Examples of WW being bulletproof in canon.

[WonderLight789]

The title literally says "examples of Diana being bulletproof"

Yes. Aka not being hurt by regular piercing weapons.

[Alpha]

Yes. Aka not being hurt by regular piercing weapons.

That's not what bulletproof means. Bulletproof means not being pierced by bullets, not just any regular piercing weapons. Superman not being hit by an arrow isn't proof that he can handle a bullet.

[WonderLight789]

That's not what bulletproof means. Bulletproof means not being pierced by bullets, not just any regular piercing weapons. Superman not being hit by an arrow isn't proof that he can handle a bullet.

In this case it is.

[Alpha]

How exactly is it proof?

[Stanlos]

Are we talking about the same pre-crisis Wonder Woman who got knocked out by a bit from an ordinary gun and couldn't even scratch Mongul?

Under Alan Moore 's questionable hands she was relegated to separate status due to gender which was not in alignment to her book or even her appearances in other Superman books. But yes, Pre-Crisis WW is who we are discussing.

[Stanlos]

If normal bullets can harm her then any kryptonian and God should be able to kill her in one hit.

Mystical your reasoning here is quite flawed and doesn't match the physics that you and I experience in our every day lives. That vulnerability story in WW Secret Files 1 perfectly explains the natural physics at play. It is no different from other non bulletproof characters like Marvel's Wolverine or Marvel's Ares.

To test the physics yourself you can look at the previously provided hammer and nail exercise or you can examine those finger stick lancet devices.

Of course this really only applies to the PreFlashNoPoint version as there are few definitions for the current iteration and things read as rather generic

[WonderLight789]

Mystical your reasoning here is quite flawed and doesn't match the physics that you and I experience in our every day lives. That vulnerability story in WW Secret Files 1 perfectly explains the natural physics at play. It is no different from other non bulletproof characters like Marvel's Wolverine or Marvel's Ares.

To test the physics yourself you can look at the previously provided hammer and nail exercise or you can examine those finger stick lancet devices.

Of course this really only applies to the PreFlashNoPoint version as there are few definitions for the current iteration and things read as rather generic

If the force of a bullet can hurt her. Hell even a normal human hitting her with a knife can apparently produce enough force for the knife to pierce her and harm her. So she shouldn't be able to take hits from characters that produce far greater force than a bullet and a human swinging a sword or a knife. That's just how stupid her ''magic'' weakness is. It has 0 explanation behind it. It only serves the purpose of nerfing her.

[Stanlos]

If the force of a bullet can hurt her. Hell even a normal human hitting her with a knife can apparently produce enough force for the knife to pierce her and harm her. So she shouldn't be able to take hits from characters that produce far greater force than a bullet and a human swinging a sword or a knife. That's just how stupid her ''magic'' weakness is. It has 0 explanation behind it. It only serves the purpose of nerfing her.

Your reasoning completely ignores the mechanics of blunt force trauma and the role of surface area and force in piercing. I can see that you 100% believe what you are stating (as always, you number among the most ardent posters on the board).

However, you are drawing your conclusion from an incomplete data set. Because it is incomplete, you are filling in the blanks with assumptions about the mechanics at play in blunt force trauma versus those in play with piercing.

Please, take a moment to do one of two simple exercises to help broaden your data set. Take a flat top nail, a hammer, and a plank. Hammer the nail into the plank once as you normally would (pointy side down, flat side up) taking care to note how much strength you use.

Now take your second nail but this time place it on the plank flat side down. Using the same force, hammer the nail into the plank once.

What did you notice about the results? Were the depths to which the nails penetrated the plank the same? If not, how did the results differ?

[Stanlos]

The difference in the results is due to the role of surface area and distribution of force. Your analysis--laudable for the thought and effort behind it--is flawed because it is very incomplete and assumes a sameness across two scenarios that quite simply is not there.

As you progress and get to the point where you note just how much more surface area a fist or a bolder has than a needle then it will become even clearer why one scenario poses a mild inconvenience whereas another is shrugged off completely.

On the surface it may seem illogical to the untrained it may seem counterintuitive that say a tank shell or a high calibre round would be much much much less damaging than a needle or dart but the physics versus a body such as hers makes sense.

And that is before you factor in the other elements contributing to her durability such as her healing factor, her Amazon training for taking blows or redistributing force, or the protective powers of the silver bracelets.

[WonderLight789]

Your reasoning completely ignores the mechanics of blunt force trauma and the role of surface area and force in piercing. I can see that you 100% believe what you are stating (as always, you number among the most ardent posters on the board).

However, you are drawing your conclusion from an incomplete data set. Because it is incomplete, you are filling in the blanks with assumptions about the mechanics at play in blunt force trauma versus those in play with piercing.

Please, take a moment to do one of two simple exercises to help broaden your data set. Take a flat top nail, a hammer, and a plank. Hammer the nail into the plank once as you normally would (pointy side down, flat side up) taking care to note how much strength you use.

Now take your second nail but this time place it on the plank flat side down. Using the same force, hammer the nail into the plank once.

What did you notice about the results? Were the depths to which the nails penetrated the plank the same? If not, how did the results differ?

a punch from kryptonians produce far greater force than a bullet. There is no way around it. Any punch from them should be able to penetrate her skin and body. Like Superman one punching her to death in dceased. Where his fist went through her body like she was made of soft buttter.

Her weakness has never been given any real explanation. So it is a stupid weakness. So you have to decide. Is WW super durable or does she have human durability? If a bullet can kill her then she has no real super durability. Period. And no. The boulder example is not accurate. Because a boulder can kill a human too. How can you explain WW falling from outter space to earth. Having boulders fall onto her unharmed. Take a nuke explosion, but yet an arrow can kill her like a mere mortal? There is no explanation. You can't say she has magic split durability. Because that has never been stated anywhere. She has a weakness without an explanation.

[Stanlos]

a punch from kryptonians produce far greater force than a bullet. There is no way around it. Any punch from them should be able to penetrate her skin and body. Like Superman one punching her to death in dceased. Where his fist went through her body like she was made of soft buttter.

Her weakness has never been given any real explanation. So it is a stupid weakness. So you have to decide. Is WW super durable or does she have human durability? If a bullet can kill her then she has no real super durability. Period. And no. The boulder example is not accurate. Because a boulder can kill a human too. How can you explain WW falling from outter space to earth. Having boulders fall onto her unharmed. Take a nuke explosion, but yet an arrow can kill her like a mere mortal? There is no explanation. You can't say she has magic split durability. Because that has never been stated anywhere. She has a weakness without an explanation.

Once you do the exercise, you will see the point. Until then you seem intent on just making up stuff on your own. If that is your wish, I respect your prerogative and will disengage. But you should know that should you continue to do so your posts will provide quite a bit of unintentional comedy to those who encounter them and have seen those principles at work.

My hope is that you will make the effort and learn, if not by the suggested experiment then perhaps by YouTubing various lancet devices for diabetics. But that is up to you.

[BiteTheBullet]

Mystical is claiming it doesn't make sense despite he himself straight up ignoring physics

We are talking real life physics in comics? If that is the case, I will make the argument that what the superheroes do is pure garbage physics. I am pretty sure I can win a pulitzer prize on this one.

[Stanlos]

We are talking real life physics in comics? If that is the case, I will make the argument that what the superheroes do is pure garbage physics. I am pretty sure I can win a pulitzer prize on this one.

Mystical says there was no explanation when WW Secret Files 1 literally has a story titled vulnerability that incorporates the principle I outlined (which needn't matter today since that was in volume 2 but that was the last time any true definition was provided)

So what we know from that story and from the examples in Byrne's run is that her body at base or unadorned is strong enough to support her powers and their vastness. However it takes very little force behind an arrow point or a needle point to pierce the dermis. That is why we are speaking of this particular bit of physics. It was in a story by Joanna Sandsmark in WWSF 1.

I disagree with the bullet thing because compared to an arrow point or a needle point the surface area of a bullet is ginormous and too big to penetrate when wearing her bracelets as they massively dull the force anything impacting her body.

The things that Mystical is saying are literally voiced and answered in the story. But it would seem he will not check it now perform the recommended practical exercise. That would do more for him than any text I can type as he has demonstrated a tendency to shrug off that which is outside of his own experience and just make up stuff at random to fill the gap. Increasing what he himself knows from experience or observation is the only way this particular point can be successfully conveyed IMHO

[WonderLight789]

Mystical says there was no explanation when WW Secret Files 1 literally has a story titled vulnerability that incorporates the principle I outlined (which needn't matter today since that was in volume 2 but that was the last time any true definition was provided)

So what we know from that story and from the examples in Byrne's run is that her body at base or unadorned is strong enough to support her powers and their vastness. However it takes very little force behind an arrow point or a needle point to pierce the dermis. That is why we are speaking of this particular bit of physics. It was in a story by Joanna Sandsmark in WWSF 1.

I disagree with the bullet thing because compared to an arrow point or a needle point the surface area of a bullet is ginormous and too big to penetrate when wearing her bracelets as they massively dull the force anything impacting her body.

The things that Mystical is saying are literally voiced and answered in the story. But it would seem he will not check it now perform the recommended practical exercise. That would do more for him than any text I can type as he has demonstrated a tendency to shrug off that which is outside of his own experience and just make up stuff at random to fill the gap. Increasing what he himself knows from experience or observation is the only way this particular point can be successfully conveyed IMHO

It wasn't a good enough explanation. Because they can't explain how her body is fine when she gets thrown around buldings, ships and other structures with steel beams and other pointed and sharp materials. Or when she can take grendade explosions unharmed. Not to mention everything else that has happened post WW V2. And specially now in a totally different era and origin for the character.

[Stanlos]

It wasn't a good enough explanation. Because they can't explain how her body is fine when she gets thrown around buldings, ships and other structures with steel beams and other pointed and sharp materials. Or when she can take grendade explosions unharmed. Not to mention everything else that has happened post WW V2. And specially now in a totally different era and origin for the character.

Have done the suggested exercise?

Or even Google searched "PSI" or related principles?

If the answer is "No" how are you declaring it is "not a good explanation"?