• 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.

Assorted Lifting Strength Discussion Thread

The character withstands a push into his body and barely moves. Can we translate this into lifting strength if we know the exact force of this push in Newtons and the stopping distance the character had to go to suppress the momentum? In the end, to withstand and stop such a force, you need to have a force that is not inferior.
 
Are you talking about a scenario where you stand still and a car crashes into you and you barely move? Yeah I think it should be counted as LS since your feet planted to the ground is trying to resist it.
 
Physically speaking that is impossible. Unless he dug his toes into the ground, no matter what level of strength the person is, he'll be flung dozens of meters away.

Which is why i disagree with the notion of "LS counters Telekinesis". Because you may move your arms and stuff, but your body mass is still small so you can still be thrown around.

Similar case here, you may be able to lift a lot, but at the end of the day, the one with less mass will be flung outta the way (in this case the human, instead of the car) due to having far too small of an inertia to counter the force tryna push him.

So i am unsure as to what to do in these cases. Maybe treat them as PIS if it's a 1 case thing, if it's a thing that happens all the time in X verse i have no idea.
 
LS on its own does not counter telekinesis, not unless you have flight into the mix.

Also stopping a car just by standing really isn't telekinesis. Just ask Hancock.
 
I was calculating Saitama's feat when rocks flying at near-light speed were thrown at him, and He didn't even move. This gave a really impressive result, but some people did not agree with the feat, writing it off as durability. However, it would only be a feat of durability if Saitama only survived this attack. But more than that, it had no effect on him at that moment, which indicates his strength.
 
Never said stopping a car by standing is telekinesis. I said it's similar to saying LS can counter being lifted by telekineses.

You just do not stop a car coming at you with anything less than striking strength. If you're just standing and stop it, it's just the verse not knowing how physics work and calcing that is wrong for reasons i believe i do not need to state.
 
NikHelton said:
I was calculating Saitama's feat when rocks flying at near-light speed were thrown at him, and He didn't even move. This gave a really impressive result, but some people did not agree with the feat, writing it off as durability. However, it would only be a feat of durability if Saitama only survived this attack. But more than that, it had no effect on him at that moment, which indicates his strength.
Click to expand...
That is not meant to be a feat of resisting the impulse of the rocks. Similar to how tanking a bullet is not supposed to be a feat of not moving from the impact.

But as we said above, do not bring verse specific discussions into this if possible, it just derails at best.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
Never said stopping a car by standing is telekinesis. I said it's similar to saying LS can counter being lifted by telekineses.
You just do not stop a car coming at you with anything less than striking strength. If you're just standing and stop it, it's just the verse not knowing how physics work and calcing that is wrong for reasons i believe i do not need to state.
Click to expand...
Reasons being?
 
You're trying to calculate something that goes against the laws of physics?

So to rephrase it.

You're using physics formulas and reasoning, to calculate something that specifically does not behave as physics itself says it would.

Are more reasons necessary?
 
I wasn't talking about the physics part. I was talking about where the characters had planted themselves into the ground.
 
Then that's calcable i guess. Their fingers or whatever they've planted has enough LS to withstand the force.
 
I have to unsubscribe from this thread due to time constraints. You can notify me later via my message wall if you need my help after you have reached a conclusion.

Anyway, remember to create backups for this thread in the Wayback Machine archive, so it can be referenced later.

https://archive.org/web/
 
Or, y'all can use Mozilla's PDF extension to save this thread as a PDF.
 
1. Throwing stuff can absolutely count as lifting strength if said thing has a defined mass, and we already use such instances, as seen in numerous calcs.

2. Higher gravity=more mass=more effort needed. A guy who lifts 200 kilos in Earth gravity is gonna get Athletic Human whereas a guy who lifts 200 kilos on a Super Earth with higher gravity will get Peak Human.

3. This can also absolutely count for lifting strength, potentially using the same formula as we get for throwing stuff into what weight someone would be stopping.

4. Are you referring to jerk as in a push press or the jerk as in a split?
 
Also as a resident swole lad I am immensely disappointed and bummed out that you didn't call me for this discussio
 
Crabwhale said:
3. This can also absolutely count for lifting strength, potentially using the same formula as we get for throwing stuff into what weight someone would be stopping.
Click to expand...
This about the punching an object thing?
 
Crabwhale said:
1. Throwing stuff can absolutely count as lifting strength if said thing has a defined mass, and we already use such instances, as seen in numerous calcs.
2. Higher gravity=more mass=more effort needed. A guy who lifts 200 kilos in Earth gravity is gonna get Athletic Human whereas a guy who lifts 200 kilos on a Super Earth with higher gravity will get Peak Human.

3. This can also absolutely count for lifting strength, potentially using the same formula as we get for throwing stuff into what weight someone would be stopping.

4. Are you referring to jerk as in a push press or the jerk as in a split?
Click to expand...
This is not entirely true, because the length of the braking distance directly affects your lifting strength. Stopping a car with a stopping distance of 5 meters and stopping a car with a stopping distance of 0.5 meters will give you completely different results.
 
So what needs to be updated in the page?
 
NikHelton said:
This is not entirely true, because the length of the braking distance directly affects your lifting strength. Stopping a car with a stopping distance of 5 meters and stopping a car with a stopping distance of 0.5 meters will give you completely different results.
Click to expand...
That was exactly what I was referring to. Sorry for not wording it properly.
 
Crabwhale said:
NikHelton said:
This is not entirely true, because the length of the braking distance directly affects your lifting strength. Stopping a car with a stopping distance of 5 meters and stopping a car with a stopping distance of 0.5 meters will give you completely different results.
Click to expand...
That was exactly what I was referring to. Sorry for not wording it properly.
Click to expand...
Now the dilemma or even multilemma is: If the person stop a car with zero distance, if we blindly plug in the formula this would give infinite lifting strength since

Work done = Force x Distance

Work Done / Distance = Force

Distance tends to zero leads to Force tends to infinity

Which is pretty wtf.

However, it makes sense that it applies more force to throw an object with higher speed. If said character can catch a flying object, it makes sense the said character catches the object with lifting strength. Do we limit the lifting strength to lifting the object mass on Earth?
 
Yeah that's a huge no. And while we can use the Acceleration or Impulse formulas to determine the Force, that would require time. And for that we would need to find a standard/assumption in cases like that. If we do have an assumption for time then we can find force using the formula:

Force = Impulse change (which is just the initial impulse as the object will have no impulse after stopping)/time fraction

or simplified it would be:

Force = (Mass x Velocity)/Time
 
@ Jason

Unless it's a character with infinite lifting strength, then no, we should absolutely not assume they're not being budged an inch in a situation such as that. In the case where distance moved is so tiny where it can't be made out, then what Earl suggests we use seems fine.

Also can you elaborate on that last question?
 
To be simple: How should / Should Chris Redfield's lifting strength be deduced from pushing a boulder by punches? Since he does not just apply forces constantly but apply it in jerks.
 
I'm not sure; I know it's technically a 9-B feat. And the RE cast due have a Class 50 lifting strength feat iirc.
 
However I currently am against treating those kind of crashes as lifting feats. As it is honestly not portrayed to be such under most circumstances, so more often than not it just serves to inflate the lifting strength due to assumptions on distance moved or time of the crash.
 
Jasonsith said:
To be simple: How should / Should Chris Redfield's lifting strength be deduced from pushing a boulder by punches? Since he does not just apply forces constantly but apply it in jerks.
Click to expand...
Oh lol I was thinking of entirely different thing.

Well then you'd presumably just calc the push itself and nothing else. If he just does it repeatedly that doesn't add to his lifting strength.
 
Jasonsith said:
Do we limit the lifting strength to lifting the object mass on Earth?
Click to expand...
Also I was referring to this too.
 
Chris scales above Leon, who legitmately pushed a boulder alongside Helena (And that feat didn't involve any punching). Chris's boulder feat is just a supporting feat.
 
I was just saying why Chris's feat is just a supporting feat and wouldn't affect current RE ratings in anyway
 
Jasonsith said:
Crabwhale said:
NikHelton said:
This is not entirely true, because the length of the braking distance directly affects your lifting strength. Stopping a car with a stopping distance of 5 meters and stopping a car with a stopping distance of 0.5 meters will give you completely different results.
Click to expand...
That was exactly what I was referring to. Sorry for not wording it properly.
Click to expand...
Now the dilemma or even multilemma is: If the person stop a car with zero distance, if we blindly plug in the formula this would give infinite lifting strength since
Work done = Force x Distance

Work Done / Distance = Force

Distance tends to zero leads to Force tends to infinity

Which is pretty wtf.

However, it makes sense that it applies more force to throw an object with higher speed. If said character can catch a flying object, it makes sense the said character catches the object with lifting strength. Do we limit the lifting strength to lifting the object mass on Earth?
Click to expand...
If the character did not move, then we can assume that the braking distance is equal to 1 m, referring to the elasticity of soft tissues.
 
>Did not move

>1 meter

You do know how huge of a difference that is right? Elasticity or not that does not happen, nothing bends 1 meter. Which is why i am so against using stuff like things crashing on you as Lifting Strength, it inflates the calcs a lot. Almost no verse treats it as lifting strength, just durability.
 
Then again, we'll treat this on a case by case basis. People tanking crashes like that while it's clearly shown to be a LS feat are extremely rare feats. So it doesn't matter.
 
I have a question, if character A resisted an attack that can push/overpower character B, who weighs thousands of tons, can character A scale from character B's lifting strength?
 
Therefir said:
I have a question, if character A resisted an attack that can push/overpower character B, who weighs thousands of tons, can character A scale from character B's lifting strength?
Click to expand...
Nope. It can scale from the attack who has LS enough to push B.

Tell me if you want the reasons for that too.
 
Actually i just realized i propably did not make myself clear. What i mean is. If A resisted an attack that could push B, then A is capable of pushing B. So A is capable of pushing thousands of tons.

Just run the calc for the force he would need to have to do that (by calculating the friction, then the Force being equal to the force of friction). That's what you can get from that.
 
Feel free to discuss what kind of jerks you want to discuss though - in terms of lifting strength.

IMO if we think back that how striking strength differs from lifting strength, maybe we should look into the feat and situation itself before commenting.

Feel free to bring up more examples. And note down what is generally accepted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Damage3245
Expanding the Lifting Strength page
2
Replies
50
Views
6K
Qurbonboev
Qurbonboev
Shugunou
What AP is needed to to throw an apple hard enough at someone's head to kill them?
Replies
7
Views
1K
AppleMaker
AppleMaker
TheSwordOfTheEvening
A simple question about lifting strength.
Replies
3
Views
747
KLOL506
KLOL506
Hacigeralt
  • Locked
Thor and Gorr's Pre-Stellar Lifting Strength should be removed
Replies
10
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
StarShooter80
Establishing Gap Needed for LS Stomps
Replies
14
Views
1K
StarShooter80
StarShooter80
Back
Top