Freezing Calcs, and Why they Make No Sense

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Korra is scaled based on "Energy Bending". Plus, removing thermal energy from another object still equates to heating up another object at the same time, so it a sense; it's the exact same thing as heating feats.

The reason Absolute Zero negates durability is not because of the pure cold, but simply due to the stopping of atoms and molecules; it more so equates to atomic manipulation. Though, poking someone with a AZ frozen stick isn't hax anymore, just the ability to freeze someone's body to AZ temperatures is. Also, other freezing feats also involve freezing massive areas of cold which isn't quite the same as freezing a specific spot to AZ.

 

[Antoniofer]

Same effect =/= same energy, and of course, energy =/= damage; yes, thermal transference could lead to the same result to molecular acceleration: creating certain amount of heat; however, in certain environments (in this case cold environment) wouldn't be the same, the character that use thermal transference wouldn't be able to output the same heat, as there's little heat to absorb, in the other hand, the one that use molecular acceleration may archive the same effects.

And of course, doesn't matter how much energy they produced, if they can only heat up to 1000 kelvin, that's all the damage they can archive (durability negation aside).

All freezing deccelerate atoms, just that AZ stop them completely, so even conventional freezing can be archived by atomic manipulation.

 

[Jaakubb]

Korra is scaled based on "Energy Bending". Plus, removing thermal energy from another object still equates to heating up another object at the same time, so it a sense; it's the exact same thing as heating feats.
The reason Absolute Zero negates durability is not because of the pure cold, but simply due to the stopping of atoms and molecules; it more so equates to atomic manipulation. Though, poking someone with a AZ frozen stick isn't hax anymore, just the ability to freeze someone's body to AZ temperatures is. Also, other freezing feats also involve freezing massive areas of cold which isn't quite the same as freezing a specific spot to AZ.

Your first argument relies on the statement that "removing thermal energy still equates to heating up another object" which is literally what we are arguing about right now. You are begging the question. And avatar characters scale from freezing feats, so we can't even be sure those calcs are valid. You can't use the premise to support your premise.

Nobody is arguing that freezing negates durability, it is just exploiting a weakness. For example, if you stab someone in the gut, they'll probably still survive, but if you stab them with the same amount of kinetic energy in the carotid artery, the injury would be more fatal.

 

[Jaakubb]

A material can be very fragile but capable of taking a huge amount of heat but not vice-versa. Fiction is not always consistent on that though

So for fiction, the answer could possibly be yes? Also could you tell me the source of this?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

For freezing calcs, specifically:

The person in question doing the freezing is interacting with a system that has a set amount of energy in it and that system must reach a certain level of energy to become frozen.

If I introduce energy forcibly into a system, I'm contributing [X] energy to it, which the wiki shorthands as 'Attack Potency' when you measure for [X].

If I remove energy forcibly from a system, I'm ejecting [X] energy from it; this is the exact same principle, just in reverse, and still involves the transferral of energy from one system to another. This is what freezing does, at base.

It's AP with how the Wiki treats it no matter how you shake it since you have to be forcing energy into some system by how thermodynamics works, and doing that by force is AP.

Actually, there was another person I forgot to credit, Xulrev explained it perfectly. And actually, Conversio of energy is still attack potency. It's also explained on our Attack Potency about our distinction between Destructive Capacity and Attack potency. Heating feats are still technically DC feats. Keep in mind DC is simply a baseline for AP feats also.

Cancelling destruction feats through raw power are the inverse of destructive capacity. A planet shattering punch is both DC and Attack Potency, and blocking that same punch is the opposite of DC, but it's still an equal to or greater AP feat. Freezing feats being the inverse to heating feats of equal change in temperature is no different than a character blocking a multi-Megaton/Gigaton/Megafoe/ect Punch being qualified as an AP feat. Or using your bare hands to force an explosion closed to the point where a multi-megaton bomb doesn't even generate an explosion. Or repelling a giant energy blast just by punching it. And for Mass-Energy conversion feats, transforming matter into pure energy is the same as turning that same pure energy back into matter for the same reason. A Multi exaton freeze beam were to collide with a multi-exaton heat wave of the same power; they still cancel each other out the same way two Kamahameha's of equal force do. Heating and Cooling is also transferring energy the exact same way but in the opposite direction.

I will have to go to work soon, so I won't be able to respond to future comments for a while.

 

[Antvasima]

No problem. Thank you for helping out.

 

[Jaakubb]

What are you talking about? Freezing calcs do not involve negating energy. It is just transferring energy or making use of conduction. Blocking a punch is MUCH different from freezing an object on fire. There is no inverse law of AP.

 

[Jaakubb]

Is there anyone else who can justify freezing feats if DDM is going to be inactive for a while?

 

[Ugarik]

Yes they do. Heat does not transfer from-cold-to-hot. From physical point of view freezing an object is indeed negating or extracting its internal energy

 

[Ugarik]

@Medeus

What is DC and DDM?

 

[Damage3245]

@Ugarik;

DC = Destructive Capacity

DDM = DarkDaragonMedeus

 

[Jaakubb]

Yes they do. Heat does not transfer from-cold-to-hot. From physical point of view freezing an object is indeed negating or extracting its internal energy

You don't "negate" it's energy. You either extract its energy by sort of siphoning it out with energy manipulation or using conduction (which does not require an outside energy source and happens automatically. Refrigerators and other electrical appliances DO NOT work by "negating" heat.

 

[Jaakubb]

Here are some sources for how a refrigerator works. Conduction requires no outside energy source once the objects are in contact with each other.

 

[Antvasima]

I will unsubscribe from this thread due to time constraints. You can send me a message later if you need my help.

 

[Jaakubb]

Yes they do. Heat does not transfer from-cold-to-hot. From physical point of view freezing an object is indeed negating or extracting its internal energy

Freezing something involves heat going out of an object, so it is hot to cold if you are using a freeze beam or something like in metroid.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

The refrigerator example isn't exactly the strongest counter argument; the fans being used to blow out the thermal energy still require continuous amounts of electricity. And actually, if anything; as far as air conditioning is concerned. Cooling areas require more energy than warming areas due to a variety of factors. There's the fact that most people use gas to heat up areas, which burning gas is more so a chain reaction and is cheaper, though not renewable unlike solar or wind powered energy.

If there was a single wave or blow and all the thermal energy literally got fanned out of a lake or ocean to the point where it's frozen shut, it would be AP. Liquid Nitrogen isn't the strongest example either as that's something already super-cooled. It also does require a lot of energy extraction to produce liquid nitrogen. Which also requires plenty of energy.

Also, there are other factors if this article has something to say about that. There are scientific facts that even the human body naturally produces heat, and the more muscle the person has, the more heat they do produce. That's where the saying "Tough guys don't get cold" comes from. So in other words, it is naturally more difficult to freeze someone who's really strong and/or more durable.

Anyway, Energy extraction or injection is still manipulating the energy the same way but in the opposite direction. Creation is equal to destruction for the very same reason, and another example is for Mass-Energy conversion feats. Turning mass into pure energy is the same as turning pure energy back into matter. I know Mass-Energy is a very specific concept that's not generally used for creation or destruction feats unless outright stated, but it's still the same principle of input being equal to output.

 

[Jaakubb]

The refrigerator example isn't exactly the strongest counter argument; the fans being used to blow out the thermal energy still require continuous amounts of electricity. And actually, if anything; as far as air conditioning is concerned. Cooling areas require more energy than warming areas due to a variety of factors. There's the fact that most people use gas to heat up areas, which burning gas is more so a chain reaction and is cheaper, though not renewable unlike solar or wind powered energy.

The reason why it usually takes a lot of energy is because we want to cool things slowly. If we used something like liquid nitrogen as a coolant, it would take vastly less energy to cool things. There is no relationship at all between energy to move a coolant to a hot object to cool it and the energy that subsequently moves out from the object. Prove me wrong

 

[Antoniofer]

If we go with this we simply change our current definition of AP and put "the capability of cause change", cuz that its what energy is. Can't compare an air conditioning with someone with the power of freezing, the first one it designed in a way tranfer and store heat in order to cool an area, that also requiere electric power to do so, meanwhile the other simply induce cold into something; the difference its that the last one violates the principle of energy conservation.

People have to understand that there's simply few process that can't be conventionally calculated: someone that punch so hard and destroy something yeah, its simply, it do not violate anything, but creating/inducing stuff from nothing can't; people say that creating stuff its more difficult than destruction, but is not that way, its simply not possible to create stuff from nothing, so it can't be calculated by any knowns mean.

Few heating methods works the same way: you can calculate something that increase the temperature up to certain point by 5 degrees when it comes from a source of heat, but simply inducing uniform heat in an area its not something possible, and thus, can't be calculated.

 

[Jaakubb]

Anyway, Energy extraction or injection is still manipulating the energy the same way but in the opposite direction. Creation is equal to destruction for the very same reason, and another example is for Mass-Energy conversion feats. Turning mass into pure energy is the same as turning pure energy back into matter. I know Mass-Energy is a very specific concept that's not generally used for creation or destruction feats unless outright stated, but it's still the same principle of input being equal to output.

For a feat to scale to other stats, the character has to be capable of actually producing that energy themselves, right? AP is the energy output of an attack (this is the very definition from our attack potency article). Of course negative energy could exist, but that would negate durability in many cases. Simply manipulating energy does not mean a character can tank or produce that energy. If I operate a nuclear reactor, I'm technically manipulating large amounts of energy, but I obviously cannot tank it or produce it myself.

 

[Jaakubb]

If we go with this we simply change our current definition of AP and put "the capability of cause change", cuz that its what energy is. Can't compare an air conditioning with someone with the power of freezing, the first one it designed in a way tranfer and store heat in order to cool an area, that also requiere electric power to do so, meanwhile the other simply induce cold into something; the difference its that the last one violates the principle of energy conservation.

The problem is AP scales to durability and the character's other attacks. The capability to cause change, on the other hand, does NOT necessarily scale to ANYTHING at all. Prove that there is a causal relationship between "capability of causing change" and durability or other attacks and this will be fine.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Operating a Nuclear Reactor is false equivalency. Freezing can still be functioning with similar properties without the need of a device that generates all the power. Using your own chi/essence to freeze or heat objects is still no different from being a living nuclear reactor.

 

[Jaakubb]

Or was that more of a rhetorical suggestion? Sorry if I'm misconstruing your point, Antoniofer.

 

[Andytrenom]

AP only scales to durability if its physical strength, not in every circumstance

 

[Jaakubb]

Operating a Nuclear Reactor is false equivalency. Freezing can still be functioning with similar properties without the need of a device that generates all the power.

Like what specifically?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

@Andy, AP can scale to durability in many cases, it just needs to be elaborated upon or specified with reason. It doesn't by default yes, but there are plenty of cased where it can. Two mages trading blows with their magic still scales to durability.

I still think, DontTalk, Xulrev, Bambu, and Ugarik are the ones being the most reasonable here.

 

[Antoniofer]

@Jaaku, yes, it was rhetorical, naturally we shouldn't evaluate by simply causing (or undo) changes, but that its what people suggest. Going with it, why not trying to calculate the energy needed to cause absolute zero, for anyone that can do so? Or transmutate into energy? Does are changes.

Similar reason why we do not scale environmental destruction to physical characteristics or other powers, cuz simply causing rain do not cause damage by itself, and creating a tornado or calling down lighting wouldn't cause more damage to what the tornado or lighting can do.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Andy, Two mages trading blows with their magic still scales to durability.

Obviously but in that case they are tanking attacks, which is the definition of durability, I don't think there was much point in bringing that up

 

[Agnaa]

The refrigerator example isn't exactly the strongest counter argument; the fans being used to blow out the thermal energy still require continuous amounts of electricity. And actually, if anything; as far as air conditioning is concerned. Cooling areas require more energy than warming areas due to a variety of factors. There's the fact that most people use gas to heat up areas, which burning gas is more so a chain reaction and is cheaper, though not renewable unlike solar or wind powered energy.

Refrigerators don't need fans to function, they have fans so that they can cool things more quickly. That isn't the strongest counter argument against that counter argument.

Also, there are other factors if this article has something to say about that. There are scientific facts that even the human body naturally produces heat, and the more muscle the person has, the more heat they do produce. That's where the saying "Tough guys don't get cold" comes from. So in other words, it is naturally more difficult to freeze someone who's really strong and/or more durable.

This is barely a factor. A human that outputs 100x as much energy might take 1.2x as much energy to freeze. And considering that this is just due to the existence of muscles, and not directly correlated to the output of joules, it won't matter much for most fictional characters.

Anyway, Energy extraction or injection is still manipulating the energy the same way but in the opposite direction. Creation is equal to destruction for the very same reaso

Just to bold this for emphasis, creation isn't energy extractio.

Creation requires adding energy to a system. If there's nothing there and you create something, you used your energy to add it into the system. Destruction is also adding energy to a system. Cooling is neither of these, as it's extracting energy, it's essentially absorption, which we don't scale to AP.

Turning mass into pure energy is the same as turning pure energy back into matter... but it's still the same principle of input being equal to output.

I don't agree with this being a comparison to heating and cooling being equivalent. To turn something from energy to matter or from matter to energy only requires the correct circumstances, and doesn't require a specific amount of energy. What stays equal is the total energy in that pure energy/mass after the end of it.

This is not true for heating and cooling. They both require transferring energy into/out of a system, and at the end of it, you're left with a different amount of energy in the system. This isn't swapping things between states, it's completely changing the energy level.

To simplify:

• 1. You change the circumstances requiring little energy, and the total energy afterwards remains the same.
• 2. You add or remove large amounts of energy, and the total energy changes immensely.

These two things are disanalagous.

 

[Lightbuster30]

Creation requires adding energy to a system. If there's nothing there and you create something, you used your energy to add it into the system. Destruction is also adding energy to a system. Cooling is neither of these, as it's extracting energy, it's essentially absorption, which we don't scale to AP.

Then why do we limit things like attack absorption to the ap of attacks they've absorbed? I'm pretty sure you can find a few characters here who are at the tier they are at for absorbing an object as well.

 

[Agnaa]

We only say that they can absorb attacks as high as they've absorbed. That doesn't mean that absorbing attacks gives AP by default.

There are characters who are at the tier they're at for absorbing objects. That's because the story itself states that they have a power boost from absorbing it, and reliably demonstrates what tier that power boost leaves them at. We don't automatically assume that all absorption means that the character gets whatever tier they absorbed.

 

[Jaakubb]

Creation requires adding energy to a system. If there's nothing there and you create something, you used your energy to add it into the system. Destruction is also adding energy to a system. Cooling is neither of these, as it's extracting energy, it's essentially absorption, which we don't scale to AP.

Then why do we limit things like attack absorption to the ap of attacks they've absorbed? I'm pretty sure you can find a few characters here who are at the tier they are at for absorbing an object as well.

Extracting energy through cooling doesn't necessarily mean they tanked it. They could've spread it out into the environment, and because of the inverse square law, this movement of energy wouldn't make any noticeable difference in the environment.

 

[Jaakubb]

I think we need to make a distinction between freezing feats that work by sort of siphoning the thermal energy from an object directly and freezing feats that use an object to absorb heat (like an ice cube absorbing heat from a drink or Samus using an ice beam to absorb heat from a star).

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Again, Samus doesn't use an object to absorb energy, she does it herself because her Ice Beam Power Up and Arm Cannon are both literally parts of the Power Suit, which is in turn a Holy Relic granted by the Chozo God of War that's also literally attacked to her. And in other words, her own Ice Beam is not much different than a Kamahameha or various Saint Seiya attacks as far as "Being her own energy/power" is concerned.

It's made of digital data and neither biological nor technological. It's an intangible attack formed using her own "Mental Energy". And the exact same type of data/power source used to create Super Missiles, Power Bombs, ect.

 

[Jaakubb]

The ice beam is made up of some kind of cold object, right? If not, show me the source. All she has to do is propel the beam towards the star (shouldn't require too much energy) and thermal energy will transfer from the star right into the beam. If the beam has certain properties no other energy source is needed.

 

[Jaakubb]

It's made of digital data and neither biological nor technological. It's an intangible attack formed using her own "Mental Energy". And the exact same type of data/power source used to create Super Missiles, Power Bombs, ect.

Source? Admittedly, I haven't played metroid prime and I'm not sure whether or not I can trust the metroid wiki or not but this article seems to say that both the intangible attack interpretation and the physical projectile interpretation are equally probable. In some of the descriptions, it is described as a "sub zero attack" and since intangible objects cannot have temperature, it implies matter. Also, according to the article, other freezing weapons make use of refrigerants as well (like supercool plasma).

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

We generally try to avoid using other wikis as the people do have a tendency to misinterpret details, and a lot of wikis also have a tenancy to use information that's based on ministrations and fan theories. Direct quotes may still be usable, but actual sources are more reliable overall. And it's starting to get off topic, so I will collapse it to make it readable. This thread is supposed to be based on the general standards and not verse specifics.

Off Topic

Anyway, it was SomebodyData who knows about Metroid lore, so it might be best to ask him. It was mentioned on this page however about the Mental energy. The source should be on some ancient Wayback machine digging of an old Metroid Database page;. Also, the Freeze Gun and Judicator Beam are different from the Ice Beam; and side note, the latter was outright stated to be extremely close to Absolute Zero. But plenty of Metroid games such as Fusion especially are pretty consistent in noting that all of Samus' power ups are digital programs. It's also another reason why all her arm cannon power-ups are stacked as well as why her arm cannon as infinite ammo; such the fact that she's able to fuse Ice Beam, Wave Beam, and Plasma Beam altogether. Note that Plasma Beam was stated to be equally capable heating objects to the same change in temperatures as the Ice Beam. They were described as "Elemental opposites in Prime." Also, that same article mentions the concept of Thermal Shock is a combined combo Samus can used by combining Ice Beam and Plasma Beam, which she has used to practically nuke and entire area full of enemies with well above baseline Planet level durability. Wave Beam is also loosely described as a weaponized FM Radio that phases through all solid objects and damages them; this is advanced armor negation via damaging targets from the inside out. But it's been shown to be capable of killing Chozo Ghosts which there's lore here. Samus was also able to trade blows with SA-X when Ice Beam, Plasma Beam, and Wave Beam were stacked, but that's both durability and resistance to the stuff. But for other comparisons, Samus' attacks are various much how Geo Stellar and MegaMan.EXE's attacks work.

 

[Jaakubb]

I think I'd rather stick to the cooling feats for now. Maybe I'll ask SomebodyData about it later if i have to.

 

[Jaakubb]

bump

 

[Jaakubb]

bump

 

[Jaakubb]

bump