- 4,327
- 2,978
Find the Staff Members page, it list the profiles of all Staff Members.
-
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.
Possible Bleach Speed Update
- Thread starter USklaverei
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bleach calculations
- 32,358
- 20,298
First calc seems (The thunderbolt one) seems to be fine. Second calc is calc-stacking.
- 8,153
- 2,177
May I ask how it's calc stacking?Matthew Schroeder said:
- 2,519
- 1,364
I brought this issue up tooMatthew Schroeder said:
It's calc stacking because you're taking Ichigo's speed from one scene (him falling) and applying to a completely different scene (him setting off and travelling), this is pretty much by definition calc stacking
This would mean both the calcs that used it are invalid
- 32,358
- 20,298
Yeah, this. I explained it on the blog as well. It is the textbook definition.
- 533
- 43
No we aren't taking ichigo's speed from one scene and applying to a completely different scene.TataHakai said:
If you read the calc well,you will see that the initial velocity that was used for ichigo was 0.
Ichigo was free falling,his initial velocity would be zero whereas his final velocity would be the velocity found in the calc.
This does not involve calc stacking at all.
"Calc stacking refers to the practice of using results from one calculation in order to calculate other feats"
>In this case we aren't trying to calc other feats,Ergo we are trying to find the distance it took ichigo to fall at this speed or reach this speed.
Examples of calc-stacking that can not be applied
- Character A moved so fast that character B couldn't react to him. So character A needs to have crossed the distance until he could be seen by character B again in the time that character B requires to react. Since we know from a calculation how long character B needs to react we can calculate the speed of character A based on that.
- 2,519
- 1,364
That's not true at all, to find the acceleration in the first place requires a calc, it doesn't involve freefall because from that distance it would take someone like Ichigo's weight several minutes to fall
The calc takes the speed Ichigo propelled himself into the Shokomanku with and finds the acceleration based on that and applies it to a completely different scene in which he sets off and also travels to Seiretei, again, these are all separate scenes from one another and applying calcs to each other is calc stacking.
The calc takes the speed Ichigo propelled himself into the Shokomanku with and finds the acceleration based on that and applies it to a completely different scene in which he sets off and also travels to Seiretei, again, these are all separate scenes from one another and applying calcs to each other is calc stacking.
- 305
- 63
it's being applied to the same feat though. not another feat.
>completely different scene
are you saying because theres a transition between panels that somehow make it a "separate scene" and therefore a "separate feat"? just trying to understand what your issue is.
>completely different scene
are you saying because theres a transition between panels that somehow make it a "separate scene" and therefore a "separate feat"? just trying to understand what your issue is.
- 533
- 43
Did you even understand the calc at all?or you're just replying here for debunking sake?TataHakai said:
Again the initial velocity for ichigo isn't the same with the final velocity of ichigo in the calc.
The calc uses a 0 initial velocity and a final velocity in where ichigo crossed the dome.
- 305
- 63
>╠Âw╠Âo╠Ân╠Âd╠Âe╠Âr╠Âs╠ ╠Âi╠Âf╠ ╠Ât╠Âh╠Âe╠ ╠Âs╠Âu╠Âd╠Âd╠Âe╠Ân╠ ╠Âo╠Âp╠Âp╠Âo╠Âs╠Âi╠Ât╠Âi╠Âo╠Ân╠ ╠Âf╠Âr╠Âo╠Âm╠ ╠Ân╠Âa╠Âr╠Âu╠Ât╠Âo╠ ╠Âf╠Âa╠Ân╠Âs╠ ╠Âi╠Âs╠ ╠Âi╠Ân╠ ╠Âr╠Âe╠Âs╠Âp╠Âo╠Ân╠Âs╠Âe╠ ╠Âf╠Âr╠Âo╠Âm╠ ╠Ât╠Âh╠Âe╠ ╠Ân╠Âa╠Âr╠Âu╠Ât╠Âo╠ ╠Âd╠Âo╠Âw╠Ân╠Âg╠Âr╠Âa╠Âd╠Âe╠Âs╠ ╠Âo╠Ân╠Âg╠Âo╠Âi╠Ân╠Âg╠Â
- 7,069
- 1,457
Dude, can ya not?GilgaArcuied said:
- 2,519
- 1,364
It really doesn't matter if it's the same feat, because the scenes are different|
This would be the same as taking a feat of someone moving at mach 500
Then using the same feat later on in the fight to calculate a distance of that same person going at full speed for 10 minutes
That's calc stacking.
And Danny i'm not sure why i have to keep repeating myself so i'll add this next part in bold just so you can understand a bit better
The acceleration is gained by using a final velocity that was achieved via calculating it, taking this and using it to find the values in another calc is; Calc stacking, it's simple stuff really.
This would be the same as taking a feat of someone moving at mach 500
Then using the same feat later on in the fight to calculate a distance of that same person going at full speed for 10 minutes
That's calc stacking.
And Danny i'm not sure why i have to keep repeating myself so i'll add this next part in bold just so you can understand a bit better
The acceleration is gained by using a final velocity that was achieved via calculating it, taking this and using it to find the values in another calc is; Calc stacking, it's simple stuff really.
- 2,519
- 1,364
Also please don't accuse me of bias when you yourself have shown such tendencies, i don't care if Bleach or Naruto is stronger or faster, i've rejected Naruto calcs and scaling in the past before as well as Bleach and every other series, it's based on accuracy and consistency not my personal bias.GilgaArcuied said:
- 1,161
- 965
Probably. This thread was ignored for ages and suddenly they asked Matt to join (Why? He isn't even a calc member) and now it's gaining traction. If you're going to tell me you invited Matt because he is an admin where is the rest? Why only him. Sus af.
- 305
- 63
>It really doesn't matter if it's the same feat, because the scenes are different
>Reads Calc stacking page again
Press X to Doubt
>This would be the same as taking a feat of someone moving at mach 500Then using the same feat later on in the fight to calculate a distance of that same person going at full speed for 10 minutes Okay im starting to see the issue here, this is infact a false equivalence. what you're describing is two different feats. this is one in the same feat.
what do you mean the same feat later o in the fight? what does that even mean? if it is the same feat from when he initially moves and somehow is confirmed to be mach 500 that is indeed legitimate
>Reads Calc stacking page again
Press X to Doubt
>This would be the same as taking a feat of someone moving at mach 500Then using the same feat later on in the fight to calculate a distance of that same person going at full speed for 10 minutes Okay im starting to see the issue here, this is infact a false equivalence. what you're describing is two different feats. this is one in the same feat.
what do you mean the same feat later o in the fight? what does that even mean? if it is the same feat from when he initially moves and somehow is confirmed to be mach 500 that is indeed legitimate
- 4,327
- 2,978
I thought this calc was legitmate since I saw it similar to Naruto's Rasenshuriken speed feat and Pain's reaction speed.
In the same instance where a speed is calc'd for Naruto's Rasenshuriken, a reaction speed is given to Pain as he dodged the Rasenshuriken in the same feat.
Similar to here where a distance is being calc'd via the calc'd speed of Ichigo during the feat of running down the distance, thus applied back to it.
In the same instance where a speed is calc'd for Naruto's Rasenshuriken, a reaction speed is given to Pain as he dodged the Rasenshuriken in the same feat.
Similar to here where a distance is being calc'd via the calc'd speed of Ichigo during the feat of running down the distance, thus applied back to it.
- 8,153
- 2,177
I admit that is indeed a bit strange.
Well if that feat is indeed calc stacking then oh well, not like speed matters on this wiki lol.
I'd like to confirm it with another calc member though imo.
Well if that feat is indeed calc stacking then oh well, not like speed matters on this wiki lol.
I'd like to confirm it with another calc member though imo.
- 1,161
- 965
According to the calc stacking page it is calc stacking if it uses a calc from one feat and applying it to another.
This calc uses one feat. It is the same one.
This calc uses one feat. It is the same one.
- 305
- 63
>Don't accuse me of biasTataHakai said:
>goes on to accuse me of bias
Sorry if i find it hard to believe that a naruto fan msg'd matthew to reply to a bleach upgrade (gee i wonder why) that was long since decided and was just waiting to be implemented, and then is in opposition with several other well known naruto fans who seemingly all reply at once.
- 2,519
- 1,364
"what do you mean the same feat later o in the fight? what does that even mean? if it is the same feat from when he initially moves and somehow is confirmed to be mach 500 that is indeed legitimate"
I'm not sure what's so hard to understand, it wouldn't be the same feat as when he initially moves because it's not the same scene, just like in this Ichigo calc, which brings me onto Imade's point in that the Naruto/Pain calc has an RS from the same scene
If we Calculated the RS from earlier on in the fight then applied it to that feat then it would be calc stacking and rejected, however that's not the case.\
But considering how controversial this is becoming it's best to get more Calc members to check the calc out with additional context.
I'm not sure what's so hard to understand, it wouldn't be the same feat as when he initially moves because it's not the same scene, just like in this Ichigo calc, which brings me onto Imade's point in that the Naruto/Pain calc has an RS from the same scene
If we Calculated the RS from earlier on in the fight then applied it to that feat then it would be calc stacking and rejected, however that's not the case.\
But considering how controversial this is becoming it's best to get more Calc members to check the calc out with additional context.
- 8,153
- 2,177
I can't keep up with all these crts.
- 305
- 63
I think we both know where your allegiances lie, Tata. Don't try take the moral high ground.
I would prefer to hear from other calc members indeed.
I would prefer to hear from other calc members indeed.
- 533
- 43
I am sure you're mistaking.TataHakai said:
Stacking something means to pile up things,but that's not the case here.
We aren't stacking anything here.
Ichigo's initial velocity in the calc is zero,his final velocity is the result gotten in the calc,but how is it that,if ichigo started out with no velocity at all but yet arrive at a velocity?
Simple.The more distance ichigo covers,the more his velocity will increase which we refer as acceleration.
Acceleration: Is the rate which an object changes it's velocity.
So we now divide ichigo's final velocity by the total timeframe ichigo took to arrive at soul society from an unknown distance to get the acceleration.
We now find this unknown distance using acceleration formula
As you can see,nothing is being stacked here,the calc didn't multiply the final velocity of ichigo by the total timeframe it took ichigo to arrive neither did it add the two results for it to be stacked upon.
It would be calc stacking if we take ichigo's final velocity as his initial velocity which is not the case.
It would be calc stacking if we used a speed directly gotten from a calc and multiply it by the distance it took ichigo to arrive at soul society.
If an objects lands from an unknown distance but with a timeframe of landing.
It is logical for any physicist wanting to find the distance the object crossed at to land is to first note that the initial velocity of the said object would be 0 and then find the final velocity of the object.
Then divide it by the total timeframe it took to land to find it's acceleration and then get the distance the said object covered to land.
Its an all in one feat,there is no two or three honestly
- 305
- 63
Thanks Danny, you explained that better than I could.
- 15,802
- 12,073
Ok so I'm no calc member and I don't have much knowledge when it comes to Bleach so my input isn't going to be worth much.
No one seems to have a problem with the first calc. If the second calc is calc stacking then I guess it can be used however from what I'm reading in this thread it doesn't seem to be calc stacking.
If it isn't calc stacking I would usually suggest the low end to be on the safe side unless there are more feats above it. I don't know who scales to what.
No one seems to have a problem with the first calc. If the second calc is calc stacking then I guess it can be used however from what I'm reading in this thread it doesn't seem to be calc stacking.
If it isn't calc stacking I would usually suggest the low end to be on the safe side unless there are more feats above it. I don't know who scales to what.
- 32,358
- 20,298
Regardless of what side you're on people should stop being immature and debate based on real arguments rather than name-calling and accusations. Why must Bleach threads always devolve to this?
- 2,926
- 1,399
- Thread starter
- #149
Stracking where? I considered only a single moment in isolation to determine the speed. From that time on, it is the time he took, which is something constant.
How clear, to determine the speed of Ichigo I considered only a moment. Stacking would be if, for example, i assign an MHS + reaction to the Quincys, because they react to lightning. Here I would be considering two different moments.
How clear, to determine the speed of Ichigo I considered only a moment. Stacking would be if, for example, i assign an MHS + reaction to the Quincys, because they react to lightning. Here I would be considering two different moments.
- 2,926
- 1,399
- Thread starter
- #150
The funniest thing about it is that Tata was one of the first calc members I asked to evaluate, I sent him a message directly, he didn't even call it, now he appears after that everything .
- 305
- 63
hmm..
- 14,409
- 1,692
In defense of Tata he is a calc member. Their job is probably the hardest on this site because of the request
- 10,043
- 9,293
Matt, please don't start, I thought we stopped being ignorant awhile ago. Like, everything was going perfectly fine actually, but once you start throwing around accusations and bassless claims, shit hits the fan.Matthew Schroeder said:
- 32,358
- 20,298
I literally asked people not to do it but apparently you think I'm doing the literal opposite?
Also, it is still Calc Stacking. Calculating the speed from Ichigo's falling and then adding it to calculate distance in another scene is per definition, unarguably, calc-stacking. To say otherwise is to not understand the meaning of the term.
And it's not the same scene or the same feat. It has 30 chapters between them. Just because one scene is a continuation of another doesn't make them "the same feat". This is like classifying multiple destruction feats which happen in the same fight scene as "one feat" because they happen in the same scene.
Also, it is still Calc Stacking. Calculating the speed from Ichigo's falling and then adding it to calculate distance in another scene is per definition, unarguably, calc-stacking. To say otherwise is to not understand the meaning of the term.
And it's not the same scene or the same feat. It has 30 chapters between them. Just because one scene is a continuation of another doesn't make them "the same feat". This is like classifying multiple destruction feats which happen in the same fight scene as "one feat" because they happen in the same scene.
- 305
- 63
it is the same scene, same feat, same everything. You are severely misinformed.
- 32,358
- 20,298
You are objectively incorrect. Tirelessly repeating the same phrase despite answers to the contrary whilst belittling the other side won't make your argument more convincing.GilgaArcuied said:
- 305
- 63
That is literally what you are doing. lol.Matthew Schroeder said:
- 10,043
- 9,293
I was referring to the last sentence.Matthew Schroeder said:
- 32,358
- 20,298
"What is an argument".GilgaArcuied said:
You say that it isn't calc-stacking because it's the same feat and scene.
I explain why it objectively isn't the same scene due to a gap of 30 chapters between them and also by making an analogy
You reply with "lol it's the same scene"
- 32,358
- 20,298
Wokistan said:
