SomebodyData
Waiting for Walpurgisnacht Rising and Metroid 6...
VS Battles
Administrator
Human Resources
- 14,727
- 4,021
The Core of the Issue:
Currently, we use Champa's statement regarding the Super Dragon Balls being "almost as big as a planet" as the basis for a lot of our DBZ planet calculations.
However, the raw line is:
The word is ほど, not "almost".
ほど is a scale comparison. It doesn't mean "almost but not quite", "slightly smaller than", or "below planet size", or anything in that lane of wording.
The Viz (yes Vizmedia) scan saying "almost as big as a planet" adds a meaning that is objectively not in the Japanese.
The actual stated diameter of a Super Dragon Ball is:
For comparison:
The Super Dragon Balls aren't "below planet size". The very fact they're over 7x Mercury's diameter and nearly 3x Earth's diameter makes that obvious.
They're smaller than gas giants of course, but that doesn't make them non-planet-sized. It simply makes them about as large as a planet, which they are. But ultimately that doesn't matter because the word that enables this method of scaling simply doesn't exist.
The scan can't be used to claim:
So the correct reading is simply:
Anything that uses them as a default planet size needs to be changed accordingly.
Below is every calc, accepted or otherwise that uses this foundation in some way, that looks semi-relevant or used. Some are unsalvageable or just there to be there, some have had a few quick fixes and patches offered. Obviously more exist, but linking 10 different Planet Vegeta calcs, and even a odd Jaco one isn't relevant here.
vsbattles.fandom.com
I want to preface this by saying even the quick fix, isn't the best way to do the feat. But the best way is such a tedious undertaking while honestly not being too different in the end (you're not looking at a drastic swing), the simplified versions should work for now. For the record on method:
I would personally prefer Version 2 in such a case, that's the speed of the vast majority of the mass being weighted. While also factoring in Planet Vegeta's 10G and Earth-like structure for a new size, mass, and so forth. This one is actually a bit of an upgrade because of that instead of a strict downgrade, about 2x the current value.
Using the blog's old reference:
The second calc uses:
The second blog says:
How much lower than the old listed high end do these get?
1279.1720813639747x lower to 25.85680611564757x lower.
Not that it matters given we are not doing E=MC2. Doesn't even make sense, we're told why it happened, and Beerus mentioning decades later that a byproduct of Hakai of all things isn't something Frieza would be capable of at that point.
Just use GBE, which is 13.894 and 687 Zettatons respectively. KE if applicable as well.
Besides the CRT problem, this one also seems to treat the 1055 px blue line incorrectly.
The blog lists:
Using the corrected planet measurement:
Using an Earth-sized fallback:
The issue in this one is that this blog is being treated like a generic "destroying an average planet" value, but the math isn't just the energy needed to destroy the planet.
It assumes the planet's mass gets launched across one whole planetary radius in 10 seconds, 5 seconds, or 1 second, then calculates kinetic energy from that assumed speed.
Huge extra assumption there.
If this is just meant to answer "how much energy does it take to destroy an average planet?", then it should just use GBE.
If this is for an actual scene where a planet explodes and debris visibly moves outward, then the actual scene should be measured. Use the shown distance and timeframe from that feat.
But for a hypothetical baseline, claiming a 1/5/10 second ejecta timeframe makes no sense. It turns the calc from "planet destruction" into "planet destruction plus high-speed debris launch". Since kinetic energy scales with speed squared, that assumption massively changes the result.
I'm unsure if we even use that blog, now if it's just for fun and whatever that's fine, but even ignoring the size changes, there's no situation we'd ever actually use this. The blog shouldn't be used as a general average-planet destruction standard. Either use the planet's GBE for the baseline, or only use KE when a specific scene gives actual measurable debris movement.
Currently, we use Champa's statement regarding the Super Dragon Balls being "almost as big as a planet" as the basis for a lot of our DBZ planet calculations.
However, the raw line is:
- 本物はスケールが違う
1つが星ほどのサイズだ!
"願い星" といってもいい大きさ!
どんな願いも叶う!
いわば "超ドラゴンボール" だ!!! - The real ones are on a different scale.
Each one is like a planet in size!
They are so big you could call them "wish stars"!
They can grant any wish!
In other words, they are "Super Dragon Balls"!!!
- 1つが星ほどのサイズだ!
The word is ほど, not "almost".
ほど is a scale comparison. It doesn't mean "almost but not quite", "slightly smaller than", or "below planet size", or anything in that lane of wording.
- 星 = star / planet / celestial body
- ほどの = comparable to / on the scale of / to the extent of
- サイズだ = is the size
- "Each one is planet-sized"
- "Each one is on the scale of a planet"
- "Each one is comparable to a planet in size"
The Viz (yes Vizmedia) scan saying "almost as big as a planet" adds a meaning that is objectively not in the Japanese.
The actual stated diameter of a Super Dragon Ball is:
- 37,196.2204 km
For comparison:
- Mercury = 4,879 km
- Earth = 12,756 km
- Super Dragon Ball = 37,196.2204 km
- Jupiter = 142,984 km
- 37,196.2204 / 4,879 = 7.62x
- 37,196.2204 / 12,756 = 2.92x
- 142,984 / 37,196.2204 = 3.84x
The Super Dragon Balls aren't "below planet size". The very fact they're over 7x Mercury's diameter and nearly 3x Earth's diameter makes that obvious.
They're smaller than gas giants of course, but that doesn't make them non-planet-sized. It simply makes them about as large as a planet, which they are. But ultimately that doesn't matter because the word that enables this method of scaling simply doesn't exist.
The scan can't be used to claim:
- "Super Dragon Balls are only almost planet-sized, so normal Dragon Ball planets must be above 37,196.2204 km".
So the correct reading is simply:
- "Each Super Dragon Ball is planet-sized / planet-scale".
Anything that uses them as a default planet size needs to be changed accordingly.
Below is every calc, accepted or otherwise that uses this foundation in some way, that looks semi-relevant or used. Some are unsalvageable or just there to be there, some have had a few quick fixes and patches offered. Obviously more exist, but linking 10 different Planet Vegeta calcs, and even a odd Jaco one isn't relevant here.
- Fix: Unfortunately, not usable now that the statement is unviable.
Frieza Destroys Planet Vegeta - "Super"-sized
vsbattles.fandom.com
- Fix: [INSERT COOL CALC HERE].
I want to preface this by saying even the quick fix, isn't the best way to do the feat. But the best way is such a tedious undertaking while honestly not being too different in the end (you're not looking at a drastic swing), the simplified versions should work for now. For the record on method:
- The shell/volume expansion method fits this shot better here, given the planet isn't shown as a fully disintegrated "dust cloud" yet (like it is after the cut), but the novelization and also just looking at the scene says that the volume is disintegrated as it goes on but obviously that hasn't happened yet in the initial cut. The majority of the visible mass is still concentrated in large connected crust/shell chunks being thrown outward together. Bar a few stray pieces. Visually, it's closer to an eggshell cracking and expanding than to a planet already pulverized into countless tiny fragments.
- That matters for the KE method as the measured outer expansion isn't just a few isolated fast particles at the edge. The largest and densest pieces are part of the expanding shell itself, so the front movement is much more representative of the main moving mass than it would be in the late-stage debris cloud towards the end of the scene. The inner material can still be slower of course (except I'm pretty sure this is the inner material), and not every piece has to move at the exact front speed, but the average mass speed is overwhelmingly a large portion of the front speed because the main mass is visibly moving outward in those very same large chunks that make up the vast majority of the mass (in fact, there's even a few stray chunks that moved further out already by a slight bit).
- The /20 dispersal method we have now is more fitting for the later stage where the planet has already crumbled into a huge number of tiny fragments. In that case, the visible outer edge would likely be made of the fastest sparse debris, while most of the mass would lag much closer to the center (rough calcing actually tells me that's the case for that shot, outer bits move further in shorter time, though still not quite to the /20 scale, it's closer to that version than this version). That'd make the front speed a poor representation of the average mass speed for the initial cracking and ejection.
- This shot isn't that kind of fully dispersed debris cloud. It's an early shell-ejection stage where most of the mass is still in large outward-moving chunks. Because of that, treating the feat as shell/volume expansion is more physically accurate than treating it like a fully pulverized omnidirectional debris spray.
I would personally prefer Version 2 in such a case, that's the speed of the vast majority of the mass being weighted. While also factoring in Planet Vegeta's 10G and Earth-like structure for a new size, mass, and so forth. This one is actually a bit of an upgrade because of that instead of a strict downgrade, about 2x the current value.
- 1. Planet Namek's size (Dragon Ball)
- 2. Planet Namek's explosion, using an alternate method (Dragon Ball)
- The first calc assumes the small body used as the reference object is 37,196.2204 km wide, based on the "average planet = Super Dragon Ball size" idea.
- Namek diameter = reference object diameter * 2.33998811998812
Using the blog's old reference:
- 37,196.2204 km * 2.33998811998812 = 87,038.713844667 km
- Namek diameter = reference object diameter * 2.33998811998812
- Moon diameter = 3,474.8 km
- Namek diameter = 3,474.8 * 2.33998811998812 = 8,130.990719334719 km.
- M = gR^2 / G
- 9.81 * (4,065,495.3596673594)^2 / 6.67430e-11 = 2.4293507516303994e24 kg.
- Earth diameter = 12,756 km
- 12,756 * 2.33998811998812 = 29,848.888458568457 km.
- M = gR^2 / G.
- 9.81 * (14,924,444.229284229)^2 / 6.67430e-11 = 3.2738563426502862e25 kg.
- Old Namek diameter = 87,038.7141 km
- Old Namek mass = 2.78373714e26 kg
- Moon-object correction:
- Diameter is 10.704564438012486x lower.
- Mass is 114.58769953790174x lower.
- Earth-object correction:
- Diameter is 2.9159784030421596x lower.
- Mass is 8.502930026998314x lower.
The second calc uses:
- Core-like volume ratio = 16.3% = 0.163
- Core density = 13,000 kg/m^3
- Energy = mass * c^2
- c = 299,792,458 m/s
- Volume = (4/3) * pi * r^3
- Core-like volume = Volume * 0.163
- Core-like mass = Core-like volume * 13,000
- Energy = Core-like mass * c^2
- Radius = 4,065,495.3596673594 m
- Volume = 2.8146799429511486e20 m^3
- Core-like volume:
- 2.8146799429511486e20 * 0.163 = 4.587928307010372e19 m^3
- Core-like mass:
- 4.587928307010372e19 * 13,000 = 5.964306799113484e23 kg
- Energy:
- 5.964306799113484e23 * 299,792,458^2 = 5.360451623278456e40 J (12.81178686252021 Quettatons)
- Earth-object Namek version:
- Radius = 14,924,444.229284229 m
- Volume = 1.3924612285426047e22 m^3
- Core-like volume:
- 1.3924612285426047e22 * 0.163 = 2.2697118025244457e21 m^3
- Core-like mass:
- 2.2697118025244457e21 * 13,000 = 2.9506253432817793e25 kg
- Energy:
- 2.9506253432817793e25 * 299,792,458^2 = 2.6518898077865995e42 J (633.8168756660132 Quettatons)
The second blog says:
- Diameter = 87,038.7141 km
- Volume = 3.60046e23 m^3
- But the sphere volume for 87,038.7141 km diameter is actually:
- Radius = 43,519,357.05 m
- Volume = (4/3) * pi * 43,519,357.05^3
- Volume = 3.452518551518173e23 m^3
How much lower than the old listed high end do these get?
1279.1720813639747x lower to 25.85680611564757x lower.
Not that it matters given we are not doing E=MC2. Doesn't even make sense, we're told why it happened, and Beerus mentioning decades later that a byproduct of Hakai of all things isn't something Frieza would be capable of at that point.
Just use GBE, which is 13.894 and 687 Zettatons respectively. KE if applicable as well.
Besides the CRT problem, this one also seems to treat the 1055 px blue line incorrectly.
The blog lists:
- Green line = Planet = 520 px
- Red line = Small Planet = 236 px
- Blue line = Fragment flying distance = 1055 px
Using the corrected planet measurement:
- Planet diameter = 526 px
- Final debris diameter = 1055 px
- Movement = (final debris diameter - original planet diameter) / 2
- (1055 - 526) / 2 = 264.5 px
Using an Earth-sized fallback:
- Planet diameter = 526 px = 12,756.2 km
- Pixel scale = 12,756.2 / 526 = 24.251330798479087 km/px
- 264.5 * 24.251330798479087 = 6,414.476996197719 km (6,414,476.996197719 m)
- Time = 0.52 s
- 6,414,476.996197719 / 0.52 = 12,335,532.684995613 m/s (0.04114690798857793c)
- E = (1 / sqrt(1 - 0.04114690798857793^2) - 1) * 5.9722e24 * 299,792,458^2 = 4.549587899880457e38 J (0.10873776051339524 quettatons TNT)
- I = integral from 0 to 1 of 3*x^2*((1 / sqrt(1 - (x*0.04114690798857793)^2)) - 1) dx = 0.000508381601441336
- E = 5.9722e24 * 299,792,458^2 * 0.000508381601441336 = 2.7287614678209614e38 J (0.06521896433606505 quettatons TNT)
- E = (1 / 20) * m * v^2
- E = (1 / 20) * 5.9722e24 * 12,335,532.684995613^2 = 4.5438100127173114e37 J (10.859966569592044 ronnatons TNT)
- E = 4.5454594781582355e37 J = 10.863908886611462 ronnatons TNT
- 1. The Super Dragon Ball diameter shouldn't be used as a generic planet-size.
- 2. The 1055 px line is being treated as one-way fragment movement, when it seems to be the full debris-cloud diameter. The actual one-way outer-front movement is only: (1055 - 526) / 2 = 264.5 px
The issue in this one is that this blog is being treated like a generic "destroying an average planet" value, but the math isn't just the energy needed to destroy the planet.
It assumes the planet's mass gets launched across one whole planetary radius in 10 seconds, 5 seconds, or 1 second, then calculates kinetic energy from that assumed speed.
Huge extra assumption there.
If this is just meant to answer "how much energy does it take to destroy an average planet?", then it should just use GBE.
If this is for an actual scene where a planet explodes and debris visibly moves outward, then the actual scene should be measured. Use the shown distance and timeframe from that feat.
But for a hypothetical baseline, claiming a 1/5/10 second ejecta timeframe makes no sense. It turns the calc from "planet destruction" into "planet destruction plus high-speed debris launch". Since kinetic energy scales with speed squared, that assumption massively changes the result.
I'm unsure if we even use that blog, now if it's just for fun and whatever that's fine, but even ignoring the size changes, there's no situation we'd ever actually use this. The blog shouldn't be used as a general average-planet destruction standard. Either use the planet's GBE for the baseline, or only use KE when a specific scene gives actual measurable debris movement.
- Agree: Floxy178, Damage3245, Dalesean027
- Disagree, although there really isn't a second option:
Last edited:
