Should mass-energy conversion be the default calculation method for the collapse of black holes?

[DontTalk]

I and ClassicGameGuys had a rather long and unpleasant discussio about this topic. In the end we agreed that just the both of us would never reach a conclusion and that we should include the rest of the community in order to reach a verdict and that is what this thread is for.

So to make the mathematics that are supposed to be applied clear: The question is if we can calculate the energy a character can use to attack by figuring out the mass of a black hole he destroyed (by not further specified means) and using that with the formular E=mc2.

I am against using that, but I will for not list my arguments now, since that would be a one sided presentation of the topic. As such I would recommend everyone to read the discussio we had, since that goes in depth into many aspects of the topic and can represant both sides (even through it is, as said, rather long and unpleasant).

I would also beg anyone to state their full reasoning, since this is a complicated topic.

(And just to make it clear this isn´t directly about the feat of Superman, but a fundamental decision.)

 

[Illuminati478]

I have to agree With ClassicGameGuys, mass energy is the only method we can use for black hole calculation, not only because it is the main theory of what happans to a black hole when it does collapse, but also because there is no other process that we can logically assume made the black hole collapse, black holes are just enormous bodies, with an even more enormous mass, and as such they devour othe masses and even light, we can not say that any process such as regular fragmantation and the likes would affect it, this applies even more when you see that the black hole turned to energy, there is really no other option then to use mass energy...

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

well, there destroying a black hole irl wud require something liek altering its angular momentum (i think i read an article about this long ago)

but i dk if that will apply to fiction at all

 

[Rib78]

The mass energy of the black hole is not energy required to make it collapse; it is the energy derived from the collapse. To over-simplify a little, it's basically the same as a character causing an exothermic reaction (like burning a tree), and in the case of an exothermic reaction the character isn't responsible that energy output. It should be the same with black holes.

You could even compare it to pushing a car off of a cliff, you'd be applying energy to do that but the car's final KE didn't come from you, and yes, that energy was already in the system as the cars gpe, but the same applies to the black hole, that energy already existed in the system, as the black hole's mass.

In short: no.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with DontTalk about that this seems to bend the laws of physics for our convenience, so that we can get any result out of it, especially considering that Superman and other characters that supposedly collapse black holes have no official abilities to manipulate Hawking radiation, that this would not be mass-to-energy conversion anyway, and also as DontTalk said, even if the matter within it was somehow converted into energy, it wouldn't affect the gravity well that comprises the black hole itself. It ends up as an unquantifiable hax ability, much like any FTL travel.

Also, where exactly did that supposed converted energy go? If it really was of a scale sufficient to vaporise multiple solar systems, how was it closed up without the Earth and the Sun being the slightest bit affected? Couldn't the black hole have simply been shifted to whatever other-dimensional space that it was connected to? Or in this case, supposedly the other side of the universe?

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

ok, how massive was the black hole?

if it was 18 solar masses, then the feat was solar sytem x 15


if it was something else, then just multiply mass in kg with

9 x 10^16, and the answer will be in joules

divide answer by 2.13 x 19^47 Joules

and you get multiplier


wait hold on

th obd calc puts it at 34.41 megaFOEs, so thats like around 32.3 x solar system level

sounds legit

 

[Quincy_King]

We should wait for Classic to share his argument here....

 

[Joseph619]

I agree with DontTalk about that this seems to bend the laws of physics for our convenience, so that we can get any result out of it, especially considering that Superman and other characters that supposedly collapse black holes have no official abilities to manipulate Hawking radiation, that this would not be mass-to-energy conversion anyway, and also as DontTalk said, even if the matter within it was somehow converted into energy, it wouldn't affect the gravity well that comprises the black hole itself. It ends up as an unquantifiable hax ability, much like any FTL travel.
Also, where exactly did that supposed converted energy go? If it really was of a scale sufficient to vaporise multiple solar systems, how was it closed up without the Earth and the Sun being the slighrest bit affected? Couldn't the black hole have simply been shifted to whatever other-dimensional space that it was connected to? Or in this case, supposedly the other side of the universe?

Agree with you. I also think it's a hax ability and unquantifiable, and has nothing to do with Attack Potency. Specially since Superman struggle to destroy a simple moon.

 

[Quincy_King]

Specially since Superman struggle to destroy a simple moon.

Again That is a PIS bro....

 

[Undylan]

Joseph, Why do you keep downplaying Superman? Sorry to be off-topic but it really seems bothering you know.

 

[Rib78]

This isn't just about Superman, his low end showings shouldn't have any impact on the final result here.

 

[Antvasima]

True. Sorry. Let's keep to the topic please.

 

[SeiryuShin]

I see no problem with it being used as long as it's a legit black hole and it was confirmed to have completely collapsed

 

[Rib78]

yeah, you could get a number for energy that would have come from the collapse but there's no reason that would actually apply to anyone's stats.

 

[Joseph619]

Joseph, Why do you keep downplaying Superman? Sorry to be off-topic but it really seems bothering you know.

I am not downplaying him, I know of his feats very well. People blow some of his unquantifiable feats out of proportion.

 

[Kavpeny]

Joseph, Why do you keep downplaying Superman? Sorry to be off-topic but it really seems bothering you know.

I am not downplaying him, I know of his feats very well. People blow some of his unquantifiable feats out of proportion.

Some people get fixated on his low end feats and blow them out of proprtion as well...

 

[Kavpeny]

I disagree with the calc putting New 52 Superman at 4-A, because Superman didn't collapse that black hole by himself, simply tanked it's collapse.

However, I do agree with ClassicGameGuys's method for the calc.

As I've already mentioned before, calcs are...faulty. All of them are. Each and every single calc makes a trmemendous amount of presumptions, so in a sense, they're all (without exception) way off the mark.

Given that, I hope everybody realizes that comics are not exactly 100% scientifically accurate. And if somebody actually expects a comic book writer to show a character use "Hawking radiation" to close a black hole, their expectations are completely hypothetical and borderline delusional.

I also agree with Rib78's analysis of mass-energy of a black hole being the energy derived from the collapse, rather than the energy to cause the collapse.

To summarize: The method used to calc black holes is not exactly correct, scientifically speaking. However, scientifically accurate comic books (or manga) are rare, and hence the current method used to calc black holes' energy level should continue to be used since it gives us a reasonably fair value.

 

[DontTalk]

Ok, so counting through we currently have 5 people in favor of using it as standard method and 4 people are against it. So there is a small majority for using it. If no one wants to voice his opinion anymore or has otherwise objections, I will take that as conclusion to the topic.

 

[Rib78]

So, using the superman case for example, would it apply to his dc but not durability, if we assume that energy came from the collapse?

 

[DontTalk]

I didn´t really follow it, but I think I read that in the Superman case there are some special circumstances which made it so that it didn´t count towards his dc at all, but just his durability or something.

In general this would only count to Attack Potency, I think. Durability which a character gains from coming close or flying into a black hole is entirely different topic, I believe. Just as is Speed that a character gets for it.

 

[Rib78]

Why would the mass energy of a black hole apply to the DC of the person who collapsed it, though? That's what would come out of the collapse, it's not the energy that has to be put in to cause it.

 

[DontTalk]

Well, of you mean to ask me you´re asking the wrong person. I will leave explanations on this topic to the ones that agree with the position that it does count for DC.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I still do not think that it makes any sense, even by the permissive standards that we usually use for calculations, but that is me.

 

[Dexteradon12]

Black holes are purely theoretical and have never been observed in nature. Just like how not all fictional laser don't travel at the same speed as one and other, not all fictional black holes have the same destructive capacity.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

also, not all black holes gobble stars at once, most take a long time

but i think mass energy equilance is the best way to calc black hole destruction, also, we have to keep in mind whether a character tanked all of the energy or not

if not, then how far away were they and how much did the energy spread out