• 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.

Kuzan's Ice Age

Messages
6,594
Reaction score
1,713
So basically why are we using 2257 joules per kilogram for the calc? Freezing saltwater is; according to the calc, 2257 Kilojoules per kilogram; as in 2.257e6 joules per kilogram, not joules per kilogram. The calcs used 2257 joules per kilogram. The official calculations guide even states that freezing water requires 334 joules per gram. That's not 334 per kilogram that's 334000 per kilogram, so even regular water would yield more results than what is currently used. Unless I missed something, the calc is wrong.

Also, I would like a citation for 2257 kj/kg.
 
Well this is definitely interesting maybe some calc group members can give some opinions
 
If you're referring to the old calc, that was remade here .
 
Damage3245 said:
If you're referring to the old calc, that was remade here .
All I'm saying is that the old calcs were innacurate since they used the wrong energy value. Cutiously, is your calc lower because you used a 10 in thickness instead of 40+ meters?
 
Yes, I tried to calc the thickness of the ice instead of just assuming it to be 47 meters deep.
 
Talking about that, did you used ground-level horizon distance? When we see the effect the camera is far above LRLL's trees which are tall AF and we can't see the next island.
 
Neither I but I was looking at the distance covered and I wondered about how many time did that took.

3370085595m^2/60s (assumptive timeframe)= 56168093.25m/s Fricking Mach 163,755

Coming back to the topic:

One-piece-61295
Aokiji is comparable to Kizaru so 3.02m (42px).
The building is 12.583m (175px).

One-piece-61297
12.583m (184px).
The Sea King is 17.09m (250px).

So 17m above sea level. That's as far I could help about this.
 
Holy shit that's incredible and the help is appreciated as always

I'm not sure if this scales to anyone since I don't directly recall an instance of someone reacting to Aokijis freezing but it's definitely good to note
 
If it's correct then it would support Relativistic OP with more than Rayleigh's feat.
 
@Damage I kinda skimmed over your calc, but you also seem to have used 334 J/kg instead of 334 J/g so that doesn't really answer the OP's concerns.
 
You might be right on Aokiji's freezing speed... but it's not like it scales to anyone and we've seen him freeze things slower than that too.
 
Damage3245 said:
You might be right on Aokiji's freezing speed... but it's not like it scales to anyone and we've seen him freeze things slower than that too.
What abput KE?
 
You can't calc speed from area. You'd use distance to the horizon.

At 17m that's 14.7km

14.7km/60s=245m/s
 
Damage3245 said:
You might be right on Aokiji's freezing speed... but it's not like it scales to anyone and we've seen him freeze things slower than that too.
No, but it's a good speed feat for Kuzan.

While he doesn't attack at the same speed everytime he attacks there's nothing suggesting he'd freeze things with a lower speed than a casual attack.
 
Also, since the horizon distante has been updated to 20 km, wouldn't that make the feat even more impressive?
 
Doubt it. The diameter (or was it radius)? Was over 120 km, so 20 km would actually downgrade things.
 
I'm not entirely sure how a ground-level horizon distance seems larger than one from a higher height.
 
Lightbuster30 said:
Doubt it. The diameter (or was it radius)? Was over 120 km, so 20 km would actually downgrade things.
The 20 km horizon distance is at ground level.
 
Even 500 meters (higher than storm cloud bases) would only yield 79.9 kilometers in radius.
 
Horizon from ground level is only 4.8 km away, and at a 31.16 m height it's only 20 km. Neither will get any decent speed unless you assume something silly like a 1 millisecond timeframe.
 
The original calc took the diameter of the planet and plugged it in for radius, giving inflated results. It then multiplied this by 3 for the 3 island distance.

I'll also point out again that the speed calc up above used the area instead of distance. Even 120km/60s is only hypersonic.
 
If the calc for the speed comes up 60s would be the low end. Feat happened in a few panels and was almost instant.

But if the feat needs a total redo then someone should work on it.
 
Back
Top