Sun durability vs Planet busting attacks question.

Can anyone at all make sense of this? If someone can withstand the force of the sun, the nuclear raging force of any star, then how do they get hurt by planet busting attacks or less? Am I missing something?

Either its silly writer logic, or someone actually have a good understanding of physics I am not grasping.Let me know.

Whats superior, withstanding being in the sun or busting planets?

@sirfizzwhizz: To be clear, your saying someone entering a sun correct?

Because all durability is not the same.

And if you're referencing Superman...solar energy is his power source. That's like trying to drown Aquaman.

Resisting burning is different than resisting explosives I guess

Yes. Just entering the sun and being like, "whateves"

I was thinking Thor actually, even though thor is harmed by beings mountain level.

There is likewise handful of characters who do this as well. BRB, Lanterns, Wonder Woman, ect....

That is the issue. the sun is not just fire and heat. Its a violent nuclear reactor with insane forces in it.

@sirfizzwhizz: By planet busting attacks, do you mean like a punch that could shatter a planet, or a massive explosion?

@sirfizzwhizz: Its definitely the Writer cause the pressure in the core of a Star is in a whole other league compared to Planet Busting energies but it also can be the those "Planet Busting" energies are actually higher.

If I remember correctly (someone should fact check me on this), the Sun creates as much energy per second as 30 billion hydrogen nuclear bombs.

To vaporize even the smallest rocky planet, you would need hundreds of billions of strongest nuclear bombs.

So surviving inside the Sun for more than 10 seconds, should be a comparable feat to surviving a small planet busting (vaporizing) attack.

If my numbers are correct.

It's all plot.

I am not an expert at math, but isn't the amount of energy the core of the sun expulses in radiation and heat way less than the energy required to destroy a solid object the size of a planet?

http://vsbattles.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:DontTalk/Durability_required_to_resist_the_heat_of_the_sun

Because writers don't really care. It's inconsistent between characters but imo tanking a planet busting attack is better than surviving in a star, purely because writers tend to take planet busting more seriously.

It depends what you consider planet busting. Is it planet busting if you shatter it, or are we tlking complete annihilation.

Actually destroying all the matter the planet has probably requires an immense amount of energy.

Shattering it... no clue. Depends on the size, density, point of impact, etc. No clue how the two relate to each other.

The thing is the sun isn't like a big ball of fire; its a giant ball of nuclear gas. Pouring a huge bucket on it won't put it out. Surviving ONE second on the sun is like surviving 1,838,095,238 Tsar Bombas.

If you're talking about Superman, however, he gets his powers from the sun, so using him is kind of unfair.

That makes sense.

I think Thor is a better example than superman when using sun feats.

Sun. attacks which are barely planet busting level wouldn't do anything to the sun

I agree, the feats I was thinkin was Thor and beta Ray Bill, Gladiator, Lanterns, ect and not Superman who is empowered by the sun :) Im not sure why anyone would think I was referring to Supes.

Yeah I didn't get that either, probably because of Fallschirmjager comment.

The way I perceive this distinction in universe disregarding plausibility and all that is that planet busting attacks might be distinguished from sun durability stuff. A planet busting attack involves not just a massive release of energy but also kinetic and sound energy from the shockwave of the planet blowing up. In contrast, sun durability involves being resistant to the massive amounts of heat, energy and radiation put off by the sun. The two attacks might be considered different by fictional standards even if someone with sun durability should be able to shrug off a planet busting attack.

It takes a lot of energy to actually bust a planet. If you place the planet on the surface of the sun, it would take a fair while ( days iirc) to actually annihilate it

This of course ignoring the fact that gravity would destroy the planet long before it reached the surface of the sun

The same gravitational force is largely meaningless ( relatively ) to someone like Thor , for whom the heat , radiation etc is a far bigger problem

It's a massive durability feat regardless , and given Thor does things like have casual conversations inside stars , that's at least a planetary scale if not planet busting level durability feat , even accounting for the fact that he's takin a minuscule portion of the total force ( given his size vis a vis the sun )

Wonder Woman has never done anything like this unless you're talking about a silver age feat . Post crisis was mighty worried she would be killed by getting tossed into the sun

It really depends on the character also. Silver Surfer for instance was given a skin that is specially made to protect him from all sorts of cosmic radiation and which also allows him to absorb it. His physical durability on the other hand is not close to his energy durability imo. He is often ko'd with physical force. Thor's durability tends to be very up and down over the decades. Some writers have written him as unable to survive lava or falling off a skyscraper and unable to survive in the vacuum of space while others have him fly through space without any problem and do things like be able to be inside the sun. Editors don't seem to really care how his durability is portrayed. It seems to be w/e the writer wants for the plot is what it is.

Because a planet busting attack is not a planet exploding. It's just an attack that could destroy an earth sized mass. A planet exploding involves a lot of heat among other things, as does being in the sun, while a planet busting attack may not.

The energy needed to break a planet is far more potent than the energy given off by the sun

something like 9,7000,000 yattojoules of force is needed to simply make a hole in the moon. Far more energy is needed to break a planet