Some questions about calculating planet sizes and even universe size.

[Damage3245]

I'd just like to note I'm still also against the Dragon Ball Universe size calc. I don't understand why it is assumed that the Observable Universe as we understand it IRL is assumed to just be a sphere that fits inside the hemisphere of the mortal universe in this map.

What is the basis for assuming the Observeable Universe in DBZ is the same shape as our Universe? And why are we using that assumption as the basis for calcing the volume of the DBZ Universe?

 

[The_Calaca]

Can we handle the main topic first, please?

If we discuss and decide what's better, we can go and discuss about those topics affected by the revision.

 

[PowerToScale]

Yeah, we should probably finish with the fairy tail world discussion first. We don't want to have overlapping conversations.

 

[The_Calaca]

The main topic is the general discussion about planets and universes, not FT.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Strictly talking only about the Main Topic, then yes, I don't think we should scale speed off of assuming the Universe Size, as well I agree if you don't have in verse measurements, then you shouldn't be able to calc the Planets Size, just use Earth

The only time you should be able to calc a Planet's Size is when...

Once I believe that the only time that you should be able to calc a Planet's Size are...

1. The Planet isn't Real Life Earth

2. There are actual measurements given by a reliable source in the story that you can use

3. There are multiple sources (Either maps, images or otherwise) that suggest the planet being bigger

4. There is no evidence against the planet being larger

That's my opinion about the Main Topic as a whole

 

[Antvasima]

This discussion should probably be restarted as a staff only thread in order to get anything done.

 

[Ionliosite]

Usually, the point of a staff only thread is to filter out unnecessary flooding and uncivilized conduct, letting the people who are really dedicated to this community discuss it without major obstructions

Using it to just shut off other people's opinions when they are entirely relevant and important to the discussion solves nothing

In the case of Fairy Tail, which seems to be the main point of discussion here, the statement is pretty stinking direct, and the implications that has for the size of the planet is pretty simple. That means this island is this size, and this is how much landmass it takes up. If that value is contradicted, it's fine to toss out, but if it is not contradicted, we shouldn't arbitrarily ignore pieces of information we have at our disposal to say it's just the size of earth.

In general, if we can measure it, we should only discount it if it is inconsistent and needlessly inflates results, goes for everything. I'm not entirely sure about the DB universe size, I haven't really familiarized myself with what that entails.

I'm going to quote DMUA on why this shouldn't be staff only.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

There should be a separate thread specifically about Fairy Tail, because looking over the Main Topic it isn't even mainly to do about Fairy Tail, so we hardcore derailed the thread ƒÿ░

Plus Fairy Tail is unique a case on its own to have its own discussion

 

[Moritzva]

The only time you should be able to calc a Planet's Size is when...

Once I believe that the only time that you should be able to calc a Planet's Size are...

1. The Planet isn't Real Life Earth

2. There are actual measurements given by a reliable source in the story that you can use

3. There are multiple sources (Either maps, images or otherwise) that suggest the planet being bigger

4. There is no evidence against the planet being larger

That's my opinion about the Main Topic as a whole

I agree with this. It doesn't have to be blatantly stated "Oh, this planet is Jupiter sized" if all the stars align and say so. My knowledge on Fairy Tail is limited, but it seems to be one of those situations where planet measurement is fine.

If you have actual, firm basis measurements, few contradictions, and at least more than one implicaton of the planet being bigger, I see no problem with planet measuring.

 

[Damage3245]

> and at least more than one implicaton of the planet being bigger

Regarding Fairy Tail at least, the planet only has a single implication of being bigger and that is the 400 km statement.

 

[Moritzva]

If so, sucks for Fairy Tail. That's not the point of this thread. The point of this thread, is what the rules should be.

We can't handle Fairy Tail's interpretation of the rules if we don't know the rules.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

^Yeah, but there is no evidence against, every map has the world being bigger than earth, and the Planet isn't earth

Fiore being as big as it is, is a given, that's just a fact of the verse, and If we're just gonna throw out the 400 Km statemnet because it makes the planet bigger and that's not safe, then every single thing that is pixel scaled is wrong by assuming sizes and such

I don't like that argument, but I'm not willing to just ignore actual distance given

 

[AKM sama]

@AKM Sama
I editted the calc for the bare minimum diameter without using curvature

Gonna ignore method 2 altogether, but real question about method 1. Do you really think a single mountain is 300-400 km wide? Like for real?

The map is clearly not drawn to scale if you ask me.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Those mountains and trees are to indicate that there are mountainous and forestry terrains there, are you seriously suggesting that we should scale those mountains size-wise to the country's distances

Real maps that use confirmed real distances also sometimes have mountains and trees as keys on the map, are you seriously suggesting this debunks the map, that means all real in-world maps that might have these images to signify what type of terrain is on the map are unusable and are also BS

You haven't disproven anything, real maps are like that, no I'm not suggesting those Mountains scale to 400 Km, but we see placement of all the citys and towns, so yeah, we can scale that stuff

This is a ridiculous argument

 

[Moritzva]

Can we stay on topic for God's sake? Enough about Fairy Tail.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Yeah sorry, I'm gonna make a new thread later just for Fairy Tail, as for scaling Universe Size, I agree that it doesn't make a lot of sense without specific measurements

Ugh, this is tiresome

 

[AKM sama]

Yeah I know it could also mean to depict a mountainous region and real maps also do that, but how can you be 100% sure it's that and not the actual thing? Several maps include actual things too in many cases but those are not drawn to scale, that was my point.

But anyway, I guess I'll ask this on another thread or the blog itself.

 

[CNBA3]

I guess the actual question would be, are cities black dots, if so, they would be far larger when looking at them from space

 

[The_Calaca]

I agree with Moritvza. This has been derailed to hell and back due to FT's case.

Do not adress something related to FT unless it's strictly tied to what we're discussing here (our rules about planet and universe's sizes).

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I've said my piece on Planet and Universe Size, so I'll stop about Fairy Tail and likely everything else

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree with AKM Sama here 100%

 

[Damage3245]

The proposed guidelines by MitchAubin note that there should be "multiple sources that suggest the planet being bigger". I think this is an important qualifier.

 

[Moritzva]

So, can we agree with the following:

Planet calculations are not to be used unless:

The planet does not sharply resemble Real Life Earth.
There are canonical measurements/references of measurement that don't require calculation stacking.
There are multiple consistent statements or frames of reference regarding it's size.
There are multiple consistent shots/images/maps of it's size.
There is little to no counterevidence or antifeats as to the planet's size.

 

[CNBA3]

you can also add that it should follow a standard limit of size for terrestial planets

 

[InfiniteSped]

What do you mean by limit of size?

 

[CNBA3]

I posted it earlier where there is certain limit in characteristics of a terrestrial planet that can be terrestrial and nothing larger

 

[InfiniteSped]

Eh, fiction can often make absolutely gigantic planets, I don't see why we should limit them. Planets in Ergenverse, for example, have small countries being larger than the sun. Lord Xue Ying has a guy with a backyard a few trillion kilometers long. Pretty sure Toriko has a regular planet about the size of a gas giant too. Limiting them to a few times larger than Earth seems weird.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Planet calculations are not to be used unless:

There is little to no counterevidence or antifeats as to the planet's size.

Would there being no abnormalities with gravitational force count as an antifeat?

Like, if you calc that the planet is 2x larger than Earth, that has a lot of implications for the acceleration of falling objects and the G-force exerted on living beings.

 

[Moritzva]

I imagine not. So little of fiction actually treats such a rule with respect, and to accurately get it right in an entire story would nearly require a PhD in biology and physics.

 

[Zackra1799]

I agree with InfiniteSped, if a planet is stated to be lets say "as big as a Star" and it has multiple statements and images to back it up we shouldn't go against it just because it's impossible in our universe.

 

[The_Calaca]

Would there being no abnormalities with gravitational force count as an antifeat?

Like, if you calc that the planet is 2x larger than Earth, that has a lot of implications for the acceleration of falling objects and the G-force exerted on living beings.

In most cases that's impossible to determine. How do we know if there's a different G-force exerted at all since Natural Selection is a thing? I think people tend to forget that evolution is what makes us able to survive our enviroments.

If the planet has been different from the very beginning so have been the life that was formed in it. It's disingenuous to believe that like the planet, the species on them have to be exactly like IRL ones. If anything, authors of fantastic worlds use what's more relatable to us, which is the human race, but in several works of fictions there are a lot of different species. It's no surprise that these humans might be adapted to another enviroment we couldn't even think about living in.

Saiyans are tailed-humans with a brute nature and adapt to any obstacle because they are natural-born fighters. Their enviroment and culture formed them as such.

 

[Damage3245]

Would there being no abnormalities with gravitational force count as an antifeat?

Like, if you calc that the planet is 2x larger than Earth, that has a lot of implications for the acceleration of falling objects and the G-force exerted on living beings.

I think even if a planet was calced to be that big, we should not assume that the gravitational force is also scaled up unless that is directly implied or told to us.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Actually, to the contrary, evolution would be exactly what shows us whether or not a planet has enhanced gravity, assuming life evolved on it naturally.

Even slight fluctuations in Earth's normal gravity would cause huge changes in the development of flora and fauna. Bipeds would be increasingly unlikely with higher gravity, and quadrupeds would be smaller and more squat. Tall trees like Redwoods and Sequioas would not exist as too much energy would be needed to move sap up the stalk, so you'd see lowlying plants like ferns and shrubs dominate.

Without some kind of supernatural element, human life would be impossible with higher gravity than 3G. Even at 2G, any humans would be built far, far differently than what we'd normally see.

Saiyans are tailed-humans with a brute nature and adapt to any obstacle because they are natural-born fighters. Their enviroment and culture formed them as such.

I mean, considering people in DB can be born with power levels that let them flatten cities, their bodies are already suited to withstand gravitational forces equivalent to gas giants at birth, so that's no real surprise. The existence of Ki trivializes the limitations of biology for the Saiyans.

I think even if a planet was calced to be that big, we should not assume that the gravitational force is also scaled up unless that is directly implied or told to us.

We wouldn't assume it, but if you calc a planet to be 5 times the size of Earth and gravity functions exactly the same as Earth, it puts a decent amount of doubt on the calc. Fantasy writers can easily give excuses for higher gravity but regular biology as described above.

 

[The_Calaca]

All of that would work under a realistic enviroment. But the average author can't determine how scientifically accurate their world is. Something as simple as Gravity would affect the life in the planet, yes, but like I said, authors don't pay attention to these details involved in what would that do.

X author said the planet where the story happens is 3x larger than IRL Earth. He doesn't know that such thing would make the world make no sense from a scientific PoV. Do we disregard the evidence just because of that? If the planet is stated and shown to be that big, why would we deny it?

Using the ki as a caveat doesn't work for everyone. Early Saiyan Saga Goku had troubles dealing with 10G and baby saiyans are considerably weaker in almost every case.

 

[DragonEmperor23]

Would there being no abnormalities with gravitational force count as an antifeat?

I don't think it would. Like, iirc going FTL messes with time but we don't disregard FTL feats just because the character doing the feat hasn't made any mentions of distorting time.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

You seem to be forgetting that one of the most basic assumptions that we make on the site is that physics is contingous in fiction until explicitly shown otherwise. Otherwise, we could throw around the same arguement you're making to debunk any given calc on the site, considering "the average author can't determine how scientifically accurate their world is" (the claim is also just stupid, to be blunt. Authors more often than not look into science for worldbuilding, they aren't just too stupid to understand it. They purposefully ignore it for the sake of good storytelling, not because they don't get high school physics). If we're using fragmentation and specific heat values the author likely didn't even think about because of how irrelevant it is to the plot, we might as well consider one of the most fundamental forces in the universe the same way.

As for the Dragon Ball example, inconsistencies exist in any fiction. You won't see me arguing that Goku would die to high G forces because 10G gave him trouble, as it ignores all the examples of far greater forces he withstood.

 

[InfiniteSped]

The planet being bigger while everything else is normal kinda is the "shown otherwise", no?

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

The planet being bigger while everything else is normal kinda is the "shown otherwise", no?

I feel like it's easier to assume that perhaps the multitude of calculations involved in finding the planet's size ran into some kind of issue, or that the implications of people calculating the planet's size are more fallible than the author's understanding of gravity, than it is to say that gravity is just being ignored in that instance.

 

[InfiniteSped]

If you need to pixel scale between 50 different panels to get the planet size, I agree. If it's just a statement of distance like in FT, where you can reasonably scale the rest of the planet, I don't see the problem.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

@Dargoo Faust

So, you're saying that unless the verse has superhuman abilities that make characters way stronger than normal humans, then you can't make the planet bigger, cause like Ki, Magic, and stuff like that makes stuff stronger

I don't really think the gravity thing matters if the planet isn't earth and has some life energy stuff