Naruto Bad

[Nerd1435]

I did this at the spur of the moment. I'm just looking at the tier-5 (or close to tier-5) calcs cuz there're too many of them Naruto calcs.

Starting with this, I don't know why it's assumed the GBE has been overcome. It isn't enough for the two halves to move apart to conclude GBE has been overcome, they should be perpetually moving away from each other till infinity.
But that's not the case here, and if anyone wants to argue Toneri pulled them back, then we might as well stick to the original calc.

And then this. This isn't how we find the energy required to lift the Moon in this case. In the calc, change in the potential energy (of the moon) is calculated but in the formula G*M*m/r, r is the distance between center of masses of the two bodies. Center of mass of the Moon might lie in it's center but that's not the case with remaining portion of the earth, it lies farther away from the center (opposite side of the hollow created by removing the Moon). So we gotta do it accordingly.

Initial State: Planet with a GBE of 3*G*Me^2/5*Re

Final State: GBE of a celestial body with a chunk of it ripped off + GBE of the Moon + GPE of Interaction between Moon and Planet (Center of Mass of the Planet should be separately found out)

Tbh wacky shape of earth after Moon is removed, varying density to calculate it's GBE and it also gets complex to determine the position of center of mass of this figure to calculate Gravitational Potential Energy of Interaction. But we can assume uniform density since it most likely wouldn't be too far from actual result and for the sake of avoiding too much complexity.

Finally this, the Moon isn't projected at the orbital velocity close to surface (aka velocity at which an objected should be projected so that it oribits extremely close to the Planet surface), it's projected after it is created at a specific distance above the Planet. The kinetic energy required would be considerably different, I commented on the calc before, check it for more elaboration.
I was asked to make a calc for it and made it. BUT it only works if Hagoromo and Hamura projected it and didn't deliberately move it until the end.
If they did deliberately move it, we must assume a time-frame and it would have an overall yield of Planet level. But the energy would be considered to have been supplied over-time. We gotta find the energy they supply in 1 second according to the site standards afaik.

Don't have a problem with this calc itself but isn't this again considered overtime since Toneri didn't just impart energy to the Moon for once and got done with it? He was constantly, deliberately moving it towards the Earth throughout the Movie iirc. Wouldn't scale to characters outputting their energy instantaneously in a fight if that's the case.

 

[KatBoi69]

Can you organize this post more and bullet-point the specific issues? I think you're right on the first count. You'd add the GBE in if someone shattered the moon AND THEN scattered the bits through space.

I'm a bit lost after that. I think scientifically you're right on the second point, but the level of calculation is too granular for our purposes here. If you can, do a rough calc for your method and see if it significantly impacts the final result. I once had a similar gripe with a blizzard feat and it turned out the energy contribution that the calc was neglecting was an order of magnitude smaller than the tier of the feat ( it ended up being about a 5% difference iirc).

 

[Nerd1435]

Okay I will but I'm a bit busy atm

 

[Damage3245]

Don't have a problem with this calc itself but isn't this again considered overtime since Toneri didn't just impart energy to the Moon for once and got done with it? He was constantly, deliberately moving it towards the Earth throughout the Movie iirc. Wouldn't scale to characters outputting their energy instantaneously in a fight if that's the case.

Isn't that why the total value is divided by the timeframe so that the amount of energy per second is what is listed as the final result?

 

[Nerd1435]

Isn't that why the total value is divided by the timeframe so that the amount of energy per second is what is listed as the final result?

"V = 17002289.62 m / 3300 sec = 5152.208975 m/sec

KE = 1/2 * 6.281327653 e22 kg * (5152.208975 m/sec)^2 = 8.336972943 e29 J

8.336972943 e29 J - 199.25843554015298764 Exatons of TNT - Moon"

This is what's written. The KE itself seems to be Moon level

 

[KatBoi69]

One other thing that may simplify some of this. I believe the wiki uses a standard assumption for the density of all earthen materials, so some of your issues with changing density are eliminated and your third calc should be tractable.

 

[Rocker1189]

"V = 17002289.62 m / 3300 sec = 5152.208975 m/sec

KE = 1/2 * 6.281327653 e22 kg * (5152.208975 m/sec)^2 = 8.336972943 e29 J

8.336972943 e29 J - 199.25843554015298764 Exatons of TNT - Moon"

This is what's written. The KE itself seems to be Moon level

That is literally the energy per second, which is why it has the velocity per second. That is the energy output in one second of the moon being moved. Which is how we calc the "instant" energy of KE things like this. Thus his "instant" energy is 199 exatons which is moon level. If it was the energy from one move instead of a consistent move then after we get the AP in 1 second we would multiple by time to get the overall AP.

I am however interested in this:

"Initial State: Planet with a GBE of 3*G*Me^2/5*Re

Final State: GBE of a celestial body with a chunk of it ripped off + GBE of the Moon + GPE of Interaction between Moon and Planet (Center of Mass of the Planet should be separately found out)

Tbh wacky shape of earth after Moon is removed, varying density to calculate it's GBE and it also gets complex to determine the position of center of mass of this figure to calculate Gravitational Potential Energy of Interaction. But we can assume uniform density since it most likely wouldn't be too far from actual result and for the sake of avoiding too much complexity."

I assume GBE of partially malformed planet + GBE of moon = GBE of planet before said malforming (correct me if I am wrong)

But then what about GPE of the interaction (would it make a big difference).

Oh and as for why GBE being overcome is argued. The moon was not drifting further apart or closer at any point after we seen the pieces closer together. Even if Toneri was holding them together the problem that everyone had was initial feat and how it looked vs after the feat happened. So the first calc is still fine.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Regarding the first calc, I’m pretty sure it was thrown together haphazardly so there could be something to replace the old axed moon cutting calc.

Regarding both CT calcs just use the work-energy relationship with gravity where the two distances are between the center of the moon and center of the Earth. (If they aren’t already doing that)

Why do we need to divide the moon’s KE by the timeframe? It would be moving with the calc’d velocity at any instant in time (assuming no acceleration), meaning at any instant Toneri is making it move with said velocity requiring said energy from the calc.

 

[M3X_2.0]

Everything you said about the thing being "overtime" is wrong. In fact, we are already considering this by using KE and using the timeframe. Freezing something during 1 minute is veeeery different from moving something during one minute.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

For a fix to the moon-splitting feat, I recommend calcing the change in PE of the moon's two hemisphere's center of mass. We would need an accepted final distance between the two halves of the moon, which I was informed that we don't have that (since the original separation distance got axed and whatnot).

 

[Nerd1435]

That is literally the energy per second, which is why it has the velocity per second. That is the energy output in one second of the moon being moved. Which is how we calc the "instant" energy of KE things like this. Thus his "instant" energy is 199 exatons which is moon level. If it was the energy from one move instead of a consistent move then after we get the AP in 1 second we would multiple by time to get the overall AP.

No. The KE is the KE corresponding to average speed of the Moon's travel.

The said KE isn't imparted instantaneously, it accelerates to that point and achieves the said KE. The KE it gains in a second is still different from the instantaneous corresponding to average KE.

Aka Instantaneous KE =/= the said KE being imparted instantaneously.

It might have moon level KE in a certain instant but that isn't achieved instantaneously

 

[Nerd1435]

Everything you said about the thing being "overtime" is wrong. In fact, we are already considering this by using KE and using the timeframe. Freezing something during 1 minute is veeeery different from moving something during one minute.

Nah. You guys just consider the KE corresponding to average speed as the character's AP, that isn't how you do it.
Even it's average speed over travel is achieved after a period of acceleration, it isn't achieved instantaneously.

Let me give an example. Let's say a character moved an object 10km over a span of 30seconds.
What you did: AP = KE corresponding to average speed aka 333.33m/s
But nowhere in its journey is it necessarily gaining a KE equivalent to or close to or less than the "KE corresponding to average speed" in an instant/one second.

 

[Nerd1435]

Oh and as for why GBE being overcome is argued. The moon was not drifting further apart or closer at any point after we seen the pieces closer together. Even if Toneri was holding them together the problem that everyone had was initial feat and how it looked vs after the feat happened. So the first calc is still fine.

Not drifting apart any further only proves that GBE hasn't been overcome. Just because you don't see them getting closer doesn't mean the GBE has been overcome.
It wouldn't be considered to have been overcome unless they perpetually move away.

"How it looked after the feat happened"
Yeah it didn't look like the split was as big as the pixel scaling suggested. Even in this case, with the KE imparted to overcome it's GBE, the two parts should've moved kilometers of distance and it doesn't look like it did either.

 

[Nerd1435]

Why do we need to divide the moon’s KE by the timeframe? It would be moving with the calc’d velocity at any instant in time (assuming no acceleration), meaning at any instant Toneri is making it move with said velocity requiring said energy from the calc.

It isn't the speed at which it moves at any given instance. It is the speed that it achieves after moved for an unknown time-period and the said speed is the object's average speed over its period of travel.

It isn't "projected" at the said speed, it is being moved such that it is the average speed over the course of it's travel.
The object may be much faster as well as slower than the average speed over its travel but we need the KE it gains in an instant to get AP

 

[Rocker1189]

No. The KE is the KE corresponding to average speed of the Moon's travel.

The said KE isn't imparted instantaneously, it accelerates to that point and achieves the said KE. The KE it gains in a second is still different from the instantaneous corresponding to average KE.

Aka Instantaneous KE =/= the said KE being imparted instantaneously.

It might have moon level KE in a certain instant but that isn't achieved instantaneously

Yes just like with all KE calcs on the sight it is indeed the average speed since we can never find the individual instantaneous speed.

Which is why we use one second just like with every KE feat, you are massively overcomplicating a basic calc that is done through the entire site.

If it has moon level in a certain instant then we use moon level as the AP of the feat. Its that simple. Else again we are just overcomplicating something that we can not know of.

Not drifting apart any further only proves that GBE hasn't been overcome. Just because you don't see them getting closer doesn't mean the GBE has been overcome.
It wouldn't be considered to have been overcome unless they perpetually move away.

"How it looked after the feat happened"
Yeah it didn't look like the split was as big as the pixel scaling suggested. Even in this case, with the KE imparted to overcome it's GBE, the two parts should've moved kilometers of distance and it doesn't look like it did either.

The fact it is not coming together is also proof of overcome GBE, if the GBE is not overcome it would be literally impossible for the moon to stay apart, it should have smashed together instantly.

It is not about the pixel scale, it is about the feat itself, because we literally see the split originally as 10s of kilometers apart, that is an objective fact. It is what happens afterwards that makes the contentious.

Let me give an example. Let's say a character moved an object 10km over a span of 30seconds.
What you did: AP = KE corresponding to average speed aka 333.33m/s
But nowhere in its journey is it necessarily gaining a KE equivalent to or close to or less than the "KE corresponding to average speed" in an instant/one second.

We assume it did in the first second of the feat which would be the "instant" part, that is how the KE calcs work.

Using an examle, if someone takes 5 seconds to vape a mountain, we would use 1 second of said vaping for that character AP, it is not necessarily fact that each second is equal to that person's AP but it is the logical and average conclusion we can come to.

But nowhere in its journey is it necessarily gaining a KE equivalent to or close to or less than the "KE corresponding to average speed" in an instant/one second.

This especially is just nonsense, that is why we use equivalent for the average.

 

[Nerd1435]

Yes just like with all KE calcs on the sight it is indeed the average speed since we can never find the individual instantaneous speed.

Because we can't find the instantaneous speed doesn't mean we can just go with something which could possibly give results that are massively above what's actually the case. And taking KE corresponding to average speed does.

Which is why we use one second just like with every KE feat, you are massively overcomplicating a basic calc that is done through the entire site.

If it has moon level in a certain instant then we use moon level as the AP of the feat. Its that simple. Else again we are just overcomplicating something that we can not know of.

Overcomplicating it isn't the intention, I just elaborated on how it is.

If the Moon has Moon level KE at a certain instant, then certainly the AP of the Moon is Moon level, but it isn't necessarily achieved in a very short time. It would be almost akin to scaling a character's usual AP to some attack they had to charge an hour for (but to a lesser extent since the said object also reaches a speed higher than average speed)

Infact, wouldn't have brought this up if one of the calc staff (DT) asked about the time taken by Hagoromo and Hamura to move the Moon. Because in case of lifting stuff even the site apparently doesn't consider the whole energy in case it's not done over a reasonably short amount of time. Exactly c/ping it. The thread: Under DontTalk's comment

"Last, but not least, I want to ask about the timeframe. For things such as lifting stuff we usually don't consider the whole energy if they are not done in a reasonably short timeframe. Do we know how long the two spend lifting the moon into its orbit?"

To portray the possible difference between the MAXIMUM KE an object might achieve in an instant and the KE corresponding to average speed, I'll just use a short calc I did before for Hagoromo and Hamura moving the Moon.

"Assume force is acting in such a way that the moon is:

Accelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

Decelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

1/2*a*(1800)^2 = 187,166,115m

a = 115.53463 m/s^2

V at 1799 sec = 207,846.8153611 m/s, KE1 = 1.58674697E+33

V at 1800 sec = 207,962.3500000 m/s, KE2 = 1.58851149E+33

AP = KE2 - KE1 = 1.76452E+30 (max work done in 1 second)"

Whereas the KE corresponding to average speed aka 384,000km/(3600seconds) or nearly 106,667m/s. KE corresponding is around 4*10^32J

That's a difference of hundreds of times, way too big to neglect it.

The fact it is not coming together is also proof of overcome GBE, if the GBE is not overcome it would be literally impossible for the moon to stay apart, it should have smashed together instantly.

It is not about the pixel scale, it is about the feat itself, because we literally see the split originally as 10s of kilometers apart, that is an objective fact. It is what happens afterwards that makes the contentious.

We assume it did in the first second of the feat which would be the "instant" part, that is how the KE calcs work.

If the GBE hasn't been overcome , the Moon can still stay apart but it just gets back together eventually after a period of time. I don't understand why you're entirely ignoring how blatantly contradictory it is for the Moon to not continue moving apart while also at the same time overcoming the GBE. Unless you can argue there is an external intervention this can't be the case.

If the initial split being 10s of km apart was really taken as an objective fact by people, then there is no need to nuke the original calc.

If you can argue GBE has been overcome, you should be able to very well argue the original calc is correct.

If it did achieve it's average speed in just 1 second, it's redundant for the character to move it constantly... that's a wacky assumption.

 

[Nerd1435]

I assume GBE of partially malformed planet + GBE of moon = GBE of planet before said malforming (correct me if I am wrong)

But then what about GPE of the interaction (would it make a big difference).

Forgot addressing this, sorry. No that's not the case.

Environmental factors of an individual particle play a role in finding GBE. The partial figure formed from assimilating particles influences the energy required to assimilate the rest into the partial figure to form a complete figure. For example, a hemisphere doesn't have half the GBE of it's corresponding spherical figure.

Forming a full sphere from hemisphere is different from forming a stand alone hemisphere

 

[KatBoi69]

Forgot addressing this, sorry. No that's not the case.

Environmental factors of an individual particle play a role in finding GBE. The partial figure formed from assimilating particles influences the energy required to assimilate the rest into the partial figure to form a complete figure. For example, a hemisphere doesn't have half the GBE of it's corresponding spherical figure.

Forming a full sphere from hemisphere is different from forming a stand alone hemisphere

This is definitely a case where it's on you to give a best guess estimate of how much different the two calcs are before the throw the first calc out.

Also this sounds like a problem you could find worked out on the internet. It seems like it's about in the realm of a 2nd year classical mechanics question.

 

[Rocker1189]

Because we can't find the instantaneous speed doesn't mean we can just go with something which could possibly give results that are massively above what's actually the case. And taking KE corresponding to average speed does.

Um, that is not up to you to decide whether it is massively above or massively below even you say probabaly meaning that you in fact do not know what it should be. If you want to do things like this you would have to nuke KE calcs in general. Average speed is average for a reason as it gives us the average AP for the calc which is perfectly fine to use.

Overcomplicating it isn't the intention, I just elaborated on how it is.

It would be if you want us to somehow change the calc for some weird reason. The calc is perfectly fins as is.

If the Moon has Moon level KE at a certain instant, then certainly the AP of the Moon is Moon level, but it isn't necessarily achieved in a very short time. It would be almost akin to scaling a character's usual AP to some attack they had to charge an hour for (but to a lesser extent since the said object also reaches a speed higher than average speed)

It is not akin to that at all (you even say to a lesser extent while I would say it doesnt count at all). Toneri is consistently outputting the energy values even as he fights. He isnt charging an attack or anything even close to that. Using the 1 second value as the initial value is perfectly fine.

"Assume force is acting in such a way that the moon is:

Accelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

Decelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

1/2*a*(1800)^2 = 187,166,115m

a = 115.53463 m/s^2

V at 1799 sec = 207,846.8153611 m/s, KE1 = 1.58674697E+33

V at 1800 sec = 207,962.3500000 m/s, KE2 = 1.58851149E+33

AP = KE2 - KE1 = 1.76452E+30 (max work done in 1 second)"

Bro this very assumption in itself is a huge one. So of course you would get a value like this wtf? Not to mention Toneri is constantly moving the moon, assuming some weird as acceleration and deceleration doesnt make sense. This is not like the Hamura and Hag's feat. He isnt going to move it to a point and stop or else he would have just push it of course enough for the moon to just smash into the planet. He obviously is just driving it to the planet as quickly as he can until it crashes in at enough speed to do enough damage. Simply put doing a calc like this for Toneri is incredibly wrong. It is also wrong for Hamura and Hags but not to the same extent.

If the GBE hasn't been overcome , the Moon can still stay apart but it just gets back together eventually after a period of time.

They were like 10 meters apart later on it would have come back together instantly at that point.

I don't understand why you're entirely ignoring how blatantly contradictory it is for the Moon to not continue moving apart while also at the same time overcoming the GBE. Unless you can argue there is an external intervention this can't be the case.

I mean you say this as if I agree with the moon only having split 10 meters initially, I do think there was external intervention by Toneri considering he literally wanted to crash the moon into the planet it stands to reason that he would hold thr moon together. (I mean he is literally pushing the moon to the planet the entire time.)

If the initial split being 10s of km apart was really taken as an objective fact by people, then there is no need to nuke the original calc.

The initial split is objectively 10s of km apart onscreen, the literal reason it got removed is due to people saying it is inconsistent with later views.

If you can argue GBE has been overcome, you should be able to very well argue the original calc is correct.

I do think the original was perfectly correct. Unfortunately staff said no. And I dont want to blow my casket arguing in the thread.

 

[KatBoi69]

To portray the possible difference between the MAXIMUM KE an object might achieve in an instant and the KE corresponding to average speed, I'll just use a short calc I did before for Hagoromo and Hamura moving the Moon.

"Assume force is acting in such a way that the moon is:

Accelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

Decelerated at a rate "a" for 30 minutes and 187,166.115km

1/2*a*(1800)^2 = 187,166,115m

a = 115.53463 m/s^2

V at 1799 sec = 207,846.8153611 m/s, KE1 = 1.58674697E+33

V at 1800 sec = 207,962.3500000 m/s, KE2 = 1.58851149E+33

AP = KE2 - KE1 = 1.76452E+30 (max work done in 1 second)"

Whereas the KE corresponding to average speed aka 384,000km/(3600seconds) or nearly 106,667m/s. KE corresponding is around 4*10^32J

That's a difference of hundreds of times.

Is the choice of 30 minutes totally arbitrary?

 

[Rocker1189]

Is the choice of 30 minutes totally arbitrary?

It is pretty arbitary yes. could have been 10 mins could have been 50 mins could have been 2 mins.

 

[Nerd1435]

Um, that is not up to you to decide whether it is massively above or massively below even you say probabaly meaning that you in fact do not know what it should be. If you want to do things like this you would have to nuke KE calcs in general. Average speed is average for a reason as it gives us the average AP for the calc which is perfectly fine to use.

"You don't know what's exactly the case so what I'm doing is right!!"
No. I used possibly because there could also be cases where the KE corresponding to average speed isn't massively below the KE gained by an object in an instant.

No lol, you don't have to nuke KE calcs in general. Calcs that involve throwing/Projecting/Imparting KE at a time remain as is.

Those that involve lifting/moving over a large period of time would have to be changed. That should've always been the case.

It would be if you want us to somehow change the calc for some weird reason. The calc is perfectly fins as is.

It's a fact that considering the KE corresponding to average speed may very well be far far higher than KE the said object can possibly achieve in an instant over the entire period of it's travel.

And moreover just because you guys always did something with no basis doesn't mean it would be the true unless proven otherwise.
KE corresponding to average speed =/= average AP, average AP would be the average change in kinetic energy in 1 second.

It is not akin to that at all (you even say to a lesser extent while I would say it doesnt count at all). Toneri is consistently outputting the energy values even as he fights. He isnt charging an attack or anything even close to that. Using the 1 second value as the initial value is perfectly fine.

It is akin to it, the energy he is outputting is done over a period of time. I didn't say it's the same for a reason, it doesn't have to be charging an attack to perform something over time.
It doesn't matter if he is doing it casually w/o trying while focusing on something else, it has no effect on how one should approach this calc. He is indeed consistently outputting energy values, except they're not what you want them to be. Literally nothing you said explained why it's "perfectly fine to take 1 second as the initial value"

Bro this very assumption in itself is a huge one. So of course you would get a value like this wtf? Not to mention Toneri is constantly moving the moon, assuming some weird as acceleration and deceleration doesnt make sense. This is not like the Hamura and Hag's feat. He isnt going to move it to a point and stop or else he would have just push it of course enough for the moon to just smash into the planet. He obviously is just driving it to the planet as quickly as he can until it crashes in at enough speed to do enough damage. Simply put doing a calc like this for Toneri is incredibly wrong. It is also wrong for Hamura and Hags but not to the same extent.

It's literally an example for feats such as lifting/moving stuff to portray how great the difference could be, and it still remains the case even if Toneri was going to crash it without an acceleration-deceleration pair and just continuously moving it since time-frame is already known aka 55min.

In fact, crossing the entire distance in 55 minutes without decelerating even once only makes it worse since the maximum rate of change of KE the Moon achieved would be lower than what's the case with Hagromo and Hamura (since it has the same average speed even though it's been continuously accelerated towards earth)

They were like 10 meters apart later on it would have come back together instantly at that point.

If they're 10 meters apart and they're neither moving farther away nor moving closer that just means physics is dead in that scene (if theres no external intervention)

Doesn't mean you can assume GBE has been overcome just because it lets you scale Toneri higher.

I mean you say this as if I agree with the moon only having split 10 meters initially, I do think there was external intervention by Toneri considering he literally wanted to crash the moon into the planet it stands to reason that he would hold thr moon together. (I mean he is literally pushing the moon to the planet the entire time.)

The initial split is objectively 10s of km apart onscreen, the literal reason it got removed is due to people saying it is inconsistent with later views.

If it's considered inconsistent by people and thus og calc got removed, then that just means they didn't consider it to be 10s of km apart.

I'm not talking about what you considered, I'm talking about what the site considered when the OG calc got rejected.

I do think the original was perfectly correct. Unfortunately staff said no. And I dont want to blow my casket arguing in the thread.

I mentioned it even in the OP that either the GBE hasn't been overcome or the OG calc is correct. Because the arguments rejected in that threat would have to be used here to say that isn't the case.

 

[Nerd1435]

Is the choice of 30 minutes totally arbitrary?

Not totally but kinda. I used it as a low-end since DontTalk rejected using KE corresponding to average speed (I too agree with this part tho)

Copy-pasting what I said there.

"The thing is, to cover that distance in the given time-frame you could

1. Accelerate to an extremely high speed in a short amount of time and slowly decelerate for rest of the time

2. Slowly accelerate for a long time to an extremely high speed and then suddenly decelerate

3. accelerate and decelerate for equal times

If they crossed the same distance (aka equal area under those graphs), then you'd see the least maximum speed in case-3. Thus also the minimum "maximum rate of change of Kinetic Energy" (which is proportional to d/dt(v^2) = 2v.dv/dt = 2v*a)

Ofcourse there could also be cases where there are multiple acceleration-deceleration pairs but I doubt they'd move the Moon in such a funky way. Besides, I believe the change in speed in those cases would be even more stark compared to the three cases above. There could be more complications within case-3 like the acceleration/deceleration not being constant but I think constant can be taken as granted for a random or average case, it would also be the simplest assumption."

 

[Rocker1189]

No lol, you don't have to nuke KE calcs in general. Calcs that involve throwing/Projecting/Imparting KE at a time remain as is.

That is literally what the calc is doing, calcing how much he imparted on the object at a time.

It's a fact that considering the KE corresponding to average speed may very well be far far higher than KE the said object can possibly achieve in an instant over the entire period of it's travel.

And it is also a fact that it could be far far lower, what is your point? You literally can not tell.

And moreover just because you guys always did something with no basis doesn't mean it would be the true unless proven otherwise.

We did not do something with no basis, we did a basic KE calc. We dont need to prove anything beyond, "Toneri moved the moon this much on average in 1 second." Which is good enough as he is constantly move the moon at a certain speed which we calced.

KE corresponding to average speed =/= average AP, average AP would be the average change in kinetic energy in 1 second.

That average change in KE in a second would be over 5000 meters until you can prove otherwise.

It is akin to it, the energy he is outputting is done over a period of time. I didn't say it's the same for a reason, it doesn't have to be charging an attack to perform something over time.

It doesnt have to be a charge attack but a charge attack has completely different implications to moon something constantly.

It doesn't matter if he is doing it casually w/o while focusing on something else, it has no effect on how one should approach his calc.

That was never a point.

He is indeed consistently outputting energy values, except they're not what you want them to be.

I dont "want them to be" anything. They have been calced to be one thing.

Literally nothing you said explained why it's "perfectly fine to take 1 second as the initial value"

And you have not explained a proper alternative and no you Hagoromo calc does not work for it in any way.

In fact, crossing the entire distance in 55 minutes without decelerating even once only makes it worse since the maximum speed the Moon achieved would be lower than what's the case with Hagromo and Hamura (since it has the same average speed even though it's been continuously accelerated towards earth)

You would have to prove that it is constantly accelerating towards the earth. That is on you not me. Again Toneri is the one constantly controlling the moon's speed. Nothing else is. And the moment he stops doing so the moon stops entirely. Meaning that there is no acceleration on the moon moving towards the planet. So if you can prove that the moon is constantly accelerating towards the earth in the movie then you might have a case at all. Also you keep stating the case with Hagoromo and Hamura but on top of their feat being quite different they had to move the moon off planet first. This in it self is fundementally different to moving the moon from its starting point to the planet.

If they're 10 meters apart and they're neither moving farther away nor moving closer that just means physics is dead in that scene (if theres no external intervention)

Doesn't mean you can assume GBE has been overcome just because it lets you scale Toneri higher.

There is explicitly external intervention by Toneri. He is literally pushing the moon towards the planet with TK

I see a lot of accusations here.

If it's considered inconsistent by people and thus og calc got removed, then that just means they didn't consider it to be 10s of km apart.

I'm not talking about what you considered, I'm talking about what the site considered when the OG calc got rejected.

Then why are you using it as an argument against me. You say I am being inconsistent and why I believe that it would be 10 meters together while not pushing further apart I am answering based on what I believe not what the site believes.

I mentioned it even in the OP that either the GBE hasn't been overcome or the OG calc is correct. Because the arguments rejected in that threat would have to be used here to say that isn't the case.

And I have said I think the OG calc is correct. The arguments have been accepted multiple times the only difference now is that a staff member said it.

 

[Rocker1189]

Not totally but kinda. I used it as a low-end since DontTalk rejected using KE corresponding to average speed

Also where did DT say this? I would like to see this statement.

As far as I can see in your calc he disagreed specifically with the timeframe and when they decided to stop pushing the moon. Rather than using KE with average speed.

 

[KatBoi69]

Not totally but kinda. I used it as a low-end since DontTalk rejected using KE corresponding to average speed (I too agree with this part tho)

Copy-pasting what I said there.

"The thing is, to cover that distance in the given time-frame you could

1. Accelerate to an extremely high speed in a short amount of time and slowly decelerate for rest of the time

2. Slowly accelerate for a long time to an extremely high speed and then suddenly decelerate

3. accelerate and decelerate for equal times

If they crossed the same distance (aka equal area under those graphs), then you'd see the least maximum speed in case-3. Thus also the minimum "maximum rate of change of Kinetic Energy" (which is proportional to d/dt(v^2) = 2v.dv/dt = 2v*a)

Ofcourse there could also be cases where there are multiple acceleration-deceleration pairs but I doubt they'd move the Moon in such a funky way. Besides, I believe the change in speed in those cases would be even more stark compared to the three cases above. There could be more complications within case-3 like the acceleration/deceleration not being constant but I think constant can be taken as granted for a random or average case, it would also be the simplest assumption."

I get the mathematical/physical reasoning behind your choice of equations. What I was taking issue with was your choice to assign the time taken to 30 minutes for both acceleration and deceleration, and then argue that we have to care because it leads to a 100x difference in energy.

I'm trying to think of anything important that occurs on the scale of 60 total minutes in Naruto, frankly.

 

[Nerd1435]

Writing long comment threads is exhausting but whatever.

Toneri moving the Moon a certain amount on average doesn't mean it is the average change in kinetic energy over one second.

"Toneri moved the Moon by a certain distance in 1 second on average" doesn't mean he imparted KE equivalent to that speed on average. That relation makes zero sense. Putting KE corresponding to average speed in a fancy way doesn't make it right.

We get AP by finding the KE imparted in 1 second, aka rate of change of KE.

You can literally take a random example to see how wrong it is.

Take an object continuously accelerating for a distance d in a time t.

What you're saying: AP or KE = 0.5*m*(d/t)^2 ....eq.1
since d/t is the distance an object moves on average in 1 second.

Now let's check it.
Acceleration of object = 2d/t^2
To find the maximum change in KE in one second, let's look at the final instance.
Speed at time t = 2d*t/t^2
Speed at time t-1 = 2*d*(t-1)/t^2
Change in KE = (2*m*d^2/t^4) * [2t-1] .... eq.2

Divide eq.2 with eq.1, you get 4*(2/t-1/t^2) here t is always > 1 since we considered the change at last second and thus t is at least > 1

What does this mean?
At higher values of t, even the largest change in kinetic energy is far lower than the KE corresponding to average speed.
Take t=3300sec like in this case for example.
Difference would be like a 400x

This should at least make you understand how wrong that line of thinking is no matter how "correct" that might sound to you.

Just because there could be cases where the result would be far lower doesn't take away the fact that the method is wrong. (Not that there would be such cases here unless really wacky assumptions are taken)

While creating profiles we can lowball stuff a bit but not wank them.

The very fact that we can't tell how the KE we get from average speed compares to the actual change in KE AND the fact that we know the differences could be massive implies the method isn't something that can be used. Not even hard to understand.

.

If you paid attention to the OP, I was saying it with the fact that the OG calc is rejected in consideration. Aka Toneri didn't move them back.

And you went on mentioning how Toneri pulled them back to counter what I said....

It is blatantly contradictory that the GBE has been overcome if Toneri didn't pull them back.
And moreover you said "they stopped when they're 10m apart without moving closer so GBE has been overcome!", the reasoning is horribly wrong here eitherway. Them stopping 10m apart without moving closer still doesn't prove how GBE has been overcome.

I'm arguing either the OG calc is correct or the GBE hasn't been overcome and the current calc is wrong. I don't understand why you're again using how Toneri pulled them back when the entire reason I said it should be considered wrong is because the reasons used have been rejected before and if not, the OG calc would be correct eitherway and this calc isn't required.

About the DT thing, read the thread under his comment on the calc I already linked. He's saying that if the Moon is moved over a period of time, the total energy can't be used.

The 1 hour is considered for Hagormo and Hamura sealing Kaguya and moving the Moon.

 

[Nerd1435]

Writing long paragraphs is annoying. If you want I will ask DontTalk to comment here or read the thread.
That's probably better instead.

 

[Nerd1435]

And just dividing the KE corresponding to average speed with time taken is still better than taking the entire KE corresponding to average speed.

Even though it's a lowball, at least there is no chance for super inflation

 

[KatBoi69]

Writing long comment threads is exhausting but whatever.

Toneri moving the Moon a certain amount on average doesn't mean it is the average change in kinetic energy over one second.

"Toneri moved the Moon by a certain distance in 1 second on average" doesn't mean he imparted KE equivalent to that speed on average. That relation makes zero sense. Putting KE corresponding to average speed in a fancy way doesn't make it right.

We get AP by finding the KE imparted in 1 second, aka rate of change of KE.

You can literally take a random example to see how wrong it is.

Take an object continuously accelerating for a distance d in a time t.

What you're saying: AP or KE = 0.5*m*(d/t)^2 ....eq.1
since d/t is the distance an object moves on average in 1 second.

Now let's check it.
Acceleration of object = 2d/t^2
To find the maximum change in KE in one second, let's look at the final instance.
Speed at time t = 2d*t/t^2
Speed at time t-1 = 2*d*(t-1)/t^2
Change in KE = (2*m*d^2/t^4) * [2t-1] .... eq.2

Divide eq.2 with eq.1, you get 4*(2/t-1/t^2) here t is always > 1 since we considered the change at last second and thus t is at least > 1

What does this mean?
At higher values of t, even the largest change in kinetic energy is far lower than the KE corresponding to average speed.
Take t=3300sec like in this case for example.
Difference would be like a 400x

This should at least make you understand how wrong that line of thinking is no matter how "correct" that might sound to you.

Just because there could be cases where the result would be far lower doesn't take away the fact that the method is wrong. (Not that there would be such cases here unless really wacky assumptions are taken)

While creating profiles we can lowball stuff a bit but not wank them.

The very fact that we can't tell how the KE we get from average speed compares to the actual change in KE AND the fact that we know the differences could be massive implies the method isn't something that can be used. Not even hard to understand.

.

If you paid attention to the OP, I was saying it with the fact that the OG calc is rejected in consideration. Aka Toneri didn't move them back.

And you went on mentioning how Toneri pulled them back to counter what I said....

It is blatantly contradictory that the GBE has been overcome if Toneri didn't pull them back.
And moreover you said "they stopped when they're 10m apart without moving closer so GBE has been overcome!", the reasoning is horribly wrong here eitherway. Them stopping 10m apart without moving closer still doesn't prove how GBE has been overcome.

I'm arguing either the OG calc is correct or the GBE hasn't been overcome and the current calc is wrong. I don't understand why you're again using how Toneri pulled them back when the entire reason I said it should be considered wrong is because the reasons used have been rejected before and if not, the OG calc would be correct eitherway and this calc isn't required.

About the DT thing, read the thread under his comment on the calc I already linked. He's saying that if the Moon is moved over a period of time, the total energy can't be used.

The 1 hour is considered for Hagormo and Hamura sealing Kaguya and moving the Moon.

Some perspective: Every calc on this wiki is, to some degree, an approximation. There are many things you should be upset about, calculation wise (like using static images for time dependent calcs, or capping ftl kinetic energy contributions, or not treating matter creation using e=mc^2, or.....the list goes on) before we get to this KE treatment.

Because everything here is already approximate, it really does matter that, when a more accurate but complex calc method is proposed, we ask the question "under a REASONABLE test situation, does it make a difference?" Because all we really care about is ballparking such that we can rank these characters and use the ranks for debate.

If this was a debate, I'd ask the same thing, "OK, my calc method isn't the most detailed treatment, show me that yours makes a difference." And if you used the 30 minute approximation above, I'd still be saying, "That doesn't line up with the speeds you see in Naruto, I can pick x faster time, which makes more sense for the verse, and leads to a smaller KE difference." You just end up falling victim to the same approximation/contradiction issue that you brought up with the calc you're disputing.

 

[Nerd1435]

Totally missed this.

The moon doesn't magically stop moving when he stops deliberately pushing it.

The speed it gained till that point remains and it keeps accelerating towards earth due to gravity.

Him pushing it towards the planet is the most basic and most likely assumption. Pushing involves applying force and applying force involves acceleration.

If he already made it attain the average speed in a short time, then he wouldnt have had to bother pushing it since it would've reached it in the same time if not faster due to acceleration due to earth's gravity. But that isn't the case, he kept pushing it.
Unless he stopped applying force at some point?

 

[KatBoi69]

Totally missed this.

The moon doesn't magically stop moving when he stops deliberately pushing it.

The speed it gained till that point remains and it keeps accelerating towards earth due to gravity.

Him pushing it towards the planet is the most basic and most likely assumption. Pushing involves applying force and applying force involves acceleration.

If he already made it attain the average speed in a short time, then he wouldnt have had to bother pushing it since it would've reached it in the same time if not faster due to acceleration due to earth's gravity. But that isn't the case, he kept pushing it.
Unless he stopped applying force at some point?

Except you're literally talking about magical entities, so it could just be magic.

 

[Rocker1189]

"Toneri moved the Moon by a certain distance in 1 second on average" doesn't mean he imparted KE equivalent to that speed on average. That relation makes zero sense. Putting KE corresponding to average speed in a fancy way doesn't make it right.

We have gone over this again and again. Yes it does not necessarily mean that he put in that exact amount at every instance. However he could have put in more or less. The point is it is an average.

Take an object continuously accelerating for a distance d in a time t.

Again you say continuously accelerating when there is nothing to imply this is the case. It is continuously moving there is no proof of the speed changing over the period unless you do have said proof in which case I would like to see it. So from the moment onwards what you say is wrong.

Acceleration of object = 2d/t^2

No need for this as there is no proof of acceleration.

This should at least make you understand how wrong that line of thinking is no matter how "correct" that might sound to you.

What I said above.

While creating profiles we can lowball stuff a bit but not wank them.

While creating profiles we tend to go for a middle ground actually which is what this is.

The very fact that we can't tell how the KE we get from average speed compares to the actual change in KE AND the fact that we know the differences could be massive implies the method isn't something that can be used. Not even hard to understand.

This would only be the case if there was a constant acceleration throughout the feat which there isnt without proof of it. There is a constant movement but no constant meaningful acceleration. Which is proven by the moon staying in place once the moving is stopped. This is not hard to understand either.

If you paid attention to the OP, I was saying it with the fact that the OG calc is rejected in consideration. Aka Toneri didn't move them back.

If you paid attention to me you would notice that regardless of that I stated what I thin of the feat. Also Toneri moving it back was simply ignored.

I'm arguing either the OG calc is correct or the GBE hasn't been overcome and the current calc is wrong. I don't understand why you're again using how Toneri pulled them back when the entire reason I said it should be considered wrong is because the reasons used have been rejected before and if not, the OG calc would be correct eitherway and this calc isn't required.

And I have stated that I believe the OG calc is correct.

I am not going to go along the Toneri buisness as it is useless.

About the DT thing, read the thread under his comment on the calc I already linked. He's saying that if the Moon is moved over a period of time, the total energy can't be used.

You do know that a lot of DT's response was based on that fact that you are moving an object off of the planet and then due to the planet pull on said object as it gets a certain distance away it would decelerate to a stop. This is the main reason he had issues with the moon being moved over a period of time to get to the spot it reached.

If he already made it attain the average speed in a short time, then he wouldnt have had to bother pushing it since it would've reached it in the same time if not faster due to acceleration of earth's gravity. But that isn't the case, he kept pushing it.

You know the earth is moving constantly right? He would have to continue applying a force to the moon so that it actually hits the Earth rather than miss entirely in the 50 mins that he is pushing the moon towards it in which the earth would have moved a circular distance of 99,000 km. In other words even with attaining the average speed in a short while he would have to keep applying a force to make sure the moon stays on course.

Even though it's a lowball, at least there is no chance for super inflation

For reasons I have stated above there is no super inflation in the first place.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

When "Hamura's Tenseigan" was destroyed by Naruto and Hinata, the moon's descent towards the earth was temporarily stopped until Toneri started moving it again iirc. This clearly shows that the Tenseigan, and later on Toneri himself, was controlling it the whole time.

 

[Nerd1435]

When "Hamura's Tenseigan" was destroyed by Naruto and Hinata, the moon's descent towards the earth was temporarily stopped until Toneri started moving it again iirc. This clearly shows that the Tenseigan, and later on himself, was controlling it the whole time.

Didn't know this

 

[Rocker1189]

Didn't know this

Wait this is a joke right?

 

[Nerd1435]

Didn't think of it*

 

[Rocker1189]

Didn't think of it*

Bruh..how many times did I say that the moon stopped moving when Toneri was not applying a force to it...

Ok, I am done I am wasting my time.

 

[Nerd1435]

If Toneri could give it enough acceleration to let it achieve the average speed in just a short period of time anyway, he could've very well predicted the trajectory of Earth and pushed it such that they will eventually collide.

But the Moon entirely stopping if Toneri doesn't feed it with energy anymore is something I didn't think of before cuz once the Moon attains a certain speed, it should have continued moving. But it didn't happen.

I thought you were just saying it will stop if he doesn't feed it energy, not that it actually happened in the movie. So I tried saying it will still move with the speed it already attained even if he doesn't push it.

Not that this point alone makes the calc accurate or removes the possibility/reduces the likelihood that he's constantly pushing it but whatever Not in a mood to argue the topic even more rn, it's night for me

This can probably be considered ded unless more people come and argue. DT might comment here tho since I messaged him nearly an hour ago

 

[Rocker1189]

he could've very well predicted the trajectory of Earth and pushed it such that they will eventually collide.

Predicting trajectory has nothing to do with AP, what kind of argument is this?

Not that this point alone makes the calc accurate or removes the possibility/reduces the likelihood that he's constantly pushing it but whatever Not in a mood to argue the topic even more rn, it's night for me

Its makes it far more accurate than whatever you were trying to do however. He is constantly moving it with TK. This is something extremely blatant. When he stops doing so the moon stops too.

Actually read my entire comments please not 40% of it.