• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Mass-Energy Conversion Statement

Assaltwaffle

Assaltwaffle

VS Battles
Retired
8,438
3,293
Does this descriptio sound like a blatant enough mass-energy conversion statement? I personally believe it is, but I am not sure. Opinions are greatly appreciated.

MassEnergy Conversion
-

-

-

-

-

Edit: This has expanded to a general discussion of what qualifies as legit Mass-Energy Conversion and if they should be accepted at all, that that is also a topic here.
 
To be blunt on my end I see a fat grey screen.

But apparently, we only treat stuff as Mass-Energy when E=MC2 or anything similar is brought up.
 
Hmm. I'll leave it open for the time being, it just seems so obvious, talking about converting them into "energy signatures" and then back to their "material state," implying matter was turned into energy and then reserved.
 
Ooh. Some light at the end of this tunnel maybe? Considering this seems to not be cut-and-dry do you think it best to invite some other admins, Matthew?
 
There's multiple blatant statements of mass energy conversion in SU that weren't accepted, i think we just stopped accepting them in general
 
Oh. Any reason for that? Throws off scaling too hard considering the massive amount of power it would take to do that?
 
It's like, the highest value you could get from a given amount of matter, ever. So it has quite the burden of proof.
 
Well, if blatant statements like "Converted from matter into energy" are rejected, I honest to god don't see how the standards here are possibly reasonable.
 
@Matt The main argument for being against such the last time I brought it up was because xcano argued that it "looked like light". Theres a statement or two from pearl and two or three from peeidot that say that they convert energy into matter to create their bodies as well as to shapeshift. I don't wanna derail this thread though.
 
Aside from listing the chemical formula how much more in depth than "deconstructing matter into energy" can you get? Is this highlight worthy? Seems like our standards are... interesting... in this regard.
 
Assaltwaffle said:
Aside from listing the chemical formula how much more in depth than "deconstructing matter into energy" can you get? Is this highlight worthy? Seems like our standards are... interesting... in this regard.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
Saikou The Lewd King said:
It's like, the highest value you could get from a given amount of matter, ever. So it has quite the burden of proof.
Click to expand...
Relativistic Kinetic Energy at or above 90% SoL technically gives more energy, and is less contested.
 
@WB

Well Xcano isn't here anymore and is it really fair to have a singular member block an entire feat's validity?
 
Oh lord, Guzzlord turns mountains into energy, doesn't he...

Let's not derail, though. So is this worth highlighting?
 
Galactus converts planets and stars into energy...

Which considering the type of being he is, are actually bit feats.
 
Here, preferably. We already have some info here. I'll highlight so people can see it, if that is OK with you.
 
Do we even have any specific regulations restricting mass-energy conversion feats? I do not think so. In that case, if there is a clear statement about this, I do not see why it should not count.
 
I am going to ask a dumb question and I will admit I didnt read the thread.

But what even IS Mass Energy Conversion?

I get it is e=mc^2, but what use does it have in our site in general? (I am completely neutral I just wanted to ask)
 
Oh right...this reminds me that there is a LN character that uses something like this and achieves what ends up as explosions in the end. On the concept of Mass to Energy conversion here, i mean (Said character is this guy).

Anyways, i don't really see the issue of this being used unless there's any other issues that can go with something like this. Didn't follow the thread until now so i didn't bother to see much other than "Becuz Xcano" being brought up so...
 
Weekly is gathering "everything" so I will be interested to see what the problem is. If there isn't a problem, we should establish what is needed for these feats to be valid.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
Everything? I thought i was just getting some statements about SU using mass-energy conversion?
Click to expand...
Well, I am personally curious.

But to the op point, I am fine with ME conversion since I did some research.

Edit: Am I the only non staff member here.
 
Oh, that's fine. I thought you had some kind of compendium of statements on this issue. I'll be interested to see what SU brings to the table.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Is the mass-energy conversion unique to the creation of matter?
Replies
1
Views
705
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
Epyriel
New Black Hole Creation Feat Formula Proposal
2
Replies
68
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
VersusJunkie54
Mass Effect calculations
Replies
35
Views
2K
LegendariumOfLies
LegendariumOfLies
Armorchompy
  • Locked
Metroid Prime 2: Light of Aether downgrade
2 3
Replies
108
Views
6K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
SomebodyData
Metroid: Light of Aether Low 4-C Return
Replies
6
Views
1K
SomebodyData
SomebodyData
Back
Top