doesn't happen a third time at some point in the future

 

[KingTempest]

in that case
all i'd like is a note on the earthquake calcs page stating explicitly that the distance formulas take curvature into account so this doesn't happen a third time at some point in the future

I'd be fine with that then, although I'm not a cgm so don't consider my vote

 

[Migue79]

I’m also fine with adding a note to the Earthquake calcs page that the formula takes curvature into account.

 

[KLOL506]

Sure, yeah, add the note. I can do so now. How's this?

"Take heed that the formula here takes the Earth's curvature into account, hence, the distance used is half the circumference of the Earth, and not its radius"

This good?

 

[Agnaa]

I'd wanna put a note on the Earthquake Calcs page, not the References for Common Feats page, since I could imagine people getting confused and measuring direct distance if the series makes it easy for them to get that (like a shot from space).

Something like "Note that the radius here is the distance from the source along the circumference of the planet. Straight lines cutting through a planet's mantle should not be used."

 

[SeijiSetto]

Something like "Note that the radius here is the distance from the source along the circumference of the planet. Straight lines cutting through a planet's mantle should not be used."

belated as all hell but something like this should work.