Possible Small Galaxy level addition and 4-A revision

[Paleomario66]

I noticed on the Attack Potency Page it says that Small Galaxy level clashes with Multi-Solar System. However, I found the energy needed to destroy the Smallest Galaxy, William 1, and the is between the low ends for Multi-Solar System and Galaxy level. Here's the calculation. Also, I have an issue with the name for the 4-A tier.

Small Galaxy level
William 1, the smallest known Galaxy

Diameter of William 1 is 25 parsecs, or 81.5391 light years = 7.714e+17 m So with the the radius of the explosion is: 7.714e+17 m / 2 = 3.857e+17m

The spherical area it should cover is: 4*¤Ç*r^2

setting in r: 4*¤Ç*4.7305e16^2 = 2.3468133849664e37 m^2

Frontal area of the sun: ¤Ç*(696300000m)= 1.5231499587168312021e18 m^2

GBE sun: 6.87*10^41 J

Energy to destroy William 1:

(2.3468133849664e+37 m^2 / 1.5231499587168312021e18 m^2) * 6.87*10^41 J = 1.0585043096020279595608587642099e+61 J

If this is accepted, Small Galaxy would likely be either High 4-A or more likely Low 3-B. Kirby would probably be Small Galaxy level.

4-A Issue
The problem with the current terminology for 4-A (Multi-Solar System) is that it doesn't make sense. There is only one Solar System, since Solar refers to our sun, not stars in general. Star System or Stellar System would be better for 4-A since the calculation for Multi-Solar System's low end was actually based on the nearest Star, which is part of a star cluster, so I think it would make more sense for 4-A to be titled Star System level or Stellar System level.

Closure
Maybe the Small Galaxy level addition or the 4-A revision will be accepted (or both or neither) but they make more sense than 4-A being known as Multi-Solar System and a lack of a aSmall Galaxy level.

 

[Promestein]

I don't know about the Small Galaxy level addition, but;

Changing it to be Multi-Star System would make it inconsistent with Solar System, along with it being a lot of work, and changing it to Star or Stellar System would result in a lot of confusion.

 

[Paleomario66]

Ok, it is confusing, but it honestly is better, since again, there is only ONE Solar System, since "solar" refers to our sun. There are a huge amount of Star Systems in the universe though, so that's why I thought it would be better.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

TBH we really do not specifically need a small galaxy differentiation for this


although we could break up 4-B into 2 parts and 4-A into 2 parts (to make things more specific), but i dont think its really worth it

 

[Promestein]

It'd cause way too much confusion, inconsistency, and work to change it to Star/Stellar/Multi-Star System, even if it's a good idea on paper.

 

[Paleomario66]

Really? I don't see why it isn't necessary tbh.

I don't understand what you mean. I was just saying that the term MSS doesn't make sense. Solar System makes sense, but Multi-Solar System, not really. I was suggesting a change to Star System level or Stellar System level. Small Galaxy could fit as a High 4-A or a Low 3-C imo.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

there is no problem with the term multi solar system at all


the real problem is that we will have to scan through probably close to a thousand profiles and relevant calcs to make this small change which honestly is not worth it

 

[Paleomario66]

The name for 4-A was just something that didn't make sense to me, since the Calc for the low end was based on a star that's part of a Star System, and there is only one Solar System, like I said. That is true that it is a lot of work, but I think it might work, since MSS has a large range (not as much as Sokar System though).

 

[Promestein]

It's not anywhere close to worth the work. The current name for the tier is something easily understandable, even if it'd be 'technically wrong'.

 

[Paleomario66]

Ok.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

well the low end for multi solar system is based on the energy needed to destroy our star system AND the nearest star with just one attack/blast

 

[Antvasima]

I agree about that this would be far too much trouble for too little, if any, gain.

 

[Antvasima]

Also, as TLT1 mentioned, we base the lower border of our 4-A scale on an omnidirectional explosion sufficient to engulf our own star, as well the one nearest to it. We have to call it something, even if the term isn't perfect.

 

[Paleomario66]

Oh! I just thought of a term less confusing: Star Cluster level since Star Cluster is another name for star system, so it might work. Small Galaxy could also be used for the high end of MSS. I know it would be a lot of work though.

 

[Antvasima]

No. Sorry, but we will keep our current names. This would demand an extreme amount of work, and not gain us anything. I will close this thread now, and would appreciate if you do not bring up the issue again. Thank you.