Storm Vs Thor

[Varient]

You should see me during halloween. You're in front of your computer debating a fictional character's supposed abilities, sorry to tell you but you are actively wasting your time right now. I don't dance, I'm more the drinking type.

Does putting something in caps make it seem MORE IMPORTANT?

I always said it was gravity, well excuse me I started by explaining how she was somewhere the laws of physics did not apply. Gravitational force is the reason why you can't cram stars together without a chaotic event. You've not been reading.

She was at the center. Read back over that cool science stuff you listed.

Back in your scorpion box.

Nope. Reading is fundemental,... I posted the fact that you were wrong in your ramblings of why stars couldn't be that close,..
Gravity is also a cop out - anyone with a basic on physics understands that Gravity is based on proximity and with Storm being anything further than 1 light minute from a star (Kinda moot,.. the comic Shows NOTHING that close), GRAVITY isn't / wasn't an issue.

Caps are used in the hope that MAYBE you'll get a clue.

But like I said before - it's a waste of time.

Proof being with three pages of you and the scorpion box comments. All you show me is that you never got past grade school with the slights and insults.

Keep it up,... it showcases why I won't waste my time.

V.

 

[Varient]

They just go through stars? That's an impossibility. Unless the ship was invincible or magic. Take your pick.

Points off for that horrible and off base analogy too.

Do you read Science Journals?

Do you even READ science fiction?

Has anyone ever explained to you the BASE laws of physics that govern a body moving thru ANY medium at a high rate of speed?

Unless you can "explain" how passing thru a STAR is impossible for a craft that can take multple hits at transwarp speeds and ignore the the ambient heat,.. much hotter than a star at moving at such speeds -

You need to stop now and let the grownups talk.

 

[moraldeficiency]

Do you read Science Journals?

Do you even READ science fiction?

Has anyone ever explained to you the BASE laws of physics that govern a body moving thru ANY medium at a high rate of speed?

Unless you can "explain" how passing thru a STAR is impossible for a craft that can take multple hits at transwarp speeds and ignore the the ambient heat,.. much hotter than a star at moving at such speeds -

You need to stop now and let the grownups talk.

Awww, look you're using caps again. You must be excited. Let's begin and please junior, take notes:

First you cannot explain how a craft could achieve transwarp speeds period since it can only be theorized. Stick that in your HARD SCIENCE HOLE. But I will say objects of such incredible matter such as black holes and massive stars capture anything in their paths including time itself. So yeah, I'm saying it's hard for me to comprehend a craft that can go through these objects being created. It's far easier to comprehend crafts created that can go at those speeds which would still have to avoid stars and black holes.

ambient heat in space? Hmmm, isn't that created by friction? So as long as you're in a matterless envirnment no friction is created and no heat produced.

Grown up talk? That's cute and so very original. You're running out of even bad logic to throw at me now and starting to sound a little desperate.

 

[PemLam]

Do you read Science Journals?

Do you even READ science fiction?

Has anyone ever explained to you the BASE laws of physics that govern a body moving thru ANY medium at a high rate of speed?

Unless you can "explain" how passing thru a STAR is impossible for a craft that can take multple hits at transwarp speeds and ignore the the ambient heat,.. much hotter than a star at moving at such speeds -

You need to stop now and let the grownups talk.

I'll give you the part about the ship being strong enough to take hits from objects at transwarp speeds...it's definitely got some durability. The part about the heat though...there is no friction in space unless you're traveling within a planet/stars atmosphere, thus no heat generated by traveling through it, regardless of the speed.

 

[PemLam]

Damnit, I was too late. ^^^

 

[Varient]

Awww, look you're using caps again. You must be excited. Let's begin and please junior, take notes:

First you cannot explain how a craft could achieve transwarp speeds period since it can only be theorized. Stick that in your HARD SCIENCE HOLE. But I will say objects of such incredible matter such as black holes and massive stars capture anything in their paths including time itself. So yeah, I'm saying it's hard for me to comprehend a craft that can go through these objects being created. It's far easier to comprehend crafts created that can go at those speeds which would still have to avoid stars and black holes.

ambient heat in space? Hmmm, isn't that created by friction? So as long as you're in a matterless envirnment no friction is created and no heat produced.

Grown up talk? That's cute and so very original. You're running out of even bad logic to throw at me now and starting to sound a little desperate.

I'm going to try once more w/o being insulting:

1. Form follows function.
This means that whatever something is able to do/withstand it must be constructed or designed in a way to allow it to be.

Example - You were raised on Earth on land.... Your muscles and bones are designed to support and move you through this gravity field,.. you are able to easily tolerate moving at your maximum physical speed over ground without worry about things like breaking bones with everystep or getting burned with friction from the air.

A dolphin can't because he's not designed for land. He can be killed if left too long unsupported on land. His skin will dry out and crack if taken from the medium it was designed for, His teperature regulation was designed for being immerced in a liquid.

2. Basic construction from intelligent beings works under the same principals:
Anything that lasts is built with an eye toward being constructed to DO THE JOB, (I realize you can't handle caps - but it's a point you should heed.), with little or no failure.

3. I don't have first EXPLAIN how a craft could move at transwarp speeds to UNDERSTAND what kind of stresses a craft would be under to do so. Your logic is like saying that a calvaryman has to understand how a car works before he can understand someone falling out of the car and getting road rash.

Stupid.

4. Quote: "Friction is a surface effect and doesn't depend upon there being air. There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum.

Dr. Eric Christian"

That being said BY A SCIENTIST I'll add:
1. That the by-product of Friction IS HEAT.

2. That We are talking about a craft that moves fast enough to cross the gulf between galaxies in a matter of weeks on the outside.

3. Yes,.. Gradeschool will teach you that since there is "no air" in space that there is no measurable friction. This is based on the assumption that you won't be going faster than the speed of light itself. Even the Eggheads consulted for Star Trek Voyager admited that "Heat" was a factor in Voyager moving faster than light w/o the four or five protective devices they have in place to allow it.

And we are talking about something that moves literally millions of times FASTER than the fastest Star Trek vessel.

4. Just because you don't read and don't understand what the concepts can mean doesn't mean the conditions and properties don't exist.

In this case you need to believe that a FASTER THAN LIGHT CRAFT for some strange reason CAN'T survive going thru a star? Even when this craft moves at speeds (InterGalactic) where it would have to be able to survive because at speeds like that IT COULDN'T AVOID a star in it's path?

Right now You read like the common fool who scoffed at columbus because they couldn't grasp the fact that the world was round - They argued based on their experience with something they could hold in their hands that anything on a round object would "fall off".


SOMETHING DESIGNED to move thru space at speeds that you OBVIOUSLY can't imagine would have to worry about heat and be sturdy enough to travel that fast REGARDLESS of whether we can explain or design such.

Such a craft would not be bothered at rest surrounded by stars less than a light year away - grasp reality,.. how far are we from our star? even in an energy pumped space filled with plasma how can that compare with traveling thousands of light years in a couple of weeks?

You need to brush up on your science before you sound much worse.

V.

 

[Varient]

I'll give you the part about the ship being strong enough to take hits from objects at transwarp speeds...it's definitely got some durability. The part about the heat though...there is no friction in space unless you're traveling within a planet/stars atmosphere, thus no heat generated by traveling through it, regardless of the speed.

See my last post AND do more research.

 

[Varient]

And for the record,.. Yes I am insulted to have to explain basic stuff that adults bring into an argument, hence my current tone.

http://uplink.space.com/showflat.ph...=754958&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=

http://www.dutchforce.com/~eforum/index.php?showtopic=12277

 

[PemLam]

See my last post AND do more research.

First, jack***, unlike others I wasn't being confrontational or insulting so you can shove your smart a$$ comments.

Second, if you want to argue semantics, space, in and of itself, does not generate friction, it's the objects within it (microscopic particles, asteroids, etc.) that come into contact with other objects/vessels traveling through it that creates friction. Traveling at transwarp speeds will generate friction because of the countless objects you'll hit along the way, not simply because you're moving at that speed.

As for traveling through stars when at transwarp speeds, there is nothing saying that occurs, the only thing discussed in comics or sci-fi is traveling along known courses, thus avoiding stars, blackholes, etc.

Lastly, to say an object striking something moving faster than the speed of light will generate heat greater than any star is hyperbole, considering the heat generated at the apex of a blackhole is virtually immeasurable.

If you want to argue things, so be it, but save your grade school insults for somewhere else.

 

[Varient]

First, jack***, unlike others I wasn't being confrontational or insulting so you can shove your smart a$$ comments.

Second, if you want to argue semantics, space, in and of itself, does not generate friction, it's the objects within it (microscopic particles, asteroids, etc.) that come into contact with other objects/vessels traveling through it that creates friction. Traveling at transwarp speeds will generate friction because of the countless objects you'll hit along the way, not simply because you're moving at that speed.

As for traveling through stars when at transwarp speeds, there is nothing saying that occurs, the only thing discussed in comics or sci-fi is traveling along known courses, thus avoiding stars, blackholes, etc.

Lastly, to say an object striking something moving faster than the speed of light will generate heat greater than any star is hyperbole, considering the heat generated at the apex of a blackhole is virtually immeasurable.

If you want to argue things, so be it, but save your grade school insults for somewhere else.

Argue semantics plz,.. where did "I" say that "space" generated friction? What started this was my accounting for "heat" and you two telling me I was wrong.

Remember this?: "There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum."

That's as close as I came - by quoting someone else who put more thought into it then just saying "Naa - Ahhh."

You want to feel irritated or insulted with my tone? Plz do,... You now have a glimmer of how i feel having to post stuff from the internet to prove what i thought was common knowledge to people that have been telling me I'm wrong for three pages now.

You'll notice if i disagree with someone I don't namecall or tell you you are full of it,.. if i say you are wrong I post the why of it and give ref and example on req.

What just occured was a mass of people wasting time showing their ignorance in an insulting manner and my finally reaching my limit.

Peace.

 

[moraldeficiency]

I'm going to try once more w/o being insulting:

1. Form follows function.
This means that whatever something is able to do/withstand it must be constructed or designed in a way to allow it to be.

Example - You were raised on Earth on land.... Your muscles and bones are designed to support and move you through this gravity field,.. you are able to easily tolerate moving at your maximum physical speed over ground without worry about things like breaking bones with everystep or getting burned with friction from the air.

A dolphin can't because he's not designed for land. He can be killed if left too long unsupported on land. His skin will dry out and crack if taken from the medium it was designed for, His teperature regulation was designed for being immerced in a liquid.

2. Basic construction from intelligent beings works under the same principals:
Anything that lasts is built with an eye toward being constructed to DO THE JOB, (I realize you can't handle caps - but it's a point you should heed.), with little or no failure.

3. I don't have first EXPLAIN how a craft could move at transwarp speeds to UNDERSTAND what kind of stresses a craft would be under to do so. Your logic is like saying that a calvaryman has to understand how a car works before he can understand someone falling out of the car and getting road rash.

Stupid.

4. Quote: "Friction is a surface effect and doesn't depend upon there being air. There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum.

Dr. Eric Christian"

That being said BY A SCIENTIST I'll add:
1. That the by-product of Friction IS HEAT.

2. That We are talking about a craft that moves fast enough to cross the gulf between galaxies in a matter of weeks on the outside.

3. Yes,.. Gradeschool will teach you that since there is "no air" in space that there is no measurable friction. This is based on the assumption that you won't be going faster than the speed of light itself. Even the Eggheads consulted for Star Trek Voyager admited that "Heat" was a factor in Voyager moving faster than light w/o the four or five protective devices they have in place to allow it.

And we are talking about something that moves literally millions of times FASTER than the fastest Star Trek vessel.

4. Just because you don't read and don't understand what the concepts can mean doesn't mean the conditions and properties don't exist.

In this case you need to believe that a FASTER THAN LIGHT CRAFT for some strange reason CAN'T survive going thru a star? Even when this craft moves at speeds (InterGalactic) where it would have to be able to survive because at speeds like that IT COULDN'T AVOID a star in it's path?

Right now You read like the common fool who scoffed at columbus because they couldn't grasp the fact that the world was round - They argued based on their experience with something they could hold in their hands that anything on a round object would "fall off".


SOMETHING DESIGNED to move thru space at speeds that you OBVIOUSLY can't imagine would have to worry about heat and be sturdy enough to travel that fast REGARDLESS of whether we can explain or design such.

Such a craft would not be bothered at rest surrounded by stars less than a light year away - grasp reality,.. how far are we from our star? even in an energy pumped space filled with plasma how can that compare with traveling thousands of light years in a couple of weeks?

You need to brush up on your science before you sound much worse.

V.

God in heaven that was long boring and stupid. Here I'll make it quick for you: the amount of matter in small pockets of gas in the void of space is nothing like that of a sun let alone a black hole. One you wouldn't even notice in earth's atmosphere the other is capable of capturing and folding time itself. Can you see a slight difference here? While I could see a craft built that could survive and navigate space without much harm I cannot see it just shooting straight forward in a line ripping though stars and black holes. That's just stupid. Sorry but the effects we're talking about capture anything in their path and rearrange their very atomic structure. I don't see this craft doing that. Now I'm sure you have a magical star trek craft that can do anything except get you a girl in mind, but come on......your anything can happen with magical science argument is laughable. Yes I know we're close to our own sun, that's nothing compared to the situation we were talking about which according to the neat way you wiki'd the info would be a central event of enourmous proportions.

Common fool that scoffed at columbus? Star Trek references? Ok, not to insult you too much but while I do love arrogance, but you've managed to sound pathetic, boring and with a fictional education all in a few.....well actually you rambled on for forever.

In closing, if you're talking about scientific theories that go beyond any explainable solution within our realm of knowledge then brushing up on science doesn't help. It's fiction, kid, get a grip.

Now, I'm off to vacation, please argue continue ranting while I'm gone, I feel it gives you a purpose.

 

[Varient]

(Smile)
SMH.

"Personally, I think "depression" is caused by a lack of ability to use ones intelligence to stave off boredom. Our entire society is designed for "toys" to use to keep us occupied ...without them, the minds are so messed up that they can't think for themselves.

I think that if you think about it some more, you'll see that an intelligent person can never be bored .....and more importantly, a bored person is a sure sign of lack of intelligence."

Baron Max

 

[Ockham]

According to real-world physics, the density of interstellar matter becomes arbitrarily high in the reference frame of the spaceship when it's speed approaches the speed of light (relativistic length contraction). Furthermore, all the starlight will get doppler-shifted to high-end gamma rays and hit the ship head-on from the front. Naturally no realistic ship could take such a punishment. OTOH, this is comics, and comic stories don't usually take physics into account that much.

 

[Varient]

According to real-world physics, the density of interstellar matter becomes arbitrarily high in the reference frame of the spaceship when it's speed approaches the speed of light (relativistic length contraction). Furthermore, all the starlight will get doppler-shifted to high-end gamma rays and hit the ship head-on from the front. Naturally no realistic ship could take such a punishment. OTOH, this is comics, and comic stories don't usually take physics into account that much.

Sigh.
Where were you three pages ago when other yahoo's were saying such was not the case?

The only thing I disagree with you on is the "of course no realistic ship could take the punishment."

Since our inability to currently build one doesn't mean it cannot be built.

And "If" such a ship could be built to take that kind of punishment,... that same ship would not be bothered sitting in among stars less than 4 lightyears apart.

I seem to recall that people against the concept of the horseless buggy used to say that "the human body was not designed to withstand the velocities in moving faster than 45 MPH." Because as far as they knew with the knowledge they brought to bear,.. it was true.

That's why I reference Science Fiction.

Once the idea is put out there,... lots of people think on it and it becomes a reality.

I reference Star Trek for two reasons:

1. there are HUNDREDS of scientists who say that they are scientists because of that show. The show made an effort to have tech based on our current understanding of the Universe,... and stayed consistant.

2. With the exception of power source, distribution, and matter transmission on the Hard tech side,... every mech device introduced in Star Trek the original series has now been "invented",..... with most of the "Inventors" admitting that was where they got the idea in the first place.

The rest of the franchise had Scads of Scientists who Volunteered their free time to add to the tech of the Star Trek Universe based on what is understood now.

We have Scientist trying to make free standing force fields and anti-matter for more than pico-seconds at a time because of that show.

Thank you.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

Stars at the core would not be light years apart. At about a hundred parsecs out there are about 100 stars per cubic parsec. The density increases in closer up to hundreds of thousands of stars per cubic parsec. In addition the stars at the core are the biggest and hottest of all stars. Some of them are up to 50-100x as massive as our sun.

 

[Varient]

Stars at the core would not be light years apart. At about a hundred parsecs out there are about 100 stars per cubic parsec. The density increases in closer up to hundreds of thousands of stars per cubic parsec. In addition the stars at the core are the biggest and hottest of all stars. Some of them are up to 50-100x as massive as our sun.

No doubt,.... but I'm saying that this soup where stars are far enough apart to not take strips off each other is still plenty of room for a ship constructed to travel at intergalactic speeds.

Peace.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

No doubt,.... but I'm saying that this soup where stars are far enough apart to not take strips off each other is still plenty of room for a ship constructed to travel at intergalactic speeds.

Peace.

At that density they would be pulling at each other quite significantly. They would be filling the area between the stars with solar plasma at high temperature. The radiation would be very far above the lethal level at any point even well out from the core let alone in the core itself. The core would be an area that the Silver Surfer might well find hard to survive in and yet we are supposed to accept that Storm manipulated the energies there and survived. Nearer the center stars would be crowded together like fat people in an elevator.

 

[Varient]

At that density they would be pulling at each other quite significantly. They would be filling the area between the stars with solar plasma at high temperature. The radiation would be very far above the lethal level at any point even well out from the core let alone in the core itself. The core would be an area that the Silver Surfer might well find hard to survive in and yet we are supposed to accept that Storm manipulated the energies there and survived. Nearer the center stars would be crowded together like fat people in an elevator.

(raised eyebrow)
I've never read the surfer being limited in where he could go,...

 

[Silicon Surfer]

As to the matter of the Surfer I am speculating hence my use of the words "might well" rather than "would". The Surfer's body absorbs ambient energy to supply him with what he needs to sustain life. There is so much energy in the core that it might, repeat might, be more than he can absorb causing him to overload.

 

[Varient]

As to the matter of the Surfer I am speculating hence my use of the words "might well" rather than "would". The Surfer's body absorbs ambient energy to supply him with what he needs to sustain life. There is so much energy in the core that it might, repeat might, be more than he can absorb causing him to overload.

Okay,.. I understand.

No worries,.. when he fought Thanos with that Infinity Gauntlet (I think), he stated that he completly controlled his input of energy which is why he could adjust himself to try to match the Mad Titan.

I imagine to keep his normal swimmers body at human size instead of growing as large as Galactus or Bulking out like the Hulk, he must constantly tweak his input depending where he is.


Peace.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

Okay,.. I understand.

No worries,.. when he fought Thanos with that Infinity Gauntlet (I think), he stated that he completly controlled his input of energy which is why he could adjust himself to try to match the Mad Titan.

I imagine to keep his normal swimmers body at human size instead of growing as large as Galactus or Bulking out like the Hulk, he must constantly tweak his input depending where he is.


Peace.

True but what he is not absorbing he would have to exert energy to resist. If the ambient energy level exceeds his absorption capability + his output capacity then he takes damage. At that level he would be unable to resist the energy and could not absorb the excess.

 

[Varient]

The manipulation of the energy within the galatic core seemed easy for her.

Galactic Core

Surrounded by stars that are still only points of light,.... She would probably be on the edge of the Galactic Core,...

And I could be wrong,..(I'm going to check) but Nebula can't exist in the core since they are usually the remains of exploded stars or the birthplace of new stars - and what I've read says that it is believed that galactic cores are mostly old stars.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

The simple answer of course is that she wasn't in the core but simply in an area of space that had a lot more stars than she would be used to. This would also allow for the living worlds that she sensed. They could not exist in or anywhere near the core. She simply wasn't where she thought she was.

 

[highguard]

Sigh............We have Scientist trying to make free standing force fields and anti-matter for more than pico-seconds at a time because of that show.

Thank you.

And now we know that at some level even teleportation is possible.

You know I sense your frustration. Knowledge is a powerful thing.

There is a funny theory making the rounds of science that purpports to address all that we see.

You know, if you can conceive a thing, it probably is possible. Somehow, deep within my sense of being I know that there is a relationship between conceiiving a thing, believing it can be done and it actually occurring, simply because my belief might lead to an action that I might not otherwise undertake.

There is an amazing theory out there proven many times which states that just by observing light that left a star a billion years before can change the original path that that particle took to get to you a billion years later.

It and other ideas like it are based on a very simple experiment undertaken once with a cat called [SIZE=-1]Schrodinger's Cat.[/SIZE]

http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae179.cfm

In other words, a simple act of observation is able to reach back in time or determine something that purportedly already occurred. So what we see effects reality.

So then the question is if what we see actually can change the past, can it also change the present and by extension the future. [SIZE=-1]Schrodinger's Cat proved that for the past and the present this is true. The question then is can it also effect the future and I say yes because, the future is determined by events in the past and the present.

Now for the leap, this is so for observation, is it also true for imagination. Football coaches often teach their quarterbacks to see it before they throw it. We call it visualization.
[/SIZE]
I think there is a mystery afoot in the universe.

Clearly events are not absolute once the march of time has claimed them.

I think that this is perhaps one of the greatest mysteries known to man.

Somehow the past and the present and the future are connected, but how.

The theory extends to suggest that when a thing is not observed it does not exist. That if you are upstairs in your house, downstairs does not exist for it is not observed.

Donald Blake said (thor #1) it is not for the Gods to determine if they exist but for man to determine if they do.

Deep in my soul, somehow I know that that statement is upside down, that there is something completely bogus about it.

Science supports Strazcynskis take, that nothing exists unless it is observed. In effect all that we see is a product of our (man's or the cat's or a worm's) existence.

Now we know intrinsically that this is absurd, because we know that WE did not always exist and yet the Universe existed before us.

It leads to another mystery which is this if that principal is true for our universe and that is a fundamental property of cosmology then there was an observer out there long before us who gave rise to existence.

The question then is how did existence come into being by this process of observation if nothing existed and I think the answer lies in that thing I call imagination being a part of the process. And it must follow that imagination may have helped in giving order and shape to the things that we now observe in our universe.

What we think can indeed come to pass, what we believe does affect our 'universe' and what we see is not all that there is to our daily existence. We have seen this time and time again in the many stories of people who say "everyone said it could not be done but I believed otherwise".

And what really is that all about, that what we believe matters.

Is there truth, is there really reality, or is everything around us an illusion.

I think that what we see is the result of an incredible and awesome imagination. A mind beyond ours, beyond anything we might be able to conceive on our own.

This I believe is the mind and concept we consciously or unconsciously know of as God.

 

[OZONE]