Z Fighters vs Annihilators

[Anarchist]

While it doesn't have to do anything with the Surfer, is Thor flying through stars also considered legit?

[Hazard]

While it doesn't have to do anything with the Surfer, is Thor flying through stars also considered legit?

I don't really have any problems with it. It's not like it has only happened once.

[Cody]

I don't really have any problems with it. It's not like it has only happened once.

Thing is; wouldn't that mean he would utterly stomp post-crisis Superman? I don't see how a moon buster at best Superman could possibly harm someone that durable. I mean would that not mean Thor could take a planet-low end multi planet buster at the least? I ask because it has always been regarded that Post-Crisis Superman would take it to Thor via blitz.

[Captain Morgan]

Thing is; wouldn't that mean he would utterly stomp post-crisis Superman? I don't see how a moon buster at best Superman could possibly harm someone that durable. I mean would that not mean Thor could take a planet-low end multi planet buster at the least? I ask because it has always been regarded that Post-Crisis Superman would take it to Thor via blitz.

I don't especially consider flying through stars as being beyond demolishing planetary bodies.

Cody, I think you have a problem with thinking of celestial bodies as being durable in the same sense a class 100 person is. Planets and moons aren't actually that durable at all. They are mostly just made up of rock. Planet busting is significant because there is just a lot of it.

Stats aren't even solid matter. They are giant balls of explosive gas. You could probably mulch a planet if you shoved it in a star, but that is because it's basically immersed in the stuff. The level of abuse a person sized object would get off being submerged in the sun isn't the same amount a planet sized object would be. It's a significant durability feat, but not something that blows past, say, being at the epicenter of a planet buster and emerging unscathed.

[Hazard]

Thing is; wouldn't that mean he would utterly stomp post-crisis Superman? I don't see how a moon buster at best Superman could possibly harm someone that durable. I mean would that not mean Thor could take a planet-low end multi planet buster at the least? I ask because it has always been regarded that Post-Crisis Superman would take it to Thor via blitz.

Not really.

The sun has a lot of energy. True.

The sun's energy is spread over humongous volume.

Even the core of the sun is larger than Earth.

Thor is tiny.

It is literally impossible for him to take all the energy the sun puts out.

Also, the sun doesn't put out planet busting energy. Not in the way we think of it at least.

The Dork Knight has a point when he said the sun's gravity could cause the Earth to collapse, but that has to do with gravity being either the most underwhelming or overwhelming force ever depending on your size.

[buutenks]

Well the pressure inside our sun is 250 billion bar,for comparison a 10 MegaTon bomb has inside the nuclear detonation 5.3 billion bar.

Still though,wouldnt tanking a sun explosion not be considered having star level durability,since the whole explosion isnt concentrated on your whole body.

[Bluekey]

Well the pressure inside our sun is 250 billion bar,for comparison a 10 MegaTon bomb has inside the nuclear detonation 5.3 billion bar.

Still though,wouldnt tanking a sun explosion not be considered having star level durability,since the whole explosion isnt concentrated on your whole body.

I wouldn't say so. Being on a planet when it explodes isn't the same as taking a planet busting attack.

[Anarchist]

It definitely isn't, because when a planet explodes the kinetic force isn't solely directed at a particular person on it.

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

It definitely isn't, because when a planet explodes the kinetic force isn't solely directed at a particular person on it.

Yeah, when a planet explodes, it's usually because it's mad at the universe at large. Heavenly bodies are fickle creatures.

[Cody]

Well the pressure inside our sun is 250 billion bar,for comparison a 10 MegaTon bomb has inside the nuclear detonation 5.3 billion bar.

That's it? Seriously? ****...I didn't know that. You..don't even need to be capable of tanking a planet buster to survive through that...well..huh.

No idea why so many people are using that feat then to prove someone is capable of taking a star buster. ****.

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

That's it? Seriously? ****...I didn't know that. You..don't even need to be capable of tanking a planet buster to survive through that...well..huh.

No idea why so many people are using that feat then to prove someone is capable of taking a star buster. ****.

Who is doing that ?

I mean you keep referencing "so many other people" or individuals you're basing your notions on and ... they're like the Ones Who Sit Above in Shadow.

[Cody]

Who is doing that ?

I mean you keep referencing "so many other people" or individuals you're basing your notions on and ... they're like the Ones Who Sit Above in Shadow.

Pen was using it as an example at first. Then there were the bunch here: http://community.comicbookresources....l=1#post427673 (had to link directly to monikers post as to me, his post is on page 8, which would show different stuff entirely to those who don't have it set to show 40 posts per page)

Though after re-reading it I might have misinterpreted some of the posts.

[The Dork Knight]

Er Pendaran explicitly says in that link that flying through one and surviving one busting is NOT the same thing...

[Cody]

Er Pendaran explicitly says that flying through one and surviving one busting is NOT the same thing...

When I was asking for examples of Surfers claimed durability, he used him being in the center of the sun as proof, alongside the other listed feats.

[Pendaran]

When I was asking for examples of Surfers claimed durability, he used him being in the center of the sun as proof, alongside the other listed feats.

You:

So he is just a little more durable than a star then?

My reply, to the question of the Surfer being more durable than a star. The question you asked.

He flies in and out of such things unscathed.

This then became "that doesn't show he can endure star busting and supernovas" in further replies which prompted me to ask what exactly it is you were trying to say here, like when I said..

When he otherwise gets into a fight inside a black hole and otherwise tears open singularities he emerges from the expanding energies of, having been the ground zero of the thing, I'm not really sure what it is you want here or what you're trying to say, we've had weird things in other threads with your "star durability" and this kind of shmear.

This then leads to an entire spiralling thing where I ask, repeatedly, this question

Why exactly does he need to survive a super nova to be more durable than the thing that moving all the way through, right through the heart of in some effort for self purification does nothing to him?

Leading to having to ultimately say this:

Let me phrase this another way. And a way that you yourself should be familiar with from the various things you've otherwise advanced as categories. Invoking something that could in fact waste a solar system when talking about being more durable than a star within said solar system is going wayyy to the end of things.

Now, setting all that aside, the problem with all of this and the things being discussed at the moment.. do people really think comic writers think of the sun as anything but "the really powerful thing"? Like the Flash evacuating a whole town under the speed of light they.. kinda don't think about these things. You can sort of apply science to comics, but really only to a point.