- 32,784
- 37,964
Weird, because energy-mass conversion alone won't wield anything higher than 4-C.
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Official Calculations Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vs battles wiki
- 3,055
- 2,461
Shake is talking about some quick maths of mine on discord.
My calc mostly comes from the amount of molecules on Earth (133,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) and how Earth is mostly made out of oxygen plus various other minerals.
In a chemical energy reaction for two 4 O–H bonds results in 440 kcal, though since this is for bonds being formed I guess it'd be more fitting if I used the results from the energy released by broken bonds, the more fitting number there would be 111 kcal. I basically multiplied that result with the amount of molecules on Earth.
Though I also said after those quick maths that there was a good chance I skipped a lot and got one or two things wrong, and my sources may have been fishy as well.
ShakeResounding
He/Him- 7,958
- 6,165
So, does that sound like a valid method to the other calc members? Or is there a more viable/preferred alternative method?
- 4,779
- 4,353
If I'm doing a cloud calculation can I use the radius as the viewing distance if I'm finding the volume?
- 32,784
- 37,964
Aye, since the radius IS THE VIEWING DISTANCE after all.
- 4,779
- 4,353
- 32,784
- 37,964
This is assuming you're just doing a normal cloud calculation and the cloud isn't actually fully shown in a full planet shot or something.
- 4,779
- 4,353
Well what I'm doing is trying to find the mass of clouds that was dispersed 100km+
- 32,784
- 37,964
Hmmmm, you have the diameter, right? And you know the cloud type? Various cloud types have various cloud thicknesses. It's just a matter of multiplying the cloud area with height to get volume, and then using cloud density to get mass. And then you use KE on it depending on how it was moved.
(1/12) * mass * velocity^2 for omnidirectional expansion/dispersion, or 0.5 * mass * velocity^2 if the cloud was moved in the classical one direction.
- 4,779
- 4,353
Appreciate it
speedster352
He/Him- 17,228
- 1,745
Does anyone know any apps for drawing lines and seeing the pixels?
- 32,784
- 37,964
I use a PC so I'm mostly accustomed to using paint.net and MS Paint. Paint.net accurately gives pixel lengths.
speedster352
He/Him- 17,228
- 1,745
Hypootehcially if you were to take Gil saying he will destroy the forest at face value what will it yeield? Same for sunshine and hypotecially if you where to use e=mc^2 what would that yield?
speedster352
He/Him- 17,228
- 1,745
Giltunder said that he will destoy the entire forest(forest of dreams was a 3 day walk) what would that yield?
- 4,779
- 4,353
Wrong thread
- 17,468
- 12,848
Photoshop does as well btw... Think it's called line tool
speedster352
He/Him- 17,228
- 1,745
So how do I find out the length?
- 17,468
- 12,848
You hold it and drag the line in any direction and it will tell you the pixels, then you can color the line when the line is created by pressing stroke and selecting a color, you can then even customize the size of the line as well which is under the stroke button
You would need a size of something if you wanna know the length of the thing you are calculating, otherwise you could use assumptions
DenLitz
He/Him- 309
- 143
About this feat I calculated :
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:DenLitz/Calculation_Taesoo_destroy_brick_wall
is it correct? KLOL has evaluated it, but I'd be calmer if more than 1 CGM evaluate it, because it's a little confusing for me. So if other CGMs would like to check it out, that would be very helpful.
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:DenLitz/Calculation_Taesoo_destroy_brick_wall
is it correct? KLOL has evaluated it, but I'd be calmer if more than 1 CGM evaluate it, because it's a little confusing for me. So if other CGMs would like to check it out, that would be very helpful.
- 32,784
- 37,964
@Dark-Carioca @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan Would you be able to help out here, since you both have some experience regarding tensile strength calcs?
- 11,095
- 4,317
I'm not sure if the bricks are actually destroyed since you still see entire bricks.
- 32,784
- 37,964
Yeah, that's why I didn't use frag for the entire wall, I used the sides of the wall and their tiny surface area as the acting point for the tensile strength.
- 11,095
- 4,317
Aren't bricks usually like glued together with some special substance though? Might just be overcoming that glue rather than breaking brick.
- 32,784
- 37,964
isn't that glue supposed to be plaster which is nowadays made out of cement/concrete? AFAIK, modern bricks are made from concrete. Cement apparently has a tensile strength of 2 - 5 MPa. Should we use that instead?
DenLitz
He/Him- 309
- 143
If using Tensile Strength Cement, how about Tensile Strength Brick Wall? How does it work? I'm curious how the Tensile Strength Brick Wall is applied, if the tensile strength of the brick wall uses Tensile Strength of Cement.
- 32,784
- 37,964
Since the small area you calculated is the connection point for the bricks to stay connected to the wall, the most definite answer is that the actual thing being destroyed is the plaster glue holding them together.
You prolly could get higher results by calculating all the seams in the bricks that got detached but that's prolly going to be borderline impossible since we have no side-by-side shots to accurately compare the "before" and "after" of the feat. Hence, the side points will have to do as a low-ball.
DenLitz
He/Him- 309
- 143
He actually cracked the area around Tensile Strength.
He should have gotten a higher level of his low ball, if all of each side of the brick can be calc, I'll try my best.
So is Tensile Strength Cement more accurate here? Or Shear Strength Cement?
- 32,784
- 37,964
Once again, can't calc the cracks. Too unpredictable.
Be my guest. If you can find the lines between each of the bricks when it was intact and find the areas of those affected, lemme know. But the current area affected should be probably fine to use for now.
Tensile strength.
Last edited:
- 11,095
- 4,317
I'm not sure if tensile strength is completely accurate since it's supposed to be when a material fails from pulling it. Idk what to use for this, to be honest.
- 32,784
- 37,964
The bricks are being pushed away from their glued point. Kinda akin to Lizard tearing out a train's backside by pushing.
- 11,095
- 4,317
Yeah but for Lizard's case the force applied is parallel to the direction the top of the train being pulled apart, while in this case the cement isn't being pulled apart but rather bricks slide past it to fall out.
- 32,784
- 37,964
Pretty sure it was a rapid push, only upwards.
Not sure about that, it definitely looks like the cement being overpowered to the point where it just... fails.
- 6,880
- 8,028
Is there a formula for explosions in space?
- 32,784
- 37,964
Something something there was a discussion going on for a revolutionary shockwave formula that worked in both ground level and in space but it got put on ice
- 6,880
- 8,028
Does that mean there's no way to calc a space explosion?
- 32,784
- 37,964
At the moment? Nope.
- 15,591
- 11,882
Personally I think not knowing any way to do it, you can probably just do the ground formula, I mean it's inaccurate but it's the best we've got
- 6,880
- 8,028
But what if the explosion doesn't happen on ground?
- 32,784
- 37,964
Well, we know for sure that airburst is impossible in space because... well... no air.
- 6,880
- 8,028
Ground formula then
