Tiering question

[Sir_Ovens]

I asked a variation of this question before, but how much energy is required to stop every star and planet in the universe?

I believe the last question I asked only involved planets.

 

[Akreious]

Define "stop". Like make them completely cease movement in space so there's no momentum?

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Like stop orbiting and movement.

 

[Akreious]

I'm pretty sure that'd at least be 3-B since you'd also stop all rotation of galaxies in doing so but I'm not an expert on this, so

 

[Darkmon_cns]

I'm pretty sure that'd at least be 3-B since you'd also stop all rotation of galaxies in doing so but I'm not an expert on this, so

Probably more like at least 3-C all the 3D tiers bulk of energy is empty space as they assume the average energy of the attack is constant throughout and for something like a galaxy that's probably much more then 99.9%. If you just stop them your not only not destroying them but your going around destroying the whole galaxy in one attack thing.

By the way I responded to that question you had on my page.

 

[Drag-O-Drawgon]

Considering that stopping planets is actually pretty high, (I think even higher than their GBE), this might actually be 3-A.

Also, I've seen a galaxy's movement energy put in at 3-B. So there's that too.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

Considering that stopping planets is actually pretty high, (I think even higher than their GBE), this might actually be 3-A.
Also, I've seen a galaxy's movement energy put in at 3-B. So there's that too.

That doesn't make sense if you're destroying something out right like that you're overcoming all that energy.... also no way that this is 3-A just no way.

 

[Akreious]

So you're ignoring the fact that stopping a planet dead in its tracks actually require a crap ton of energy and are ignoring two people's suggestions that it is likely 3-B? Stopping something requires you to cancel out all momentum in that thing, which is mass and acceleration. Do you know how utterly massive a single galaxy is? Even taking into account that most of a galaxy is empty, stopping the momentum of all of it is AT MINIMUM 3-B.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

So you're ignoring the fact that stopping a planet dead in its tracks actually require a crap ton of energy and are ignoring two people's suggestions that it is likely 3-B? Stopping something requires you to cancel out all momentum in that thing, which is mass and acceleration. Do you know how utterly massive a single galaxy is? Even taking into account that most of a galaxy is empty, stopping the momentum of all of it is AT MINIMUM 3-B.

Wouldn't destroying a planet have to do the exact some thing tho? Your still overcoming the energy of that momentum if you completely destroy it.. also no need to get Hostile like that.

 

[Drag-O-Drawgon]

You do not need to stop a planet to destroy it. Any object can still be taken apart or exploded even if it is in motion.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

You do not need to stop a planet to destroy it. Any object can still be taken apart or exploded even if it is in motion.

It still doesn't seem right to imply that stop motion takes more energy then Atomizing.

 

[Drag-O-Drawgon]

Read: mass and motion of planets

 

[Darkmon_cns]

Guse it depends if it passes this number or not. 7.11 TenaexaFoe