• 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.

One Piece: Black Hole Mechanics

Status
Not open for further replies.
In all seriousness I don't know what your talking about. Votes are split, and all the opposition's points are just being regurgitated over and over even though they've been debunked. Giving into Damage just because he's stone walling is a bad look. Given that mods can vote on their own threads, Clover, and Migue agree, and Damage and DT have been mostly debunked, I think it's safe to say that the pro-op team has won.
 
That_moron2 said:
In all seriousness I don't know what your talking about. Votes are split, and all the opposition's points are just being regurgitated over and over even though they've been debunked. Giving into Damage just because he's stone walling is a bad look. Given that mods can vote on their own threads, Clover, and Migue agree, and Damage and DT have been mostly debunked, I think it's safe to say that the pro-op team has won.
Click to expand...
"Debunked" ≠ "Vote changed"
And "debunked" ≠ "Known to be debunked by all"
 
That_moron2 said:
So basically your argument is that it just doesn't seem right. That's weak. The Yami Yami no mi is special because it has a physical form, i.e mass. It using mass in its power makes sense. The gravity manipulator of Fujtora has an entirely different fruit that is never compared with Blackbeard, and devil fruits are always unique, save for those select fruits(i.e superiors). You admit it has mass, but somehow it doesn't suck things in with mass even though its gravitational pull was noted by Oda himself to be similar to a black hole which pulls things in with mass and not gravity manipulation.
Click to expand...
Bro how can you distill my entire argument down to "it just doesn't seem right" when that isn't my main contention. I'm not saying that it doesn't fit my personal preference of evidence or something. I'm saying the evidence itself doesn't support the interpretation you're trying to derive from it, it's an argument of interpretations, not an argument of personal preference. Please don't devolve my contentions like that dude.

The Yami Yami's considered special not because of the "mass" it has but rather the gravitational pull it generates and the other esoteric properties it has like the nullification and absorption of Devil Fruits. The actual "mass" portion of the ability is never, heavily commented on or pointed out. It's those stated above that are. So acting like it's a part of that grouping would be incorrect.

Both fruits never being compared doesn't prove or disprove anything since both aren't a part of the same "category" of Devil Fruits, one manipulates gravitational directions purely while the other creates shadows that can manipulate gravitational pull and crush. One is a direct property while the other is a sub-ability.

I'm going to be extremely direct with you, the statement doesn't assume anything in regards to the composition of the Yami Yami. That's you presupposing such because it's stated to have similar properties to that of an actual black hole. Y'all are seeing the statement that says "It also has an infinite gravitational pull that keeps any light from escaping. This part of the technique is similar to that of a celestial black hole." and the previous explanation of what Black Holes are to connect dots which are never expanded upon.

An object having similar properties, like it's explained that the Yami Yami has, isn't evidence of it having a similar composition. You can continue to act like the statement supports your interpretation directly, when in fact it doesn't. It doesn't support either interpretation because the statement doesn't delve into the composition of Blackbeard's stuff, only its properties.
 
That_moron2 said:
In all seriousness I don't know what your talking about. Votes are split, and all the opposition's points are just being regurgitated over and over even though they've been debunked. Giving into Damage just because he's stone walling is a bad look. Given that mods can vote on their own threads, Clover, and Migue agree, and Damage and DT have been mostly debunked, I think it's safe to say that the pro-op team has won.
Click to expand...

Not being convinced by the opposition is not "stone walling".
 
Exec leaning disagree still means that the thread rn is more in favor of disagree than agree moron. And while Exec did say they were uncomfortable giving a concrete answer themselves, they also said they’re fine with DT’s verdict.
 
765767298484797490.webp
 
Can y'all stop crying about people disagreeing with the assumptions made by the calc, acting like we're only doing this because it's One Piece and that's it?

Like, this constant demonization of our side is annoying, we aren't boogeymen trying to "downplay" this feat because we don't want Tier 5 One Piece. I personally don't care what the verse scales to because I'm not a supporter or opponent of the verse, I'm entirely neutral. One Piece can be tier 2 for all I care, as long as the evidence for it exists and is consistent. I just don't agree with the assumptions made by the calc. That's it.

Goobs.
 
Deceived3596 said:
Can y'all stop crying about people disagreeing with the assumptions made by the calc, acting like we're only doing this because it's One Piece and that's it?

Like, this constant demonization of our side is annoying, we aren't boogeymen trying to "downplay" this feat because we don't want Tier 5 One Piece. I personally don't care what the verse scales to because I'm not a supporter or opponent of the verse, I'm entirely neutral. One Piece can be tier 2 for all I care, as long as the evidence for it exists and is consistent. I just don't agree with the assumptions made by the calc. That's it.

Goobs.
Click to expand...
We're talking about the people with the power to vote

Not you.

We don't care if you disagree. We care if the ppl who can vote disagree just to disagree
 
KT you know Deceived’s message wasn’t “stop assuming I’m disagreeing to disagree”, he’s speaking on behalf of everyone who disagrees. Like what the hell are you on about? If you wanna presuppose ulterior motives go do so off site or sumn, stop cluttering the thread with that useless whining. Your response as a thread mod should be “yes guys let’s remain civil and on topic, pointing fingers at imaginary motives won’t get anyone anywhere”, not justifying it by insinuating y’all are on some righteous witch-hunt against these alleged ulterior motives that are nothing behind finger pointing speculation. Gahlee
 
Deceived3596 said:
What the calc is doing is effectively bypassing our black hole standards by assuming properties similar to, but not exact replicas of, black holes in our world and through using those properties, assuming it gains them through the exact same means as our black holes in real life. It's hiding a presumption being made, which isn't good and is inherently faulty.
Click to expand...
Okay no. I already went over this with Don't Talk, but for the sake of comprehension I will restate it here.
The Yami Yami no mi still sucks in light, that is undebatable. Blackbeard himself says it and data books back it up. You yourself acknowledge it doesn't behave like a black hole but shares the quality of immense gravity. Which means it can suck in light. K.T. is using that principle to calculate the mass of this object similar to a black hole, using a general escape velocity formula.
Click to expand...
And not a black hole formula. "But he must use a black hole formula since it sucks in light" you say. If we followed the proper physics of light then we wouldn't have an FTL rating. To elaborate, if someone was actually moving at light speed then they would have to have infinite mass. If we can tolerate people moving at light speed without turning into a black hole then we can tolerate something having the gravity to suck in light and not be a black hole.
Deceived3596 said:
I explained why, and so has DontTalk, that using a basic escape velocity formula doesn't matter with our contentions. Our contentions don't extend to the formulas themselves in terms of fundamental, mathematical disagreements, it extends to assumptions made by the calc.
Click to expand...
The assumption that it sucks in light? Because that isn't an assumption. You are giving arguments that were debunked 2 pages ago. And to be frank its getting annoying. Basically what y'all are doing is posting the same shit over and over again, just with different wording, and your only defense is "I'm not convinced". Guess what, most of the time I'm not convinced by your arguments either, but if I can't come up with anything new, I pack it up. I could go on about how terrible this behavior is, but it doesn't support my point and makes me lose credibility.
Deceived3596 said:
I don't have an issue with Blackbeard being capable of controlling the crush strength of his gravity. I can see valid arguments against the interpretation of this gravity producing infinite force, but that's an issue for someone else to bring up, not me.
Click to expand...
Then we don't have a problem.
Deceived3596 said:
No one has disagreed with this object having mass, the contention lies with the amount of mass it has. Y'all believe it has mass equivalent with its gravitational pull, we don
Click to expand...
I already addressed this.
Deceived3596 said:
Both fruits never being compared doesn't prove or disprove anything since both aren't a part of the same "category" of Devil Fruits, one manipulates gravitational directions purely while the other creates shadows that can manipulate gravitational pull and crush. One is a direct property while the other is a sub-ability.
Click to expand...

The Yami Yami no mi is special because it has a physical form, i.e mass. It using mass in its power makes sense. The gravity manipulator of Fujtora has an entirely different fruit that is never compared with Blackbeard, and devil fruits are always unique, save for those select fruits(i.e superiors). You admit it has mass, but somehow it doesn't suck things in with mass even though its gravitational pull was noted by Oda himself to be similar to a black hole which pulls things in with mass and not gravity manipulation.
Click to expand...
But you did have a counterpoint...

Deceived3596 said:
The Yami Yami's considered special not because of the "mass" it has but rather the gravitational pull it generates and the other esoteric properties it has like the nullification and absorption of Devil Fruits. The actual "mass" portion of the ability is never, heavily commented on or pointed out. It's those stated above that are. So acting like it's a part of that grouping would be incorrect.
Click to expand...
Which was already addressed in the second half of my post.

The gravity manipulator of Fujtora has an entirely different fruit that is never compared with Blackbeard, and devil fruits are always unique, save for those select fruits(i.e superiors).
Click to expand...
What's worse is that all the superiors were listed out by Oda at a time when Fujitora and Blackbeard's powers were both shown and he didn't list them.
The amount of quoting I've had to do here is making the forum have a seizure so I'll split this into two parts.
 
2/2
Deceived3596 said:
I'm going to be extremely direct with you, the statement doesn't assume anything in regards to the composition of the Yami Yami. That's you presupposing such because it's stated to have similar properties to that of an actual black hole. Y'all are seeing the statement that says "It also has an infinite gravitational pull that keeps any light from escaping. This part of the technique is similar to that of a celestial black hole." and the previous explanation of what Black Holes are to connect dots which are never expanded upon.
Click to expand...
So you need Oda to say verbatim that it sucks in light via mass? The full quote literally refers to the mass of a black hole
"If there were a star as dense as the sun and 500 times as large, it would not emit light because its escape velocity would exceed that of light, and no information could be obtained by observation of such an object".
Before saying that Blackbeard's black holes are the same in this way
It also has an infinite gravitational pull that keeps any light from escaping. This part of the technique is similar to that of a celestial black hole.
Basically saying that the method the black hole sucks in light is the same(i.e mass).
Deceived3596 said:
and the previous explanation of what Black Holes are to connect dots which are never expanded upon.

An object having similar properties, like it's explained that the Yami Yami has, isn't evidence of it having a similar composition. You can continue to act like the statement supports your interpretation directly, when in fact it doesn't. It doesn't support either interpretation because the statement doesn't delve into the composition of Blackbeard's stuff, only its properties.
Click to expand...
It has similar properties to a black hole -> It has similar composition to a black hole
A simple and safe assumption supported by the evidence of the quote saying that the properties of the Yami Yami and a Black Hole are the same(no I am not claiming its a real black hole).
But whether or not its composition is the same doesn't actually matter. This would only be a problem if we were claiming its a real black hole. The property of sucking in light via mass(which I already explained) is all that the calc needs to work. Also mass is a property so...
I would like to check back with Executor after this message
 
From what I’ve read Moron, Neco_Scaler and King Tempest has been reiterating the same things and debunking the same points yet no one is listening, and just ignoring them. Idk why this isn’t accepted,
 
That_moron2 said:
Okay no. I already went over this with Don't Talk, but for the sake of comprehension I will restate it here.

And not a black hole formula. "But he must use a black hole formula since it sucks in light" you say. If we followed the proper physics of light then we wouldn't have an FTL rating. To elaborate, if someone was actually moving at light speed then they would have to have infinite mass. If we can tolerate people moving at light speed without turning into a black hole then we can tolerate something having the gravity to suck in light and not be a black hole.
Click to expand...
What a massive strawman of our position.

The argument isn't that since this object can absorb light, like a black hole can. It means you can only calculate values from it by using our black hole formula. The issue lies with the fact the object is being argued extremely similar with an actual black hole, with it having black hole properties and potentially mass equivalent with its gravitational pull, just like a black hole in our world has. But y'all disagree with using our black hole standards for ultimately incorrect reasons.

You can't cherry pick properties and direct similarities between the two, even bringing up the fact that since Yami Yami was compared with an actual black hole by Oda, it supports the narrative of it having mass equivalent with its gravitational pull. And not argue it's applicable under our black hole standards when those standards exist to determine if objects that express similar properties as a black hole should be considered as actual ones or not on a complete level, like having similar structures which are needed for calculation purposes.

It's objectively incorrect to act like this isn't happening when everyone who is knowledgeable on our standards can see this. Just argue Blackbeard's Devil Fruit is applicable under our standards, and if it is, it can pass. If it doesn't, it can't pass. Simple as.

The assumption that it sucks in light? Because that isn't an assumption. You are giving arguments that were debunked 2 pages ago. And to be frank its getting annoying. Basically what y'all are doing is posting the same shit over and over again, just with different wording, and your only defense is "I'm not convinced". Guess what, most of the time I'm not convinced by your arguments either, but if I can't come up with anything new, I pack it up. I could go on about how terrible this behavior is, but it doesn't support my point and makes me lose credibility.
Click to expand...

I'll explain this one more time.

We have said multiple times that our main contention extends to just the assumptions made by the calculation, which would be assuming the mass of the object is equivalent with its gravitational pull, and not any side properties, like the capacity to absorb light. If you still don't understand we aren't disagreeing with the idea that it can absorb light. Then it's a hopeless endeavor on our part. Because we can't make it any clearer than that.

What's worse is that all the superiors were listed out by Oda at a time when Fujitora and Blackbeard's powers were both shown and he didn't list them.
Click to expand...

I've already addressed this contention previously, and the old arguments against them still don't hold.

Them not having a listed "superiority" difference between the two isn't evidence that one gains its gravitational pull through mass while the other only manipulates gravitational directions through esoteric means. That's you presupposing such with literally zero credible evidence. We would need actual, credible evidence why that comparison wasn't made rather than assumptions born through personal headcanon.

Like, a comparison between the two existing or not existing doesn't even support or detract from either side because the issue at hand is an assumption and constitution one. Not a property one.

I'll address the other arguments in another post later.
 
Last edited:
That_moron2 said:
So you need Oda to say verbatim that it sucks in light via mass? The full quote literally refers to the mass of a black hole
"If there were a star as dense as the sun and 500 times as large, it would not emit light because its escape velocity would exceed that of light, and no information could be obtained by observation of such an object".
Before saying that Blackbeard's black holes are the same in this way
It also has an infinite gravitational pull that keeps any light from escaping. This part of the technique is similar to that of a celestial black hole.
Basically saying that the method the black hole sucks in light is the same(i.e mass).
Click to expand...
I don't need a "verbatim statement" for me to believe or accept that Blackbeard's Devil Fruit generates its gravitational pull from its mass. I just need evidence that has probable interpretations. I don't believe the evidence provided grants those probable interpretations since the statement doesn't imply anything in relation to how Blackbeard's Devil Fruit structures its effects.

What it explains is how Blackbeard's Devil Fruit has similar effects with an actual black hole, specifically how it has infinite gravity and can keep light from escaping its gravitational pull. What it doesn't explain is how that gravitational pull comes about structurally.

There being a comparison of similar effects, and a previous explanation about how black holes within our world generate their gravitational pull isn't evidence that Blackbeard's Devil Fruit generates its effects through similar means or extents. Especially since it's stated to be only "similar", not "exact". People have to understand that "similar" as a word doesn't imply exactness, but rather implies comparability without being completely identical with the thing that's being compared with. It's because of this stated ambiguity that we can't make concrete inferences about what exactly is "similar" structurally-wise.

Until I see more evidence which supports the claim of it having mass relative with its gravitational pull, I don't believe we should assume it over the interpretation provided by me and many others in this thread.

That_moron2 said:
It has similar properties to a black hole -> It has similar composition to a black hole
A simple and safe assumption supported by the evidence of the quote saying that the properties of the Yami Yami and a Black Hole are the same(no I am not claiming its a real black hole).
But whether or not its composition is the same doesn't actually matter. This would only be a problem if we were claiming its a real black hole. The property of sucking in light via mass(which I already explained) is all that the calc needs to work. Also mass is a property so...
I would like to check back with Executor after this message
Click to expand...
It isn't a safe assumption since that doesn't logically follow. Having similar properties with an object doesn't mean you have similar composition with that object, being stated to move in a straight line, produce light-like brightness or burn things isn't evidence for that thing being comprised of photons despite the fact it has stated similarities with objects that are constructed of photons. We need further evidence supporting that idea, I don't believe your side has provided that evidence. I just see presumptions on how the composition is without due reason.

It does matter as we can't assume that it does absorb light through its gravitational pull because of the amount of mass and density the object has. It's exactly why we don't generally assume objects or abilities that produce massive gravitational pressure do so through mass-density related means without proper evidence.

With everything said, I believe our side has proven that Blackbeard's Devil Fruit most likely doesn't have mass comparable with its gravitational pull. I'll leave this as my final message in regards to this topic and allow the mods viewing this thread to read through our arguments and come to their own conclusions.
 
It never ends.

We've explained multiple times why the "natural" aspect of the Devil Fruit doesn't support the composition being exact with an actual black hole. Please read our responses to those arguments.
 
1. I'm sorry, I'm not gonna read 3 page, lol.
2. I'm just dumb
3. If this scans below was misstranslation then, im not going to argue.
IMG_20230926_073258.jpg
 
Deceived3596 said:
What a massive strawman of our position.
Click to expand...
It wasn't intended as a strawman. I was literally paraphrasing DT, and used it as a framing device to shut down a potential counter argument before it happened.
Deceived3596 said:
The argument isn't that since this object can absorb light, like a black hole can. It means you can only calculate values from it by using our black hole formula. The issue lies with the fact the object is being argued extremely similar with an actual black hole, with it having black hole properties and potentially mass equivalent with its gravitational pull, just like a black hole in our world has. But y'all disagree with using our black hole standards for ultimately incorrect reasons.
Click to expand...
I don't see how they are incorrect. I actually already addressed this, which you wrote off as a strawman. You are arguing that this doesn't work because, it is too close to a real black hole, and then saying that its not a real black hole. It doesn't fit the Black Hole standards entirely so then we can't have it be a black hole, but its to close to not be a black hole. This is just insane, especially since Oda says it isn't a black hole, and is just similar. i.e a dense planetoid. But you gave your own two cents about that interpretation.
Deceived3596 said:
There being a comparison of similar effects, and a previous explanation about how black holes within our world generate their gravitational pull isn't evidence that Blackbeard's Devil Fruit generates its effects through similar means or extents. Especially since it's stated to be only "similar", not "exact". People have to understand that "similar" as a word doesn't imply exactness, but rather implies comparability without being completely identical with the thing that's being compared with. It's because of this stated ambiguity that we can't make concrete inferences about what exactly is "similar" structurally-wise.
Click to expand...
Which is just grasping at straws. Even if it wasn't similar actually directly supports our interpretation.
The definition of similar is "resembling without being identical." Which is literally what KT, Neco, and I are claiming. If it was exact it would be a real black hole. Similar is in no way ambiguous. At this point you are thinking with scrutiny and not logic.
Deceived3596 said:
You can't cherry pick properties and direct similarities between the two, even bringing up the fact that since Yami Yami was compared with an actual black hole by Oda, it supports the narrative of it having mass equivalent with its gravitational pull. And not argue it's applicable under our black hole standards when those standards exist to determine if objects that express similar properties as a black hole should be considered as actual ones or not on a complete level, like having similar structures which are needed for calculation purposes.
Click to expand...
How am I cherry picking? Pretty much all of the properties match the properties something with its proposed mass would have. But as you said not enough to be a black hole. And again we aren't arguing for a real black hole.
Deceived3596 said:
Until I see more evidence which supports the claim of it having mass relative with its gravitational pull, I don't believe we should assume it over the interpretation provided by me and many others in this thread.
Click to expand...
You and two others.
Deceived3596 said:
It isn't a safe assumption since that doesn't logically follow. Having similar properties with an object doesn't mean you have similar composition with that object, being stated to move in a straight line, produce light-like brightness or burn things isn't evidence for that thing being comprised of photons despite the fact it has stated similarities with objects that are constructed of photons. We need further evidence supporting that idea, I don't believe your side has provided that evidence. I just see presumptions on how the composition is without due reason.
Click to expand...
Oh my god Deceived you are grasping at straws. And again we aren't even arguing that its the same just that it is very dense. And it exhibits all the properties of an object that is as dense as we argue. It does the appropriate amount of destruction, sucks in everything, etc. Heck its not even equivalent to a black hole in mass. Its 1/10th. When stripped down to its barest your argument is you disagree with it because it doesn't follow your own standards. And that's fine. I can understand that, but no it doesn't violate wiki policy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Darius2036
Black Hole formula proposal
Replies
0
Views
390
Darius2036
Darius2036
Nami_Kami
  • Locked
GGM Storm
Replies
12
Views
2K
Nami_Kami
Nami_Kami
Epyriel
New Black Hole Creation Feat Formula Proposal
2
Replies
68
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
How do i go about this?
Replies
0
Views
772
ArcaneAbyss
Dragongod224
  • Locked
[one more Staff needed] Black hole problem (my wife is the demon queen)
Replies
36
Views
3K
Dragongod224
Dragongod224
Back
Top