• 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.

Psykorochi and Tatsumaki "upgrade"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Emirp sumitpo

VS Battles
Thread Moderator
23,986
24,511
So another OPM CRT. Here we go, let's just hope this doesn't go to hell like last time.

Ugarik recently made a new calc on Psykorochi's famous feat, in which the previous result was 5.8868 petatons, the new calc puts the feat at 254 petatons, which was the accepted end, which basically just puts her higher into Multi-Continent level. So not exactly a massive upgrade.

This would affect 10 second Genos' 6-A rating, which comes from downscaling from Psykorochi's baseline High 6-A feat. It should be replaced with simply "At most High 6-A".

This CRT is to decide whether or not we should replace the current calc with Ugarik's calc or keep it as it is.
 
I vote for using Ugarik's calc because the spherical cap formula gets a better approximation of the total mass and energy involved.
 
Uga's calculation is updated using the circumference of the earth method. Also using the volume of a sherical is the better option, it is almost impossible to see the height

So yeah, I agree with Uga calculation
 
I messaged Qawsedf, no reply. I'm assuming Qawsedf is busy or he ain't interested. I'll message Ant
 
Could get someone who evaluated the previous calc to look at this and see which is the more appropriate calc?
 
Thank you for the replies.

If the calculation has not been accepted yet, it obviously also cannot be used yet.

Can somebody investigate who evaluated the original calculation and ask them to evaluate the new version as well please?

 
The calc to my understanding hasn't been accepted yet. Both of the calc group members that did comment had issues with the math and either didn't respond back or gave an unclear answer of which end to use.

But if the high end is accepted I wouldn't be against it.
@Migue79 did accept the new version, and he said that the high-end was fine.
 
The calc to my understanding hasn't been accepted yet. Both of the calc group members that did comment had issues with the math and either didn't respond back or gave an unclear answer of which end to use.

But if the high end is accepted I wouldn't be against it.
Migue did accept the high end in the comments, saying:
“ ... You know what? Forget the low-end I suggested. I thought that the pixelscaling of the sun would do a significant difference at first. But after doing this I realized it doesn't.

Yeah. Your original end checks out in my book. My bad.”
 
Oky, and who accepted the original, currently used, calculation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top