Planetary KE calcs

[KLOL506]

Not really. Gravity is still something in space. The debris could still hit the moon, but it wouldn't be a result of the meteor impact, but gravity's

It needs to be within the vicinity of the moon for that to happen tho

 

[M3X_2.0]

Not really, only the correct direction. The debris can cover only a few thousands of km, and still hit the moon. Most part of the distance covered is because of the gravity. Of course, assuming that thing is the moon

 

[Chariot190]

Not really. Gravity is still something in space. The debris could still hit the moon, but it wouldn't be a result of the meteor impact, but gravity's

I'm aware, but in order for them to have even been drawn into the moon's gravitational pull, they'd have to have gone a ludicrous distance. And that doesnt factor in the fact the debris were launched in an omnidirectional burst, the furtther the debris go, the less debris would even get close to the moon as they're all being launched in a million ways. Over the course of hundreds of thousands of km, very, very few debris would be able to be pulled in the moon's gravity. Definitely not as much as wee see.

 

[Chariot190]

Not really, only the correct direction. The debris can cover only a few thousands of km, and still hit the moon. Most part of the distance covered is because of the gravity. Of course, assuming that thing is the moon

If anything, I'm still saying it's the earth.
The object in that panel is surfaceless, which obviously wouldnt be how the moon would be drawn and if it's a surface bust, it being drawn with zero detail is likely indicative of that, as all the detail is gone (though realistically it should be molten slag, but it makes more sense then a featureless moon or other planet) (not to mention it's drawn in the exact same angle as the earth shots from prior). The amount of debris we see in the after panel would make sense as if earth, albeit smaller now, still existed, it's gravity would be sufficient enough given the distance we see the debris travel, to draw in the debris back around it creating a field of debris like we see, if it was the moon, best case scenario would still see barely any debris around the moon, or at least, not enough to create a ring around it.

 

[M3X_2.0]

I'm aware, but in order for them to have even been drawn into the moon's gravitational pull, they'd have to have gone a ludicrous distance. And that doesnt factor in the fact the debris were launched in an omnidirectional burst, the furtther the debris go, the less debris would even get close to the moon as they're all being launched in a million ways. Over the course of hundreds of thousands of km, very, very few debris would be able to be pulled in the moon's gravity. Definitely not as much as wee see.

I said that not because of moon's gravitational pull, but if you trow something in space, that thing will move regardless the force you put on it, and considering the debris is moving far faster than sound, they wouldn't simply stop moving, but it wouldn't be the result of the impact. But as you said, that's not the moon and I belive that.

 

[Chariot190]

but if you trow something in space, that thing will move regardless the force you put on it

Yeah, that is indeed true. But I covered that, kinda. All the debris are moving in an omnidirectional span due to the impact, meaning? The further they go, the farther away the distance between each piece becomes, at an exponential rate. Over the course of simply 10000km would create a giant gap between most debris. By the time they get anywhere close to the moon, they'd be unironic moon sized gaps between 90% of all debris, and that's me borderline lying, we'd actually be look at tens of thousands of kilometers.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Except it wasn't. It quite literally wasn't anywhere near those nebulae. It was lightyears and lightyears away from them. Like what in the actual **** are you arguing?

Exactly my point. The meteor's no where close to those nebulae, yet on panel they are shown to be right next to the meteor. So whats stopping me from saying the planet debris are the exact same distance away from the moon the planet is and they only appear close to it because of perspective?

And incase you arent understanding anything here, my point is that the planet debris, despite "appearing" right above the moon, can very easily be appearing like that because of perspective. The moon isnt anywhere close by to them, it appears like that due to being shown in the distance.

"Showing the entire moon and having it zoomed in", is a contradictory statement.

It isnt, because that would be the only way to show details like craters, which you cant see from being too zoomed out.

Regardless, literally wrong, we do see landmasses in the earth shot.

Yes and theres only, at best, 4 of them. There's obviously much more earth present unless you want to say the art depicting the pokemon earth with only 4 or so landmasses is legit.

Yes, a celestial object, stripped of any and all detail, with debris gravitating around it. You're assuming that the debris were launched 380000km

And your wrong here again. Ive said this about 3 times so far.

Im not arguing the debris moved anywhere near the moon or moved beyond the distance they moved from the planet getting smashed apart. Stop bringing this point up.

and all just so happened to be hovering around the moon

See above

that's drawn at the same angle as the earth previously was mind you, despite not being drawn as the moon at all, opposed to it being the earth stripped of its surface. Occam's razer is the what requires the least amount of assumptions here.

And again, its not drawn as the moon because you wouldnt be able to see those details on the moon from such a distance.

The only point here I'll give you is that its drawn at the same angle, but that also isnt 100% ironclad since the moon orbits the earth and could also be shown from that angle as well.

And yet it doesnt. Pretty straightforward.

Nope, it only works if you assume thats the earth.

You are though, because if that IS THE MOON in that panel, then all the debris moved almost 380000km, as the debris in that panel are less then 400km away from the moon.

Or quite simply

The moon is shown in the background, far away from the debris, and appears that way because of, again, perspective. Which is what my entire argument is about. The debris wouldnt need to move anywhere close to the moon for that to happen.

Just like the meteor doesnt need to be remotely close to those nebulae to appear right next to them (which you yourself agree with)

It's not interpreting what you're saying wrong though, it's the fact what you're saying is a complete nonargument.

You keep pivoting back to me supposedly arguing the debris were flung to the moon during the explosion when thats not what im arguing. So yes your are interpreting my argument wrong.

So yes, you're arguing that the debris ended up not even 400km away from the moon, of the 380000km, except it's even less because that's the distance of the moon from the POV, in which the debris can be seen like half that distance if not less closer to the moon.

And again, see above.

 

[Chariot190]

Exactly my point. The meteor's no where close to those nebulae. So what's stopping me from saying the planet debris are the exact same distance away from the moon the planet is and they only appear close to it because of perspective?

What's stopping you? The fact you'd be literally wrong. The meteor is nowhere close to those nebulae and it's DRAWN THAT WAY. It is quite literally drawn light years away. The nebulae are tiny in panel, we can literally calculate the distance they are and they're light years away. You're basically arguing something tantamount to seeing the sun in the sky meaning it's close by. There is no perspective issue in play here, in fact, do you even know what perspective is? because that still wouldnt be an issue.

And incase you arent understanding anything here, my point is that the planet debris, despite "appearing" right above the moon, can very easily be appearing like that because of perspective. The moon isnt anywhere close by to them, it appears like that due to being shown in the distance.

that isn't how it works. You've proven you have literally no idea what you're talking about, so drop it. The absolute only way you'd be right if the moon was drawn in a way where it literally isn't 90% cut off because we're so close to it, but guess what? It isnt. You're literally arguing against what we explicitly see now and it's staggering, you're wrong.

It isnt, because that would be the only way to show details like craters, which you cant see from being too zoomed out.

Except we arent to zoomed out, we're ZOOMED IN. And if we were zoomed out, we'd see craters anyway. Just not the big ass ones.

Massive reach here, those dont even look like landmasses and if anything appears no different from what the planets body of water looks like.

Massive reach? I already said it's mostly due to the scans you using being awful. It's far more pronounced in scans that have actual resolution to them. Regardless, those are landmasses, go check an actual quality scan if you want, then again, how the hell is dark gray blotches with a grainy texture the same as the way the ocean is conveyed? That was rhetorical, it isnt.

Yes and theres only, at best, 4 of them. There's obviously much more earth present unless you want to say the art depicting the pokemon earth with only 4 or so landmasses is legit.

Given the fact that isn't a shot of the entire earth and is only like 1/12 of it at best and the corner of it as well, what's the issue here? Your arguments here are ludicrous Kukui, they arent even arguments, youre just saying things. Also ten, there's at least ten landmasses drawn, though only 3/4 notable ones that are like a few hundred km in size.

And your wrong here again. Ive said this about 3 times so far.

Yes, you have said it 3 times so far, and every single time you've been wrong. What do you not comprehend? If you're arguing it's the moon, you're arguing they went that distance. You can't have one and not the other.

Im not arguing the debris moved anywhere near the moon or moved beyond the distance they moved from the planet getting smashed apart. Stop bringing this point up.

Then drop it because even if you dont think youre arguing for it, you quite literally are.

And again, its not drawn as the moon because you wouldnt be able to see those details on the moon from such a distance.

Do I literally need to grab a picture of the moon from a comparable distance? Ill ******* do it if need be.

The only point here I'll give you is that its drawn at the same angle, but that also isnt 100% ironclad since the moon orbits the earth and could also be shown from that angle as well.

You dont have to give me anything, I literally calced the approximate distance. ie, you're wrong.

Nope, it only works if you assume that's the earth.

Because it is, it sure as hell aint the moon or another planet.

The moon is shown in the background, far away from the debris, and appears that way because of, again, perspective. Which is what my entire argument is about. The debris wouldnt need to move anywhere close to the moon for that to happen.

It's less then 400km away from the debris. Not because of perspective, but because that's literally how it's drawn. It literally would and that's what you don't understand.

Just like the meteor doesnt need to be remotely close to those nebulae to appear right next to them (which you yourself agree with)

Except the NEBULAE WOULD STILL APPEAR THAT BIG. Have you ever looked outside before at night time? Holy shit Kukui, the meteor isnt close to the nebulae, and theyre drawn as if theyre lightyears away, there is literally zero issue with that and it doesnt support anything you're trying to say. The meteor isnt close to them and it's not drawn as if it was. Are you actually arguing "oh we can see nebulae in that panel so the moon being seen in that panel means it's ok". News flash, depth is something that exists. Nebulae are massive and can be seen lightyears away, the nebulae in that panel are drawn tiny in relation to the meteor, as such, we can calc the distance between them and the POV, the meteor and the nebulae are light years apart. We can still see the nebulae because THEYRE ******* MASSIVE AND BRIGHT, but theyre drawn small enough to where we can figure out the distance. The same applies to the moon, the moon is drawn UP CLOSE to the POV, with the debris being even closer, the POV and the moon are less then 400km away, meaning, the debris are less then 400km away from the moon. The moon being in the background means **** all because the moon is drawn MASSIVE in the panel, to the point 90% of it cant be seen. No offense, but you have zero idea how any of this works.

You keep pivoting back to me supposedly arguing the debris were flung to the moon during the explosion when thats not what im arguing. So yes your are interpreting my argument wrong.

And your argument is quite literally one in the same. If you're arguing that IS the moon, then by proxy you're arguing they moved that distance, because the moon is quantifiably a certain distance away from the debris, a distance that can be calced and quantified, so if that IS the moon, then it also means the debris traveled that far, because it has to be both or neither, it cant be one or the other. If you want to say it's the moon, you're also saying the distance was 380000km more or less. At this point it's not even about misinterpretation, you don't even understand what you're actually saying.

And again, see above.

i did and I'm at the point I straight up can't debate with you because you're arguing things you clearly don't understand.

 

[KLOL506]

Honestly with these massive walls of text and the problem being increasingly a Pokemon-issue, I'd suggest taking it to the Pokemon thread instead.

 

[Chariot190]

Im not doing this further, you've killed any motivation I had in wanting to help by unironically arguing against easy as **** to quantify distances and nonarguments about nebulae.
Learn how to angsize and learn what depth is, I dont have the time to argue something that shouldnt even be in contention when it's easily proven a certain way.

Anyway here's a better scan where the landmasses are more pronounced.

 

[StrymULTRA]

You could, hell, you'd probably get like a yottaton or few if you did that for every piece we see get ejected, but that's a lot of effort, though if you do go through with that then kudos to you.

Got it, but with a way more human way ofc

 

[Chariot190]

Got it, but with a way more human way ofc

I think that's good? I'll have to look over it but that may be a good approximate.
Though I can already tell some people may not be 100% on board with it, though atm, I think I'm fine with that as a simple approximation.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

3 Yotatons?! Now I can actually throw Fatalis at Rayquaza! Space Dragon Fight, WHOO!

 

[Chariot190]

3 Yotatons?! Now I can actually throw Fatalis at Rayquaza! Space Dragon Fight, WHOO!

Spoiler

Fug upscales massively off whatever the meteor ends up as fyi, regardless of the result.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

Idc, I'm doing it.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Well due to the calc Strym did, im not going to respond to the earlier stuff and waste my time with the back and forth if a better solution was found and can be agreed on. But what I will say is this:

I'm at the point I straight up can't debate with you because you're arguing things you clearly don't understand.

If you dont want to debate me Chariot (which I never asked you to do and quite frankly dont care whether you do/dont), then don't. Thats up to you.

And its not my intention to make the thread chaotic or unpleasant, but if I have an issue or problem with something, im going to address it. Simple as that.

 

[KLOL506]

What the heck, 5-A?

If you assume the entire mass of the crust moved that far within 30 seconds instead of the normal debris stuff, you'd get 3.5e+33 J or Planet level.

If you assume each debris piece weighs 1.362339e21 kg on average, 83 of them would easily exceed the actual crust's total mass.

 

[Chariot190]

If you dont want to debate me Chariot (which I never asked you to do and quite frankly dont care whether you do/dont)

I don't want to debate anyone, especially not right now, but when you're trying to insinuate something without even realizing the extent of what you're saying and then trying to use something as basic as nebulae being shown lightyears away to somehow invalidate basic angsizing and depth scaling which can be quantified to be less then 400km away, then I have no choice but to debate you on that. I'm forced to do so because you're trying to argue something as right that's literally wrong.

I still have no idea what the hell you were even trying to argue with the nebulae because whatever it was, it had absolute no bearing on how close the moon was to the POV, especially when we can calculate the distance to the nebulae and the moon irrespective of each other and the nebulae being light years away. And I still stand by that you really need to learn how to angsize and learn how depth effects how things appear because this shouldnt even be an argument.

If you assume the entire mass of the crust moved that far within 30 seconds instead of the normal debris stuff, you'd get 3.5e+33 J or Planet level.

Tbh, im not even sure if it was just the crust, while I stand firmly by what i said in that earth is still around afterwards and to be honest, I doubt my opinion will change on that, that doesnt mean that some extra mass beyond just the crust was torn off too. The mass torn could have extended below the crust to an extent, maybe that's where the extra mass comes from?

 

[StrymULTRA]

What the heck, 5-A?

If you assume the entire mass of the crust moved that far within 30 seconds instead of the normal debris stuff, you'd get 3.5e+33 J or Planet level.

Maximum crust thickness is of 90 km, the debris are like 970 km in diameter

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

What the heck, 5-A?

If you assume the entire mass of the crust moved that far within 30 seconds instead of the normal debris stuff, you'd get 3.5e+33 J or Planet level.

If you assume each debris piece weighs 1.362339e21 kg on average, 83 of them would easily exceed the crust's total mass.

I think we can all agree on here that as long as the feat can still be legitimately tier 5, thats the better goal to meet than to make it higher (if not possible ofc).

I don't want to debate anyone, especially not right now, but when you're trying to insinuate something without even realizing the extent of what you're saying and then trying to use something as basic as nebulae being shown lightyears away to somehow invalidate basic angsizing and depth scaling which can be quantified to be less then 400km away, then I have no choice but to debate you on that. I'm forced to do so because you're trying to argue something as right that's literally wrong.

Whatever, not my problem or my concern anymore.

 

[KLOL506]

I don't want to debate anyone, especially not right now, but when you're trying to insinuate something without even realizing the extent of what you're saying and then trying to use something as basic as nebulae being shown lightyears away to somehow invalidate basic angsizing and depth scaling which can be quantified to be less then 400km away, then I have no choice but to debate you on that. I'm forced to do so because you're trying to argue something as right that's literally wrong.

I still have no idea what the hell you were even trying to argue with the nebulae because whatever it was, it had absolute no bearing on how close the moon was to the POV, especially when we can calculate the distance to the nebulae and the moon irrespective of each other and the nebulae being light years away. And I still stand by that you really need to learn how to angsize and learn how depth effects how things appear because this shouldnt even be an argument.



Tbh, im not even sure if it was just the crust, while I stand firmly by what i said in that earth is still around afterwards and to be honest, I doubt my opinion will change on that, that doesnt mean that some extra mass beyond just the crust was torn off too. The mass torn could have extended below the crust to an extent, maybe that's where the extra mass comes from?

Hmmmmmm, good point, could have been something from the mantle.

 

[Ugarik]

To be clear I wasn't awear that KLOL made a correction for the calc when I said I agree with everything.

Can I see his correction?

 

[Chariot190]

Scan (Actual panel height that should be used is 317), the small rectangle where we see the floating debris)

• New planet Diameter : sqrt(1-(tan(35)(1978/317))^2/((tan(35)(1978/317))^2+1))*12742 = 4082.63263751 km = 4082632.63751 m
• Planet diameter = 1978 px = 4082632.63751 m
• Distance the debris crossed = 1260.69 px =2602090.06056 m

Low end:

• Time = 30 s
• Speed = 86736.33535 m/s
• KE = 0.5 * 2.77e22 * (86736.33535^2) = 1.04196207398775085771625e+32 Joule / 24.903491252 Zettatons (Small Planet level)

Mid end

• Time = 15 s
• Speed = 173472.670704 m/s
• KE = 0.5 * 2.77e22 * (173472.670704^2) = 4.1678483e+32 Joule / 99.613965 Zettatons (Planet level)

High end

• Time = 5 s
• Speed = 520418.012112 m/s
• KE = 0.5 * 2.77e22 * (520418.012112^2) = 3.751063466529e+33 Joule / 896.52568511687377395 zettatons (Planet level)

I think this?

 

[KLOL506]

To be clear I wasn't awear that KLOL made a correction for the calc when I said I agree with everything.

Can I see his correction?

That was before you clarified what you agreed with on me.

Also my correction is wrong, it doesn't use angsizing, Chariot made a correction to it IIRC.

 

[KLOL506]

I think this?

This one is the non-angsizing version, I believe we switched to your angsizing version later.

 

[KLOL506]

You're right, but that would only change the result by like, 2% if memory serves. It's negligible.
My point is, at the absolute minimum, no matter how you look at it, the debris are at best, only a few hundred km away from it. So if that is the moon, the debris would have traveled over 379000km to get there.

Shit, you're right, I used curvature formula and used angsizing after, it'd still be far away from the moon, assuming that round planetoid is the moon, of course.

 

[StrymULTRA]

To be clear I wasn't awear that KLOL made a correction for the calc when I said I agree with everything.

Can I see his correction?

You should see this too

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out Ugarik.

 

[Ugarik]

I think we should discuss this particular calc somewhere else. This thread is about the general method

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Done the new discussion, this one can be closed

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.