MCU Thor Storm Calcs

[Emirp sumitpo]

Btw KLOL, is that Low 6-B Neuron star calc ready?

 

[KLOL506]

Btw KLOL, is that Low 6-B Neuron star calc ready?

Gimme a moment.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

Using ice fragmentation values ain't gonna get you much because it's pathetically low

To be fair, Jotunheim ice does seem to be a lot stronger than IRL ice, but yeah

 

[KLOL506]

Nidavellir calc done

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Nidavellir calc done

If this and the Thanos Low 6-B+ calc is accepted. I suppose:

High 7-A becomes Low 6-B
6-C becomes Low 6-B+
Anyone above 6-C Thanos becomes 6-B

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Btw, wouldn't it be better if we move Spino's Low 6-B+ calc into a blog rather than a thread?

 

[KLOL506]

Btw, wouldn't it be better if we move Spino's Low 6-B+ calc into a blog rather than a thread?

I remember someone using 0.73 as the emissivity value instead of copper's 0.03 though I'm not sure whether the latter is the correct one.

Also a dude named Podonklos had some issues on the High 6-B version of the Tesseract calc.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Nidavellir calc done

Wait, don't need to adjust the temperature to use the canon figure rather than Kep's assumption?

 

[KLOL506]

Wait, don't need to adjust the temperature to use the canon figure rather than Kep's assumption?

Is there a canon temperature stated somewhere?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Is there a canon temperature stated somewhere?

Yeah, there's a temperature given in the MCU tech manual

 

[KLOL506]

Welp, that knocks down the value to 7-B.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

Yeah, there's a temperature given in the MCU tech manual

Isn't that just the temperature needed to liquefy Uru and not the actual temperature of the star?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Isn't that just the temperature needed to liquefy Uru and not the actual temperature of the star?

I think it would mean the star's temperature isn't that much higher than the melting point, considering it took something like two minutes to melt the ingots with sustained focused energy.

 

[KLOL506]

Wait, don't need to adjust the temperature to use the canon figure rather than Kep's assumption?

BTW, Kep didn't need to make that assumption, a mere google search would give a 1 million degree kelvin value for neutron stars on average having passed a few thousand years or so.

 

[Qawsedf234]

BTW, Kep didn't need to make that assumption, a mere google search would give a 1 million degree kelvin value for neutron stars on average having passed a few thousand years or so.

But that's for detectable Neutron stars.

There are thought to be around one billion neutron stars in the Milky Way,[16] and at a minimum several hundred million, a figure obtained by estimating the number of stars that have undergone supernova explosions.[17] However, most are old and cold and radiate very little; most neutron stars that have been detected occur only in certain situations in which they do radiate, such as if they are a pulsar or part of a binary system. Slow-rotating and non-accreting neutron stars are almost undetectable; however, since the Hubble Space Telescope detection of RX J185635−3754 in the 1990s, a few nearby neutron stars that appear to emit only thermal radiation have been detected. Soft gamma repeaters are conjectured to be a type of neutron star with very strong magnetic fields, known as magnetars, or alternatively, neutron stars with fossil disks around them.[18]

So Kep's calc is assuming the temperature of a pulsar or high energy neutron star, rather than the one shown in the movie which is old and needed to be restarted. So the 1,000,000 K figure is honestly a rather high end view of the feat.

 

[KLOL506]

But that's for detectable Neutron stars.

So Kep's calc is assuming the temperature of a pulsar or high energy neutron star, rather than the one shown in the movie which is old and needed to be restarted. So the 1,000,000 K figure is honestly a rather high end view of the feat.

Aight, understandable.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

7-B downgrade again?

 

[KLOL506]

7-B downgrade again?

No, not with Thanos's 6-C rating being a thing (Considering the fact that Thanos already had an axe in his chest when the feat was done). Worst comes to worst, Thor loses his High 7-A rating and jumps straight to an "At most 6-C" rating given that the Snap's energy surge showed no signs of slowing down.

We still need to talk about Thor's spire-cracking feat that his somehow an outlier yet a major plot point to stop Ultron's mass extinction plan.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

I think it would mean the star's temperature isn't that much higher than the melting point, considering it took something like two minutes to melt the ingots with sustained focused energy.

The beam does go through space and several other mechanisms before it reaches the ingots, but oh well.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Welp, that knocks down the value to 7-B.

Well that's an Oof

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

RIP Low 6-B MCU (September 2021-September 2021)......

You will live on in our hearts.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

So is Thanos' Low 6-B+ still usable?

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

Don't. Don't give me hope.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

On a serious note, with its emissivity, it looks ok to me, but I'm not that familiar with calcs, so...

 

[Qawsedf234]

Aight, understandable.

You'd be more knowledgeable than I would be regarding this, but how do we account for exposure damage? Like Thor would be taking 15 Megatons per second every second for something like 119 seconds using on screen time.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

for something like 119 seconds using on screen time.

I'm pretty sure it's not near 119 seconds on-screen. Only Eitri's statement states that the full duration is "a few minutes, maybe more"

 

[KLOL506]

You'd be more knowledgeable than I would be regarding this, but how do we account for exposure damage? Like Thor would be taking 15 Megatons per second every second for something like 119 seconds using on screen time.

Nah, Executor is smarter than I when it comes to astronomy. That being said, didn't DT say that the energy tanked should only be the yield per second and not it being accumulated over time?

 

[Qawsedf234]

That being said, didn't DT say that the energy tanked should only be the yield per second

That's what I was wondering about. If it was considered an endurance thing or a cumulative thing.

 

[KLOL506]

That's what I was wondering about. If it was considered an endurance thing or a cumulative thing.

Prolly only the amount of energy tanked in one second is the durability, any longer and it's prolly just an endurance thing.

 

[Fastestthingalive50]

The first one is a Ice hax feat that scales to no one afaik.

Hela scales to it.

 

[Fastestthingalive50]

Also, another fun thing to drop in cause I’m psychotic. Thor destroyed the ice thing in the first movie which was this large according to some guys who worked on the film:

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

Also, another fun thing to drop in cause I’m psychotic. Thor destroyed the ice thing in the first movie which was this large according to some guys who worked on the film:

I already pointed it out :v, but nice

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Hela scales to it.

Why would she?

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

Why would she?

She considered it to be weak

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

She considered it to be weak

It's a hax thing. Not an AP thing.

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

It's a hax thing. Not an AP thing.

Well it's under her AP justification, so idk

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

That should be removed

 

[SheevShezarrine]

Yeah, there's a temperature given in the MCU tech manual

With how low the on-screen yield for Thanos' snap was, despite being described as "a power surge of cosmic proportions, no one's ever seen anything like it", I don't trust WoG figures very much

 

[KLOL506]

With how low the on-screen yield for Thanos' snap was, despite being described as "a power surge of cosmic proportions, no one's ever seen anything like it", I don't trust WoG figures very much

Also a good point

 

[Marvel_Champion_07]

That should be removed

Should I make a CRT?