• 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.

InuYasha Changes

RavenSupreme

RavenSupreme

VS Battles
Retired
1,796
255
thanks to Shining Force for his calculation on the OBD and special thanks to totally not a cat for his knowledgeable input on the chemical side

http://www.narutoforums.com/blog.php?b=33607&page=1

-> moryoumarus attack melts a mountain

-> chemical reaction is calculated at 7.9 GT

-> would scale to Naraku/Inuyasha/Sesshoumaru/Magatsuhi

---

what remains to be argued: the attack itself did not caused the level of energy alone. after the impact the chemical reactions happened autonom without any further energy input. however without the initial attack originating from moryoumaru the feat would have not happened in the first place.

any thoughts on this?
 
There is a part on Yamamoto's page that state he is 6-A by "environmental destruction".

Since the attack's after effects had caused the mountain to melt instead of the direct attack itself, you could add that he is "Island Level with Environmental Destructive Capacity" to his profile.
 
thats actually a very reasonable idea. i will wait for some input from other members but it would fit that feat very well. thanks a lot for the suggestion
 
I already debunked this on the last page. This calc assumes that all the bonds within the chemical structure of silica (main component of granite) were cleaved before reacting with the miasma (so the silica fell apart into silicon and oxygen atoms). However, anyone who took an organic chemistry course in university knows that is not the case. Molecules rearrange themselves into intermediate states while reacting with a molecule, not fall apart. So really, what we need is the activation energy, not the dissociation energy. And that is unquantifiable. We could have used the Arrhenius equation had we known the rate constant, or the rate of reaction, or the resulting products... but we don't.
 
Tivanenk said:
I already debunked this on the last page. This calc assumes that all the bonds within the chemical structure of silica (main component of granite) were cleaved before reacting with the miasma (so the silica fell apart into silicon and oxygen atoms). However, anyone who took an organic chemistry course in university knows that is not the case. Molecules rearrange themselves into intermediate states while reacting with a molecule, not fall apart. So really, what we need is the activation energy, not the dissociation energy. And that is unquantifiable. We could have used the Arrhenius equation had we known the rate constant, or the rate of reaction, or the resulting products... but we don't.
Click to expand...
So you're saying this calc is unusable?
 
@faisal_shourov Essentially, yes. Calculating activation energies actually requires lab experiments to do so since we need precise data of at least two different scenarios (at different temperatures). So we can only judge this calc based on its visual effect (ie what it destroyed, which was a mountain)

Actually, pretty much all chemical reaction feats are uncalculable unless we are given precise data about the reaction itself. Scientists have to spend hours in laboratories to figure out the energies required. A calc with highly vague parameters won't cut it.
 
while i appreciate tivanenks argument in such a technical manner we have to keep in mind literally everything we do with our calcs certainly neglects deeper scientific methods.

be it the pulverization of a mountain where we assume a given number of joules per CC for the entire volume despite we actually cant apply it for the entire mountain, the usage of lineal scaling when a feat is performed by multiple people or other similar things

- no calculation we do is technically completely scientifical correct -

but does this mean we should neglect the calculated feats alltogether? no. we have our standards for calculations so that we can get an as accurate result for every member to calculate himself.

in addition we have the approval of the totally not a cat on the OBD who majors in chemistry, which is a trused source for these kind of calculations.

but ofcourse i think everyone would appreciate if tivanenk re-calcs the feat since he gave a hint when using arrhenius equation
 
@Faisal_Shourov: I did and replied.

Also, not_a_cat may major in chemistry, but there are stuff he's bound to overlook. If he actually addresses my issue on OBD, we can have a proper conversation. From his comments, it seems he actually forgot what bond dissociation energy is. In fact, I did as well, but I'm a skeptic, so I went and refreshed myself on the concept, and all it took was a single wikipedia page to see what went wrong.

As for calcing the feat itself, I already said why it was uncalculable. Yes, we can use the Arrhenius equation to calc activation energies (ln(k) = ln (A) - Ea/RT), but we don't know the rate constant k in this case and we don't know the pre-exponential factor A. Temperature... well we can guess that to be room temeprature, but there are still two unknown factors which I can't even begin to calculate because I don't even know one of the reactants (the miasma).
 
Basically, calculating the energy of a chemical reaction with a fictional acid is like calculating the kinetic energy of someone moving faster than light. It doesn't really work.
 
thats pretty much what i am talking about -> mangakas do not provide us with scientifical accurate data, leaving us with speculations. and regarding this calc, shining force did a job as accurate as possible, seeing he researched the bonding energy of silical - the very least amount of energy required to chemically dissociate. so he is already going by a low end with the energy to molar mass before converting it

in fact, this is a very important calculation since similar feats (acid, miasma, poison etc.) feats have finally some sort of reference which they can rely on

i doubt the argument " we dont have precise data for the reaction " itself should be used to neglect the entire thing when we a) have the calcer using the lowest standard for dissociating in the first place and

b) we never have, in any calc - absolute precise data

edit: comparing acid feats with KE FTL feats is far fetched
 
Low end? He literally assumed that the miasma cleaves the bond itself before reacting with the atoms, which never happens in real life because that is highly inefficient and unstable and chemicals tend to go towards the most stable reaction possible.
 
another thing one could use is the standard melting value of 4300 joules/cc for rock in so we do not have to argue whether, how and what reaction we have to apply

from what i got it even specifically was stated the mountain was "melted", so the using of the standard value would give us a good result
 
  • sigh* That's for thermal energy though. The rock wasn't melted, it was changed into an entirely different compound.
 
Because that's what it looks like to the other characters who I'm pretty sure know jack about chemistry. It wasn't thermal energy.
 
the statements of the characters play along our standard terms for calculating feats - which leaves us with a calcable feat. now would it be a mere "he destroyed the mountain" with leaving the odds open i were to aggree with you. yet character statements are often referred to when certain feats are calced. especially in the vaporization / melting / pulverization department

ofc. you cant expect the characters to give an in-depth look to certain destructive feats. the statements are the best we got and they imply authors intent the best as possible.
 
We must also look at the situation. Did he fire a flaming energy attack, or some corrosive poison?
 
the feat in question used a barrage of "spears of poison" which is a changed form of the original "diamond spear barrage"

in fact, after the result it would have to be further divided so we get an energy value for every individual spear he fired
 
That's still not a thermal energy feat. Nor can we use dissociation energy because the miasma was never stated to cleave bonds between atoms. This feat is uncalculable.
 
the mountain was calced and the mass was found. the mountain was destroyed by melting as stated. using the value for melting is the next best thing we can do - as we have done in similar ways in very much similar feats.
 
No, we can't use a value for melting simply because no thermal energy occured. It's not even an approximation, and it's definitely not the next best thing we can do considering that it doesn't even have any relation to thermal energy.

In fact, the next best thing we can do is just label this as a mountain level feat with some hax in the form of corrosive poison.
 
Yes, the thermal energy. The rock is not being melted here, it's turning into a different compound altogether.
 
where do you get the idea it is turned into a different compound when on panel statements contradict your theory?
 
So is Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz also building level because she caused the Wicked Witch of the West to "melt"?
 
flawed comparison. for once the witch was suspectible to water meaning we dont know about the physics behind her being. whereas inuyasha plays in japan of the sengoku rea which means we can apply our own standards (e.g. regular rocks and the energy to melt them) and in addition the authors intent is made very clear since multiple statements have been made in the series about certain objects being destroyed - and in terms of naraku it was "melting" throughout the series

so what is your argument against the on panel statement of melting? i recall you deny the characters having advanced scientific knowledge
 
Not a flawed comparison. This was to show that "melting" statements can be used for a variety of different things, even for activities that seem like melting whereas they are not. And miasma is a ficitonal poison that we do not know how it works or the physics of it. But it is quite clearly depicted as not being a thermal source, but rather a corrosive poison. This means that it reacts with chemicals.

It'd be like taking Coco's poison and then using melting feats for every single one of his feat even though it's clear that his poison doesn't melt, but rather corrode substances.
 
it is. you try to blurr a characters statement legitimacy from a show with 550 chapters of consistently picturing narakus acid working on different things we find in the real world like rocks, skin and bone with a movie in a complete fictional world which is not related to our physics in the slightiest and 1 single feat of questionable "melting" off a character which was portraied to be vulnerable to water

you can of course continue to argue that way, however it does not mean everyone will accept your opinion (especially people who are aware of the series and understand the consistency and can differ between a statement which is legit and a bad comparison)

i would like to hear other people on the subject

is there a possibility to callout someone?

ant, can you highlight that?
 
What you're doing is trying to apply a heat value to a fictional poison that emanates no heat (or at least was never implied to do so).
 
I'm banging me head against the wall trying to explain this to you. Do you know what those melting values are?
 
and we are circling again. i will create a specific blogpost regarding the issue and ask for input from you and the other known calcers via a shoutout on your walls.
 
Actually, though nothing like the Inuyasha series, miasma is an actual thing and has been defined as "a poisonous vapor or mist filled with particles from decomposed matter (miasmata) that caused illnesses".

In the case of Naraku's miasma, it can be best seen as a supernatural "cloud of sulfuric acid" that reduces normal humans to skeletons, yet still poisonous to others. The best example of the miasma acidity would be when Naraku and Moryomaru face each other, their respective miasmas rotting everything in their path to confront the other.

But one must also take note that the potency of Naraku's Miasma increases each time Naraku undergoes personal modifications to his being to remove the weaker demons and absorb stronger ones to increase his power.
 
Fractyl said:
Actually, though nothing like the Inuyasha series, miasma is an actual thing and has been defined as "a poisonous vapor or mist filled with particles from decomposed matter (miasmata) that caused illnesses".
In the case of Naraku's miasma, it can be best seen as a supernatural "cloud of sulfuric acid" that reduces normal humans to skeletons, yet still poisonous to others. The best example of the miasma acidity would be when Naraku and Moryomaru face each other, their respective miasmas rotting everything in their path to confront the other.

But one must also take note that the potency of Naraku's Miasma increases each time Naraku undergoes personal modifications to his being to remove the weaker demons and absorb stronger ones to increase his power.
Click to expand...
Miasma was a Greek superstitious disease, nothing like how it works in Inuyasha. And it's not a real disease or poison either, it was just their explanation for why people became sick, just like how their Pantheon of gods was an explanation for the creation of the world. Miasma is just an analogy.
 
Tivanenk: Well, I mentioned that the actual Miasma is not like the "acid mist" depicted in Inuyasha. But like you said, it was more of ancient theory of an air-borne plague which explained diseases like the Black Death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Inferno3054
Recent changes to Ayanokouji's profile
Replies
25
Views
2K
MorrisHatesYou
MorrisHatesYou
James_Plays_4_Games
Girl from Nowhere: Small Changes to Start
Replies
29
Views
2K
James_Plays_4_Games
James_Plays_4_Games
Ignatheus
InuYasha Fate and Reality Manipulation + more
2
Replies
60
Views
4K
MrHazama
MrHazama
Xxiaa
Inuyasha revisions
Replies
19
Views
2K
Xxiaa
Xxiaa
Wikisource
Tensura WN: Turn Null/Nihility Collapse Additions
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
EL_xWatcher1234x
EL_xWatcher1234x
Back
Top