• 55 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for red_ruby_petal
#51 Posted by Red_Ruby_Petal (8119 posts) - - Show Bio

@chaos_zelur: I only made this point because now people deem him a moon buster. It doesn't make sense.

Anyway thanks for the reasoning, its been getting annoying continuing this debate, which it isn't.

Avatar image for mickey-mouse
#52 Posted by MICKEY-MOUSE (36712 posts) - - Show Bio

@chaos_zelur: Yeah it’s me lukehero. If you’re gonna talk science they need to back it up with articles or video and let those pieces of proof speak towards their point other wise they come off looking goofy...

Avatar image for amcu
#53 Posted by Amcu (16647 posts) - - Show Bio

@amcu said:
@red_ruby_petal said:

@amcu: Titan's moon won't accompany billions of Thanos sized rocks, ( I say Thanos sized because some meteors aren't as big as the one that hit Iron Man. )

so it definitely won't take billions of nukes.

I posted the video because I think its funny. I don't know how many actual nukes it would take. It would be quite a lot though.

Lol I got too serious there, though the best i'd give it is several nukes. You have anything against my post though? I just wanna here your insight.

Which post are you talking about?

I think it would take a lot of nukes. Its a bit hard to compare to a nuke because this attack just surface wiped the moon, whereas nukes create deep craters. Technically Thanos did destroy the whole moon as is shown later but the OP says surface wiping so I assume that's the portion of the feat that we are to focus on.

I imagine it would take a huge number of nukes to actually wipe out the surface of the moon because of their range. But at the same time nukes may do more damage in a smaller area than Thanos's attack did. Essentially it would take a huge amount of nukes to actually wipe out the whole surface but if they did they would have done more actual damage than this portion of the blast that Thanos sent out did.

Now as to the size of the moon, its hard to know. I do think it was probably intended to be the size of a real moon like earths moon. With how much hype they put into this feat I just really doubt they wanted it to be some tiny moon. I also think that it and Titan visually look like they are quite large when we see them.

I did see that you noted Titan had lower gravity than earth, but I don't think that it was actually smaller. During the movie its actually discussed by Peter Quill when measuring the gravity of the planet with some device and he said;

Its eight degrees of its axis. Gravitational pull is all over the place.

That statement does not indicate that the planet is small or anything like that, just that gravity is not consistent. Which falls in line with how at certain points the gravity seemed normal and at other points the gravity seemed nearly nonexistent with rocks literally just floating in the air.

Avatar image for red_ruby_petal
#54 Posted by Red_Ruby_Petal (8119 posts) - - Show Bio

@amcu: thats a fair assessment, although considering where the moon was placed, it seemed extremely close to Titan.

Avatar image for amcu
#55 Posted by Amcu (16647 posts) - - Show Bio