Why is creating a galaxy, galaxy level?

[Lou_change]

Alright so currently the Celestial Body Feats page says “creating whole Solar Systems is ranked as Solar system level, multiple Solar Systems as Multi-Solar System level, Galaxies as Galaxy level and multiple Galaxies as Multi-Galaxy level.”
There is a problem solar systems and larger structures are mostly empty space where nothing is created (technically there's the cosmic mediums which I guess explains why they are usually instantly visible it hardly matters at the scale we're looking at). Meaning compared to the baseline for those tiers, an explosion capable engulfing these structures in their entirety, the results are smaller.

For example according to our rules creating a solar system like ours which has a mass which is only slightly more than one solar mass is considered a more impressive feat than creating a star like Rigel weighing 21 solar masses. That seems counterintuitive. The first creation feat created less stuff than the other but is rated higher. Using e=mc^2 would get solar system level but that's explicitly not the standard due to getting inflated results and the sun would get a similar rating by itself.

However from here on out using e=mc^2 on the baseline doesn't reach the tier. Using it on the Milky Way is only 4-A at 3.6821999672847E+58 joules. For creating 1.5 trillion solar masses or 2.983 × 10^42 kilograms. The creation of the observable universe using e=mc^2 is only 3-B at 1.34813276810522646e+70 joules for 1.5 × 10^53 kilograms.

Given e=mc^2 isn't used since it "produces unrealistic values in virtually all cases. The energy required to do so is so ridiculously high that it is almost never realistic by any means" I think that would mean we shouldn't use a higher assumption.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

We do not use the E=mc^2 method. We use the GBE combined with inverse square law method to get the baseline calculation.

 

[Lou_change]

Well we don't actually use either for anything I am talking about.

The page also seems to refer to collections of celestial bodies as using a system different than what we use for individual bodies.

"Since fiction in general tends to be very inconsistent when it comes to creating matter out of nothing, Einsteins formula (E = mc2) shouldn't be used. (More info can be found on this page) Instead, the Gravitational Binding Energy of each planet or star should be used. If the size of the stars is unknown, then the GBE of the Sun can be used, if the size of a planet is unknown the GBE of the Earth can be used.

Furthermore, creating whole Solar Systems is ranked as Solar system level, multiple Solar Systems as Multi-Solar System level, Galaxies as Galaxy level and multiple Galaxies as Multi-Galaxy level."

 

[Lou_change]

Bump

 

[Jinsye]

Because we equate creation to destruction. That's pretty much it.

There's not really a solid mathematical basis behind it, because fiction doesn't necessarily work with energy values in mind. In most people's minds, making a galaxy = galaxy level.

It's the same for universes. Making a universe is universe level despite the huge amount of empty space, "actual physics" be damned cause creation doesn't follow actual physics unless you use e=mc^2, which inflates stats on a significantly lower scale.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Furthermore, creating whole Solar Systems is ranked as Solar system level, multiple Solar Systems as Multi-Solar System level, Galaxies as Galaxy level and multiple Galaxies as Multi-Galaxy level."

Basically what Jinsye said.

Adding to that, unless the size of the galaxy being created is given or somehow proven to not be the size of a normal galaxy[whether via being far higher or far lower], we assume that a "Galaxy" would be the size of the Milky Way.

The very act of "creating a galaxy" from nothing defies Physics, as well as the law dictating that "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it merely transforms from one state to another". So unless its a really scientifically strict verse and elaborates on how the galaxy was created enough to not warrant a galaxy rating, we assume otherwise.

 

[Lou_change]

In most people's minds, making a galaxy = galaxy level.

We have multiple tiers where destroying the name sake doesn't automatically mean you get the tier.

The very act of "creating a galaxy" from nothing defies Physics, as well as the law dictating that "Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it merely transforms from one state to another".

Doesn't the energy come from the creator? Isn't that why they even get to scale to creating stuff?

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Doesn't the energy come from the creator? Isn't that why they even get to scale to creating stuff?

Most of the times, yes, but not always.
However:

Creation is the ability to create something from nothing, without manipulating existing things. ~ "Creation" ability page

That's what it means to create something "without manipulating" existing things. Using their own magic or energy reserves in their own existence without using the energy of the surrounding is what it means to "create something from nothing".

Additionally, if the user only has the ability to create and not for directly harming others, then it would just wall under 'Environmental Destruction', which has its own limitations and cons. However, it's still worth mentioning in the OP section.

For example, a being that can create a planet can essentially make that planet collide with another planet to cause destruction. That's indeed gonna be planetary.
The clear disadvantage, however, is that in some cases, they collide the newly created planet with their own planet, thus bringing themselves harm as well.