Vaporizing Earth (Reference Feat)

[Arc7Kuroi]

Intro
So, @DontTalkDT and I were having a mini-debate in this blog here regarding a planetary destruction calc via heat. We didn’t really dive into this facet of discussion, but it got me thinking about why we include GBE for vaporizing the planet in our common reference feats.

Discussion
I checked out the blog where the common reference feat comes from and couldn’t find any extrapolation on why we included GBE, it just asserted so and got accepted into the calc. When I think of overcoming something’s GBE, I think of shattering a planet beyond its own gravitational pull. Like the matter is no longer held together but rather is free to float away from each other, since the gravitational pull ain’t keeping it together anymore (piccolo blowing up the moon comes to mind). However, if you were to just vaporize the planet you wouldn’t have to separate the matter beyond it’s GBE, you could just phase shift all the matter comprising the planet into a gas and be done with it. To me, that intuitively makes sense, but admittedly I’m not 100% about this.

Conclusion
I’m curious to hear what other people think. Or if someone can point me to a link that answers this very question.

 

[SeijiSetto]

I agree. Vaporizing the earth wouldn't require you to overcome its GBE.
GBE is basically the energy required to break incredibly thin shells of the planet off and move them to infinite distance away, compared to vaporizing something which is just heating and phase change.

 

[Stryker861]

I agree, this level of destruction dosent require overcoming GBE as its reducing the matter to such a small state

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Didn't even realize the calc did that

Definitely shouldn't IMO

Probably best to re-do the calc with methods similar to Boros calcs where you have to take every element into account on every layer (Including factoring it inner temperatures)

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I suppose that makes sense, vaporizing Earth isn't the same as overcoming it's gravitational pull

But we sorta default to nuking a planet as overcoming the GBE, would that change?

 

[SeijiSetto]

I suppose that makes sense, vaporizing Earth isn't the same as overcoming it's gravitational pull

But we sorta default to nuking a planet as overcoming the GBE, would that change?

Shouldn't. GBE is reliant on GPE, so it would only apply if you actually move parts of the planet away from where gravity wants to put them (i.e an explosion that destroys the entire thing and launches the parts outwards).
Vaporizing the entire thing in a flash does not rely on moving them against the force of gravity.

 

[KLOL506]

@DontTalkDT

 

[Flashlight237]

It's a little frickin' weird, I mean vaporizing Earth isn't as cut-and-dry as you think of it. See, the insides of Earth look like this:

And all the iron and nickel that make up the literally everything in the inner core is so pressurized that they are solid instead of liquid despite being a few thousand degrees hotter than the surface of the sun...

Considering all that I said, I hope you have a degree in thermodynamics because otherwise, you're not figuring this shit out.

 

[DontTalkDT]

What OP is concerned: Yeah, there is no reason to include GBE. It's a problem in the common feats that the exact assumptions that need to be proven aren't specified up front, but basically have to be filtered from how the calculation is done. (I tried to have a standard format established to fix that but nobody followed it... maybe I should put a note at the start of the page or something)

The feat in the common references is for vaporizing it on top of dispersing it. Not just vaporizing earth.

 

[Avengershows]

And all the iron and nickel that make up the literally everything in the inner core is so pressurized that they are solid instead of liquid despite being a few thousand degrees hotter than the surface of the sun...

I'm fairly certain that it's impossible to vaporize the core in a single blow, because it's a BEC. I think.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

What OP is concerned: Yeah, there is no reason to include GBE. It's a problem in the common feats that the exact assumptions that need to be proven aren't specified up front, but basically have to be filtered from how the calculation is done. (I tried to have a standard format established to fix that but nobody followed it... maybe I should put a note at the start of the page or something)

The feat in the common references is for vaporizing it on top of dispersing it. Not just vaporizing earth.

Should it be updated to not include Earth’s GBE? I feel like that’d be an easy fix. Either the original blog person can subtract out the GBE or someone else can copy the blog minus the GBE or should the title be updated?

 

[KLOL506]

It's a little frickin' weird, I mean vaporizing Earth isn't as cut-and-dry as you think of it. See, the insides of Earth look like this:

And all the iron and nickel that make up the literally everything in the inner core is so pressurized that they are solid instead of liquid despite being a few thousand degrees hotter than the surface of the sun...

Considering all that I said, I hope you have a degree in thermodynamics because otherwise, you're not figuring this shit out.

I guess we better get to figuring this shit out then.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I guess we better get to figuring this shit out then.

I think the current calc just goes through calculating the energy of the phase changes based on their current states of matter, I wanna say it acknowledges that it's not the most 100% accurate thing in the world, but currently is a better approximation than what was prior. Which improving its accuracy is worth while but not really pertinent to this thread, I'm more so wondering if A) we should remove the GBE portion from the reference feat or B) include some kind of note as per what DT about the calc being dispersing and vaporizing not just vaporizing

 

[DontTalkDT]

Should it be updated to not include Earth’s GBE? I feel like that’d be an easy fix. Either the original blog person can subtract out the GBE or someone else can copy the blog minus the GBE or should the title be updated?

It should likely be specified that the value is including exploding the planet. That's the most common scenario.

Planet destruction feats where the planet isn't exploded are more the exception.

Or we could list both values, I suppose.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Or we could list both values, I suppose.

im for this tbh

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Or we could list both values, I suppose.

Bump/should we do this/who is allowed to do this

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Or we could list both values, I suppose.

Bump

 

[DontTalkDT]

I'm ok with listing both. But obviously gonna need more than my vote to decide.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I'm ok with listing both. But obviously gonna need more than my vote to decide.

I’ll get some others then