hadrian29

This user has not updated recently.

27 0 18 1
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

hadrian29's forum posts

  • 25 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Interesting article I happen to agree with. Thoughts?

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/kryptonite-is-crap/276984/

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hadrian29 said:

@heavenlydarkdragon:

No that isn't what I'm refering too, and I know what you're talking about by the way. What I am referring to is that fact that bkack body radiators with a temp of approximately 6000 degrees Kelvin emit EM radiation across a range of wavelengths but peak their output in the blue-green area of the visible spectrum. Please try not to be so condescending if you bother replying to this. Thank you.

I wasn't being condescending. Just giving you some info to look at. I don't bother being condescending, if I read total nonsense most of the times I don't even reply. It's a waste of time.

And it's true they peak at blue-green area of the visible spectrum but there aren't green stars. The green part is barely visible given blue part.

@hadrian29 said:

@heavenlydarkdragon:

G class stars range in color from slightly yellow to white. The more luminous ones like our sun are essentially white in appearance. And yeah, they're called yellow-dwarf stars, but that's a misnomer. Also, what do you mean "weaker" stars? Define that please. That sounds more like Comic Book Science 101 to me. If you're taling about surface temperature, did you know that a star with a cooler surface tempurature than our sun can have a higher luminosity, and this a higher total radiant output?

Weaker. As in much less power output. Something I believe you already knew what I was referring to.

Our sun is actually yellow-white. Pushing more to the white than yellow, but still yellow. If not then it would be a F class star, as you very well know.

Either way none of that explains kryptonian powers as DC tries to explain it. I've read every type of nonsense theory "Superman hypermetabolizes sunlight" completely disregarding something as basic as the very law of conservation of energy, "Superman stores sunlight much more efficiently than humans" despite the simple fact that even if Superman was able to store every bit of sunlight that arrives on Earth each day, that still wouldn't be enough for him to have those power levels. And then there was that photonucleic effect theory thing, that defended that the same type of matter, develops under the influence of different types of stars, different properties. And that what happened to kryptonians, was that, once exposed to different type of sunlight from our G class star caused the subatomic particles inside the atoms to expand the distance between them. Making those atoms highly energetic and thus giving them the energy to fuel those powers.

Now, there's so much stuff scientifically inaccurate about this theory that I don't even understand how it was even considered in the first place. First of all it's been shown in lab tests and by the use of similations done in supercomputers that carbon (or any type of matter) develops the same way independent from the type of star. The size and mass of the planet are the main factors that could cause the development of different isotopes. Second, atoms don't become more energetic if the space between protons and electrons increase. Quite the contrary. It's when the space between them reduces that they become more energetic, and even then it can't be a slight increase, but quite a significant one. Which would require a source of energy to pull that off, energy that simply doesn't arrive on Earth. Not simply in the form of sunlight.

The main point here, going back to the OP title of this thread, is that the red sunlight weakness as it's explained makes no sense whatsover. How can a body contain huge amounts of energy but then it's exposed to red sunlight and that energy doesn't go away, it simply does nothing. It's still inside the body but at the same time it's like it wasn't there. It would be like saying, you had a small battery and then you would expose it cold. It would not need to be that much colder, just a slight difference. And the battery would stop producing energy. Which you and I know it's total nonsense. The difference in overall frequency from one type of star to others is so little that even that can't explain why things happen as they say it does.

I know we're talking comic book fiction here. But at least the Flash has the Speed Force, seeing that we don't know what it really is no one can simply dismiss the Speed Force. Laterns have the emotional spectrum, again we have no way of verifying any of that. Aquaman and Wonder Woman are kind of a byproduct of magic and genetics, and when magic is involved all else goes out the window, no use wasting time trying to explain that. And then of course we have kryptonians. Too human-like. Even on their own planet of Krypton. And then we have the sunlight stuff. What I don't get is why DC doesn't pull a move from lets say Marvel. At first Cyclops was the same, that was how his mutant power worked. He absorbed sunlight and then he would release that energy through his eyes in the form of hard light, or something like that. But the moment they started to think about that, they knew they had to come up with an explanation that didn't completely deviated from the origin most people knew but that was also new and more credible, and most of all that couldn't be simply dismissed by facts. And so they changed it a little bit, by saying that his body does indeed absorb sunlight much like we do, but that Cyclops mutation takes that sunlight and access a form of extradimensional energy. And it is that energy that was the real source of his powers. Sunlight was simply the catalyst.

That's why to me, I'd remove the red and yellow sunlight, power off power on stuff, and update it to something that could be believable but at the same time couldn't be dismissed by facts.

Even saying something like for example, kryptonians have in their bodes exotic elements, elements that were present in Krypton's geological composition. And one or more of those exotic elements allowed kryptonian physiology to quantum entangle with the stars closest to them. When near a red star, their powers would be reduced to significantely much lower levels, they'd be more physical with the energetic powers mostly gone, but still superhuman in every aspect. And when near a G type star or other stars above M class the quantum entanglement would produce energy on the level we see in the comics.

"Class dismissed." That was the comment that elicited my reaction. I'd like to think you could see how that kind of comment could be considered somewhat condescending...especially after you assumed I didn't know the difference between the overall spectral output of a star and emission lines produced by trace elements in the star. But if it wasn't meant to be, I'm sorry. And no you won't see any green stars in the sky. But it's because of the limitations in the way our eyes work.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/07/29/why-are-there-no-green-stars/#.Vv2F9a_2a70

And from what I understand G class stars range in color from white to slightly yellow and the F class stars have more of a yellow/white color, not the other way around. And the reason I wasn't certain what you were referring to when you said "weaker" is because I read many post from comic book fans on this subject who assume the ALL red stars are "weaker", i.e. have a lower overall radiant output, than the Sun because of their cooler surface temperatures...which just isn't true. I've come to realize that's not common knowledge. When I asked for clarification, I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page.

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@joshmightbe:

Color IS a specific type of EM radiation. One that our eyes are sensitive to. What are you talking about? Could you please clarify what you mean?

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@heavenlydarkdragon:

G class stars range in color from slightly yellow to white. The more luminous ones like our sun are essentially white in appearance. And yeah, they're called yellow-dwarf stars, but that's a misnomer. Also, what do you mean "weaker" stars? Define that please. That sounds more like Comic Book Science 101 to me. If you're taling about surface temperature, did you know that a star with a cooler surface tempurature than our sun can have a higher luminosity, and this a higher total radiant output?

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By hadrian29

@heavenlydarkdragon:

No that isn't what I'm refering too, and I know what you're talking about by the way. What I am referring to is that fact that bkack body radiators with a temp of approximately 6000 degrees Kelvin emit EM radiation across a range of wavelengths but peak their output in the blue-green area of the visible spectrum. Please try not to be so condescending if you bother replying to this. Thank you.

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@tifalockhart:

Eclipso enhanced Superman and BFR doesn't count as winning, technically. WW Hulk threw Juggernaut out of they battlefield, but he didn't beat him. From what it seems like, he has beaten Lobo with enhancement, but without it, he can draw or lose to Lobo.

I have that issue where Superman was eclipsed in my basement. At what point exactly does it say the Eclipso enhanced him? Because I dug it out, but I can't seem to find it stated or even implied there. Hmm. Besides, it's Lobo who needs enhancement to beat Superman...in the form of Dan Jurgens's lousy writing.

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@

@

hey noob how about reading more than internet pages like ................ some actual comics and then running your mouth. you are just .......yeesh!

First of all, I read ACTUAL comics for about 15 years before I stopped reading them on a regular basis due to marriage, parenting, and...well...life. Lol. But the kid in me is still interested in them, and always will be. That's why I use the net to sorta keep tabs on what's going on in Comicdom. So, way to make knee-jerk, baseless assumption and run your own mouth without knowing all the facts. Second, you could ACTUALLY contribute a serious opinion to the discussion instead of...again...running your own mouth in a sophomoric effort to deliberately insult me. YEEESH...x2!

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Infinity is not a number. It means "endless". It represents the neverending number line.

You don't have to God to have unlimited power.

God decides all that was, is, and is to come.

Does Hulk control the fate of the whole universe? No he doesn't. But there nothing his body can't withstand. That's all there is to it.

Hulk has the storngest body ever known but that doesn't mean he is in control of his fate and the fate of others.

LOL! What?! Boy are you reaching. LOL!

Avatar image for hadrian29
hadrian29

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Sinfulplayerx said:

(Hulk) Vs. (SuperMan) "Gamma-ray bursts can release more energy in 10 seconds than the Sun will emit in its entire 10 billion-year lifetime!" Source: http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/gamma.html

This!

Yeah. And if Banner had been hit by an actual gamma ray burst that would matter. lol

  • 25 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3