One Punch Man calc revision(one of the big ones)

[Alexander]

ok, let's start with this:
as we know, one punch man in his top tiers are currently(which is multi-solar system level)
now,there is have been a previos thread talking about it,about what?about this:

yes,this infamous feat,now,vsbw wiki has calculated the feat like,multiple times,and varied, from multi-solar system (the accepted) galaxy and multi-galaxy as the maximum high ball.

but as we know, vsbw kept the low-ball, and although it is not invalid, the problem is that it is that, a low-ball, and it is like a character who could be taller for logical reasons, stays there below because yes.
and i want to changed it.

tier changes and arguments:

Now, although we don't know how much of the void was destroyed (because its existence is so ambiguous that it's a joke) we do know that it did happen, because we've been there for about 5 months and that thing is still there and it hasn't changed, if it were an error of drawing.
now,has we know,there is this other panel where we see stars and lights in the ''reversal of causality''

which, everyone accepted as what is in the void.......................
I have nothing to say, the void is ambiguous in itself, but they want to disambiguate it with something even more ambiguous (and more headcanon)with that,ok,there is no argument for that,there is,0 proof of that being the void,because is not mentioned,and also because there is literraly just a fancy look,nothing more.

And yes, I know that Murata explains things, but I don't explain this, neither of them, so using this to say that the feat does not go beyond multi solar system is bad.

now,i am gonna go with a better argument,for example,using the references that the chapter give us,like,this:

like you see,there is galaxies visible in jupiter,So with that, we can assume that with more reason, there are more than just stars.
''but those are just visual effects and is not possible to see galaxies in jupiter''
ok, 1. then why the hell do you insist that in the absolute inavoidable punch there are only stars, if there is nothing that says that there are, it is only something visual, as you would say here.
2.remember something my friend,real life can sometimes be impressive,and actually,in real life,there is a footage of jupiter and galaxies being visible(this is from literraly hundreds of millions of kilometers far away of jupiter)

In a wide-field view, Webb sees Jupiter with its faint rings, which are a million times fainter than the planet, and two tiny moons called Amalthea and Adrastea. The fuzzy spots in the lower background are likely galaxies “photobombing” this Jovian view.
even though they were said to be ''likely'' galaxies, they are still just that, possibly galaxies.

and again,garou and saitama are not in earth,are in the literral jupiter,in io,one of the moons of jupiter,so is probably good to assume that yeah,there is galaxies in the void and is possible.
what to do now
Now, although I don't know what we'll do, might I suggest that we do the math again, and take higher and better assumptions that there are only stars.
You wanted to use another hole in space that does exist in reality, such as bootis void,or something.
also,murata knows alot about space and physics,because is it favorist subject,just take that into account.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

the wiki is too cowardly to add the possibly 3-B rating that they deserve

 

[Alexander]

the wiki is too cowardly to add the possibly 3-B rating that they deserve

I'll still try

 

[Recon1511]

I mean a "possibly 3-B" considering there could actually be at least 1 galaxy in the void shouldn't be too controversial but whatever

 

[ZillertheBucko]

The thing that was getting in the way of that is most likely a wiki technicality where we don’t use the different ends of calcs as possibly ratings
but I’ve never seen an official rule on that, and this really should be an exception to the rule anyways considering you could assume the feat ranges from 4-A to 3-B even without a calc.
That being said, downplay.

 

[Recon1511]

The thing that was getting in the way of that is most likely a wiki technicality where we don’t use the different ends of calcs as possibly ratings
but I’ve never seen an official rule on that, and this really should be an exception to the rule anyways considering you could assume the feat ranges from 4-A to 3-B even without a calc.
That being said, downplay.

It's not about different ends really, it's just that we have 2 or 3 instances were galaxies are visible in the background so it should be a fair assumption that at least 1 was present in the void

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I also heard someone say once that furthest visible star was a lowball since in space you should be able to see further than when you’re in the atmosphere

 

[Alexander]

I also heard someone say once that furthest visible star was a lowball since in space you should be able to see further than when you’re in the atmosphere

So why the hell didn't they take that into account? We are not on the earth, we are outside of it (literally the void is seen from outside the earth)

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Alexander W

 

[TimmyTurnero]

Its not like the blast took out a single set of stars, it traversed a vast amount of distance obliterating everything in it’s path and everything behind it. A whole section of space was taken out by this. I find it hard to believe there’s not even one galaxy in that missing section of space.

 

[Alexander]

Its not like the blast took out a single set of stars, it traversed a vast amount of distance obliterating everything in it’s path and everything behind it. A whole section of space was taken out by this. I find it hard to believe there’s not even one galaxy in that missing section of space.

because,we don't know how much it does destroy,yes,that does means that is limited to just stars?no

 

[TimmyTurnero]

because,we don't know how much it does destroy,yes,that does means that is limited to just stars?no

Yeah ik im agreeing with yall lol

 

[Alexander]

Yeah ik im agreeing with yall lol

ok

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

The reason it’s not accepted that a galaxy was destroyed is because galaxies are visible within a part of the fight

But there’s none visible here and they just look like stars https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/917231037757673472/994374126615658536/page_10.png

 

[ZillertheBucko]

The reason it’s not accepted that a galaxy was destroyed is because galaxies are visible within a part of the fight

But there’s none visible here and they just look like stars https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/917231037757673472/994374126615658536/page_10.png

Galaxies can be completely indistinguishable from stars at that distance, this point is nothing notable

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Galaxies can be completely indistinguishable from stars at that distance, this point is nothing notable

He could’ve added galaxies in the background like he did in those panels and the distance isn’t that different

 

[TimmyTurnero]

The reason it’s not accepted that a galaxy was destroyed is because galaxies are visible within a part of the fight

But there’s none visible here and they just look like stars https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/917231037757673472/994374126615658536/page_10.png

I think the point is galaxies are close enough to be visible, and then the squared punch is strong enough to destroy every visible light in that section of space, not like a small section but it’s so intense that it erased every single thing in that direction.

 

[Alexander]

He could’ve added galaxies in the background like he did in those panels and the distance isn’t that different

again,galaxies in the distance can be indistinguishable from a great distance, also you have to remember that the reason those galaxies were not destroyed, is because they are literally in another direction of the void.

 

[Kachon123]

Following.

 

[Alexander]

@ByAsura

 

[Kachon123]

@ByAsura

Normal members can't ping staff members.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Alexander is no ordinary member

 

[Alexander]

Normal members can't ping staff members.

sorry

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

sorry

Don't be

 

[ByAsura]

@Qawsedf234 I was asked to tag you for this thread.

 

[Quantu]

I'm not even terribly against a possibly 3-B anymore tbh.

But eh, I'll see if this thread collapses progresses.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I don’t really see any good counterargument against it myself
I think we should collectively just think “I mean, it’s definitely possible that there were some galaxies in that hole” and it doesn’t really go any deeper than that
we just don’t actually have any way to know for sure what was in that hole before it was destroyed.

 

[Alexander]

So we can conclude, that you could try to take it higher than just multi solar system.

 

[Sisyphusx]

might I suggest that we do the math again, and take higher and better assumptions that there are only stars.

Imo we should either go with this or put a possibly 3B rating along with the atleast 4A one cause the accepted calc is obviously a low ball of the feat

 

[Alexander]

Imo we should either go with this or put a possibly 3B rating along with the atleast 4A one cause the accepted calc is obviously a low ball of the feat

not a bad idea

 

[Qawsedf234]

@Qawsedf234 I was asked to tag you for this thread.

There's no change from when we went with 4-A. There's zero evidence that the blast went outside the galaxy and no evidence that it destroyed anything other than stars. 4-A is used not because it's a lowball, but because all we can definitively say is that they at least destroyed stars from visible distance.

 

[Kachon123]

There's no change from when we went with 4-A. There's zero evidence that the blast went outside the galaxy and no evidence that it destroyed anything other than stars. 4-A is used not because it's a lowball, but because all we can definitively say is that they at least destroyed stars from visible distance.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they're proposing a possibly 3-C rating, as it's still a possibility that Galaxies were destroyed.

 

[Alexander]

There's no change from when we went with 4-A. There's zero evidence that the blast went outside the galaxy and no evidence that it destroyed anything other than stars. 4-A is used not because it's a lowball, but because all we can definitively say is that they at least destroyed stars from visible distance.

The problem is that galaxies can be seen from Jupiter, and therefore it can be assumed that they were more than just stars, also that the distance could be so great that they could be galaxies (because almost everything at a great distance would be seen as points of light )

Not to mention that the reason why only the star rating was left was unfounded beyond not wanting to argue something better, there is more evidence than just leaving it in the rating that is.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they're proposing a possibly 3-C rating, as it's still a possibility that Galaxies were destroyed.

It can't be a 3-C rating, as the sheer distance involved would inflate any number to 3-B.

The problem is that galaxies can be seen from Jupiter,

Alexander, you do realize that Garou was propelled the opposite direction of the void right? Seeing anything on Jupiter is irrelevant, as that's literally the opposite direction of the attack.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Alexander, you do realize that Garou was propelled the opposite direction of the void right? Seeing anything on Jupiter is irrelevant, as that's literally the opposite direction of the void.

Actually it does mean something
it suggests that in opm cosmology, the density of galaxies in any given section of space is greater than irl, so there’s a higher chance that in the void (which we still saw absolutely none of) there was at least one galaxy in there
and there’s no actual evidence otherwise, given that we never actually see what was in the void.

It can't be a 3-C rating, as the sheer distance involved would inflate any number to 3-B.

Then it is possibly 3-B, that is fine.

 

[Qawsedf234]

it suggests that in opm cosmology, the density of galaxies in any given section of space is greater than irl,

It suggests that if Murata wanted to draw a galaxy in the distance he'd draw a galaxy in the distance. Instead all he draws is stars and points where the void used to be.

chance that in the void (which we still saw absolutely none of) there was at least one galaxy in there

There's no evidence that there were any. We also see a panel of the damage being undone and Murata didn't draw any galactic disks despite doing so multiple times in the same chapter.

4-A isn't used because it's a lowball, it's used because that's all we have evidence for.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

It suggests that if Murata wanted to draw a galaxy in the distance he'd draw a galaxy in the distance. Instead all he draws is stars and points where the void used to be.

We have no picture of what was in the void.

There's no evidence that there were any. We also see a panel of the damage being undone and Murata didn't draw any galactic disks despite doing so multiple times in the same chapter.

4-A isn't used because it's a lowball, it's used because that's all we have evidence for.

That panel doesn’t show any evidence of that being where the void was whatsoever, it’s just headcanon.

I hope you’re bringing more to the table than that one random panel of space (we get a lot of panels of space during the fight lol) and assuming it was the void. Furthermore, small dots like that can be a way to draw galaxies from extremely far away, so that doesn’t make any sense as a counterpoint either.

 

[Alexander]

It suggests that if Murata wanted to draw a galaxy in the distance he'd draw a galaxy in the distance. Instead all he draws is stars and points where the void used to be.


There's no evidence that there were any. We also see a panel of the damage being undone and Murata didn't draw any galactic disks despite doing so multiple times in the same chapter.

4-A isn't used because it's a lowball, it's used because that's all we have evidence for.

I said above that this panel is not the void, it was not said that it was the void, seriously, stop assuming that it is without proof of it.
Also, again, there are galaxies visible on Jupiter, and in the void, no light is visible, and it cannot be distinguished from galaxies or stars (because it is so far away,is simple logic,everything that you see in the distance is gonna be a dot).

 

[ZillertheBucko]

The most important thing here is that there are galaxies visible to begin with, which means the furthest star most likely is more than a galaxy’s distance away from earth, regardless of if an actual galaxy was destroyed

 

[Qawsedf234]

We have no picture of what was in the void.

We see an image of an empty space refilling once time has been reversed. The narration does not need to spell out everything to connect the dots.

That panel doesn’t show any evidence of that being where the void was whatsoever, it’s just headcanon

This is like saying the serious punch moving clouds is headcanon because it doesn't explicitly state they were clouds. We see a void in space being refilled with stars. It can only be one thing.

Also, again, there are galaxies visible on Jupiter

Which is on the opposite side of the blast. That isn't evidence.

The most important thing here is that there are galaxies visible to begin with

If Murata wanted to draw a galaxy, he'd draw a galaxy. As evidence by him drawing galaxies in space, one of which could be seen from Earth's atmosphere.

The OP has no evidence, just a bunch of irrelevant maybes that we already covered in the inital upgrade.