Ninjago Planet size issue

[Lloydblitzed]

The current size used for Ninjago's planet size, which comes from this calc, is extremely flawed and makes no sense whatsoever.

Spoiler: Problem

The problems:
1. The city used as a reference to calculate the size is non canon

2. The calc suggest that Ninjago's Planet is only 10887.1 square km

So the Ninjago world has a total diameter of 117.73653 km, and thus it'd have a circumference of 369.88 km and surface area of 10887.1 square km.

Which implies the planet is smaller than the country of SPAIN, and essentially smaller than Cuba

3. The calc suggest that the Ninjago planet's diameter is 16.82x smaller than the radius of the smallest planet in the Universe, which is 1980km

4. Is a planet yet supposively smaller than Pluto?

5. Supposively country size yet has an entire rounded moon orbiting it (As well as the calc implying the world's diameter is smaller than the smallest gravitationally rounded object we know)?

Spoiler: Why Ninjago's Planet is not country sized

1. Litterally referred as a Planet by Nadakhan, which means it cannot be considered a Dwarf Planet (like Pluto) or a Moon (because it substains life)

2. Lloyd refers the Ninjago Light Island (right one) as an entire continent, which makes it impossible for the planet to be that small

3. The minimum radius as well as the average mass for a habitable planet is 0.5 Earth radii and 0.1 Earth masses, which translates to 3189.07km of radius and 5.972e+23 kg. Which overall makes it impossible for Ninjago to only be 117.73653km wide in diameter

Spoiler: Solution

The solution:
Essentially use this calc as a reference for Ninjago's true planet size, or simply assume it should around the size of Earth (which was confirmed by WoG but since its apparently banned...)

Agree: @TheOrangeGuy09 @Ghostimuscrime @CastoriceTheFifth @PedjaTarzan @Qurbonboev @AigerTheKing @TheRustyOne @Floxy178
Disagree:
Neutral:

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

I agree. But just to clarify:

The solution:
Essentially use this calc as a reference for Ninjago's true planet size, or simply assume it should around the size of Earth (which was confirmed by WoG but since its apparently banned...)

I used size of Earth on this calc. It only calcs the size of the continent.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

I agree. But just to clarify:

I used size of Earth on this calc. It only calcs the size of the continent.

Earth size is the default size for a Planet anyways

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Bump

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Bump

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Bump

Maybe DM a calc mod

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

It does sound super weird to say a celestial body is a planet and has moons orbiting it to be that small, if that city is actually non canon then I agree to using the baseline for planet earth unless there's evidence showing it's smaller, think we are lenient enough to allow Earth sizes for random planets

 

[Vzearr]

Gonna have to disagree here. The original calc is fine. Your debunks don’t hold up.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Gonna have to disagree here. The original calc is fine. Your debunks don’t hold up.

How exactly?

 

[Vzearr]

How exactly?

The current size used for Ninjago's planet size, which comes from this calc, is extremely flawed and makes no sense whatsoever.

Spoiler: Problem

The problems:
1. The calc suggest that Ninjago's Planet is only 10887.1 square km


Which implies the planet is smaller than the country of SPAIN, and essentially smaller than Cuba

2. The calc suggest that the Ninjago planet's diameter is 16.82x smaller than the radius of the smallest planet in the Universe, which is 1980km

3. Is a planet yet supposively smaller than Pluto?

4. Supposively country size yet has an entire rounded moon orbiting it (As well as the calc implying the world's diameter is smaller than the smallest gravitationally rounded object we know)?

5. The city used as a reference is non canon

Spoiler: Why Ninjago's Planet is not country sized

1. Litterally referred as a Planet by Nadakhan, which means it cannot be considered a Dwarf Planet (like Pluto) or a Moon (because it substains life)

2. Lloyd refers the Ninjago Light Island (right one) as an entire continent, which makes it impossible for the planet to be that small

Spoiler: Solution

The solution:
Essentially use this calc as a reference for Ninjago's true planet size, or simply assume it should around the size of Earth (which was confirmed by WoG but since its apparently banned...)

Agree:
Disagree:
Neutral:

All of it rides on assumptions and fallacious takes, I’ll go into depth when I’m on my Mac.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

fallacious

Is it fallacious to believe that a planet with a satellite should not be smaller than Cuba?

I think that at the very least debunks the calc, along with other stuff Lloydblitzed mentioned.

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

Let's give him some time to write out a proper response, if he does not you can discard his words

All of it rides on assumptions and fallacious takes

Also let's not bad mouth arguments without any basis, simply disagreeing and mentioning you'll elaborate later works

 

[Vzearr]

The current size used for Ninjago's planet size, which comes from this calc, is extremely flawed and makes no sense whatsoever.

Spoiler: Problem

The problems:
1. The calc suggest that Ninjago's Planet is only 10887.1 square km


Which implies the planet is smaller than the country of SPAIN, and essentially smaller than Cuba

Okay?

2. The calc suggest that the Ninjago planet's diameter is 16.82x smaller than the radius of the smallest planet in the Universe, which is 1980km

Okay?

3. Is a planet yet supposively smaller than Pluto?

Okay? Planets can be smaller than Pluto.

4. Supposively country size yet has an entire rounded moon orbiting it (As well as the calc implying the world's diameter is smaller than the smallest gravitationally rounded object we know)?

Again, this is possible for the calculated size.

1. Litterally referred as a Planet by , which means it cannot be considered a Dwarf Planet (like Pluto) or a Moon (because it substains life)

Again, still possible iirc.

2. Lloyd refers the Ninjago Light Island (right one) as an entire continent, which makes it impossible for the planet to be that small

A continent can be small enough to fit into a world as small as Pluto.


Basically my response is most of your reasoning is appealing to incredulity.

 

[Vzearr]

Is it fallacious to believe that a planet with a satellite should not be smaller than Cuba?

I think that at the very least debunks the calc, along with other stuff Lloydblitzed mentioned.

Holy argument from incredulity.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Okay?

Okay?

This doesn't address the issue. A "smaller than Cuba" sized planet was never found irl and isn't realistic at all

Okay? Planets can be smaller than Pluto

Dwarf Planet =/= Planet. Nadakhan wording contradicts this. You are also implying Ninjago, who contains an entire ocean, is somewhat smaller than the smallest Sea

Again, this is possible for the calculated size.

If it was the case, the Earth would orbit the Moon due to being bigger, which isn't the case. And since we assume that Moons have the standard size of our irl Moon, it makes less sense

Again, still possible iirc.

Again. Dwarf Planet =/= Planet. Orange's calc, which use a direct footage of the planet itself to calc it, also contradict Dark's calc

A continent can be small enough to fit into a world as small as Pluto.

Even Australia is bigger than the full diameter of planet according to the calc, which is 117km wide. The city used as a referrence is non canon which makes the calc invalid regardless

 

[Vzearr]

This doesn't address the issue. A "smaller than Cuba" sized planet was never found irl and isn't realistic at all

But monkeys with genius level intellect is realistic. The fact that it's a possibility is why I'd reject it, because the current calculation doesn't rely on it, possibility

Dwarf Planet =/= Planet. Nadakhan wording contradicts this

Yk planets can be as small as dwarf planets right?

If it was the case, the Earth would orbit the Moon due to being bigger, which isn't the case. And since we assume that Moons have the standard size of our irl Moon, it makes less sense

Why would we assume that.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Holy argument from incredulity.

Not really, just being realistic.

Why would we assume that.

A planet smaller than Cuba would not have enough mass to attract any other celestial body smaller than it. Or putting it simpler: does Cuba attract Haiti?


Anyways, the fact that the map is non-canon already straight up debunks it (which was notably enough ignored), so this debate is useless.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

But monkeys with genius level intellect is realistic. The fact that it's a possibility is why I'd reject it, because the current calculation doesn't rely on it, possibility

Current calc relies on a non canon city to begin with....

Yk planets can be as small as dwarf planets right?

There's a reason Pluto isn't considered a Planet anymore....(which is btw, smaller than Kepler-37b)

Why would we assume that.

Because we don't have proof the Moon is smaller than the standard one? Because its clearly not on the same size as the smallest spherical Moon which is still bigger than the planet (according to Dark's calc) and like I said, we don't see the Earth Orbit the Moon

 

[Vzearr]

Because we don't have proof the Moon is smaller than the standard one? Because its clearly not on the same size as the smallest spherical Moon which is still bigger than the planet (according to Dark's calc) and like I said, we don't see the Earth Orbit the Moon

We don't have proof it's smaller than the moon that orbits a completely different planet.

See how it doesn't make much sense?

 

[DavidTPPM]

Vzearr is right that most of your arguments are just personal incredulity. You finding the planet being so small hard to believe doesn't mean it's wrong.

That being said, if the calc relies on something that's not canon you should just prove that it's not canon and the removal should be good to go imo.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Vzearr is right that most of your arguments are just personal incredulity. You finding the planet being so small hard to believe doesn't mean it's wrong.

Yes, I do find that a celestial body stated to specifically be a planet being far smaller than the smallest circular Moon, especially when there's minimum size for Planets to qualify as planets, is wrong. Using a clip from the actual planet gives a totally different result:

Ninjago size

Radius of Earth = 446px = 6,371km

Ninjago length = 470px = 6,713km

Ninjago width = 231px = 3299.8km

Depth of earth's crust = 70km

That being said, if the calc relies on something that's not canon you should just prove that it's not canon and the removal should be good to go imo.

It was said from the beginning

5. The city used as a reference is non canon

 

[Lloydblitzed]

We don't have proof it's smaller than the moon that orbits a completely different planet.

See how it doesn't make much sense?

How can a 117km wide "planet" have enough mass to orbit Moons? Also, a Havard study cites that a planet cannot be below 2.7% of the Earth mass to be habitable

 

[DavidTPPM]

Yes, I do find that a celestial body stated to specifically be a planet being far smaller than the smallest circular Moon, especially when there's minimum size for Planets to qualify as planets, is wrong.

Unless you can back that up with some objective evidence like scientific research/standards/something that proves it's impossible, all this is is your personal incredulity.

Like, I understand where you're coming from. It feels much more intuitive to point out how weird the current conclusion seems, but that simply doesn't work as an argument on its own and instead got you caught up in long winded arguments that you're basically bound to lose.

Using a clip from the actual planet gives a totally different result:

Idk if I'm misreading the calc but this seems to assume the planet is as big as earth and calculate the size of island off of that. It doesn't seem to be calculating the size of the planet.

It was said from the beginning

Yeah then just go from that. Something like

"The current planet size calculation is invalid as it relies on non canon material. Due to its similarities to earth and canon title of a planet we should instead go back to the standard assumption that it's earth sized"

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

People are overlooking that simply calling something a planet already carries baseline requirements. You cannot label it like that without giving it a certain size and mass, stars need to maintain a minimum size to be considered stars, brown dwarfs sit in a separate category for being too massive to be planets but not massive enough to ignite like stars. Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet precisely because it failed to meet the key planetary conditions:

• It's not the dominant body in its orbital path.
• Its too small to gravitationally clear away or capture nearby objects.
• It shares its orbital zone with countless Kuiper Belt bodies and even crosses Neptune’s path. (A proper planet, is large enough to own its playground, either absorbing, ejecting, or capturing other bodies so it can dominate that region.)

Seeing how OP lists it being labelled as a planet and mentions a moon of some sort (capturing bodies near it), it logically cannot become that small, so unless the author gives explicit numbers for the small planet parameters it's nothing but headcanon.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Unless you can back that up with some objective evidence like scientific research/standards/something that proves it's impossible, all this is is your personal incredulity.

Being qualified as a planet would mean it fits these criteras

1. is in orbit around the Sun,
2. has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
3. has "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit.

According to the same article, Rocky bodies should be at least 800km and 5e+20 kg in mass to qualify for the roudness shape standard (which is way bigger than the suggested size from the calc)

And the minimum radius as well as the average mass for a habitable planet is 0.5 Earth radii and 0.1 Earth masses, which translates to 3189.07km of radius and 5.972e+23 kg. Which overall makes it impossible for Ninjago to only be 117.73653km wide in diameter

Idk if I'm misreading the calc but this seems to assume the planet is as big as earth and calculate the size of island off of that. It doesn't seem to be calculating the size of the planet.

Nah, it use the non canon city to calc the a portion of the Island and then the full diameter of the planet (supposively 117.73653km) as well as its surface area to calc how much flooding the entire planet would yield at

Yeah then just go from that. Something like

"The current planet size calculation is invalid as it relies on non canon material. Due to its similarities to earth and canon title of a planet we should instead go back to the standard assumption that it's earth sized"

Alr

 

[DavidTPPM]

Nah, it use the non canon city to calc the a portion of the Island and then the full diameter of the planet (supposively 117.73653km) as well as its surface area to calc how much flooding the entire planet would yield at

No here I was talking about the calc you want to use to replace the current one. This one

Nadakhan Lifting Strength

vsbattles.fandom.com

As far as I understand the calc, it's not measuring the planet size but rather assuming it's the size of earth and measuring the size of an island based on that.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

No here I was talking about the calc you want to use to replace the current one. This one

Nadakhan Lifting Strength

vsbattles.fandom.com

As far as I understand the calc, it's not measuring the planet size but rather assuming it's the size of earth and measuring the size of an island based on that.

The island part was to calc an LS feat but the first half is to calc their Earth's size yeah

 

[PedjaTarzan]

while i agree that most of counter arguments for sounds fallacious, it should still be considered how possible is it REALISTICALLY have planets that small, because then its not even possible to have planet that sustains life, other than that i agree that the standard earth and moon size should be used instead.
and dont even bring the “its just fiction part”
because for calc you literally use real life physics and therefore you would use real life science
AND there currently isnt anything scientifically proven to have planet THAT small while sustaining life and having celestial object orbit around it
I agree with OP

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Bump

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Bump

Can thread staff review it or it must be calc staff?

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Can thread staff review it or it must be calc staff?

I saw Thread Mods engaging with some CGM threads so maybe

 

[Vzearr]

Can thread staff review it or it must be calc staff?

Why would a thread moderator be able to evaluate calculation debunks.

 

[Ghostimuscrime]

Why would a thread moderator be able to evaluate calculation debunks.

if there is a will there is a way



(Jokes aside, just request CGMs to look at this or ask a staff to tag em here)

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Bump

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Bump

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Bump

 

[Qurbonboev]

Gonna have to disagree here. The original calc is fine. Your debunks don’t hold up.

It's not. Even putting aside canonicity of it(which is death sentence), there are another problem with it. It assumes that huge map convey size of small details(like city or small islands) faithfully (size by size). But it's widespread practice in cartography to inflate size of small details for practical purposes. For example, size and length of Norwegian fjords are routinely increased by very sizeable amount. Size by size faithful representation of Norway fjords would make it coast look smooth. If someone tried to calculate Earth size based on comparison of small scale maps of Norway(where fjords dimensions are painted accurately) to global maps, he would get wildly smaller values for Earth size than actual ones.
It's normal to assume that map creators(of this particular map that calc uses) would too inflate size of city and its nearby island to make them more noticeable. So my objection applies to it

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Bump

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Damn this planet might stay smaller than Cuba

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Damn this planet might stay smaller than Cuba

Ninjago as a franchize will end before CGM takes a look at this