The reason Lanza is equal to deidaras C0 in naruto.

so im probably gonna get alot of hate or praise for this, but lets get the ball rolling.

first off, lets see what the lanza does.

No Caption Provided

as we know,Ulquiorra creates a javelin-like weapon using his spiritual power. It is quite like his original energy javelins, with the only noticeable difference being the energy flowing off of each end in a fashion similar to flames, making it look more arrow-shaped. He can use this weapon as a projectile or as a melee weapon. When thrown, it produces an incredibly destructive explosion on impact, which dwarfs the fortress of Las Noches in height. Ulquiorra prefers to not use the attack at close range, most likely because the resulting blast would damage himself as well as Las Noches. While he can use these spears in rapid succession, he has difficulty controlling their trajectory. When Hollow Ichigo threw his amputated arm at him, Ulquiorra was able to disintegrate it upon impact by simply striking it.

so at the moment, we need to get the hight of las noches.

now, im gonna assume that los noches is about 20X smaller then size of the seireitei. now im gonna calculate how big the seireitei is from measurements.

We know that the distance Ichibei flew was 1000 Ri or 3927 km

I'll be using this distance to scale the Soul king's palace and then Seireitei.

No Caption Provided

From the above scaled scan, the width of the Soul king's palace is 141.8 km.

No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided
No Caption Provided

End result: Diameter of Seireitei (scaled) =

1585 km. if you don't know what Km is, its 984.8733 miles.

now im gonna decrease this a bit by 1000 and we get 875 miles.

now lets look at deidaras C0

No Caption Provided

as we see, the explosion greatly dwarfs Konohagakure with ease. so now we need to know the size of konoha.

from the pain arc, we can see the entire size of the village.

No Caption Provided

we can see that konoha is several times wider then the mountain ranges shown behind. lets say they are 270Km or 167.77 miles. there is five mountains around it so lets times it by 5. so we could get 875 miles or 1408.18Km.

so now we compare both the attacks.

No Caption Provided

No Caption Provided

similar in size. check.

similar in power. check.

similar in destructive capability. check.

if my math is wrong, i would love help.

12 Comments

what would happen if you could travel past normal space?

as we know, normal Space is the boundless three-dimensional extent in which objects and events have relative position and direction. Physical space is often conceived in three linear dimensions, although modern physicists usually consider it, with time, to be part of a boundless four-dimensional continuum known as spacetime.

Space is one of the few fundamental quantities in physics, meaning that it cannot be defined via other quantities because nothing more fundamental is known at the present. On the other hand, it can be related to other fundamental quantities. Thus, similar to other fundamental quantities (like time and mass), space can be explored via measurement and experiment.

Today, our three-dimensional space is viewed as embedded in a four-dimensional spacetime, called Minkowski space (see special relativity). The idea behind space-time is that time is hyperbolic-orthogonal to each of the three spatial dimensions.

but lets go see if we can go past normal space in our eyes, and into something more crazy...liquid space. According to the latest theory, spacetime could be treated as a fluid. This model could allow scientists to work out how some forces move through space. ... Instead, it should be regarded as the visible aspect of a fluid. For example, water appears to us to be a flowing liquid, but is in reality a H2O molecules.

Superfluid vacuum theory (SVT), sometimes known as the BEC vacuum theory, is an approach in theoretical physics and quantum mechanics where the fundamental physical vacuum (non-removable background) is viewed as superfluid or as a Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC).

The microscopic structure of this physical vacuum is currently unknown and is a subject of intensive studies in SVT. An ultimate goal of this approach is to develop scientific models that unify quantum mechanics (describing three of the four known fundamental interactions) with gravity, making SVT a candidate for the theory of quantum gravity and describing all known interactions in the Universe, at both microscopic and astronomic scales, as different manifestations of the same entity, superfluid vacuum.

No Caption Provided

According to general relativity, gravitational interaction is described in terms of space-time curvature using the mathematical formalism of Riemannian geometry. This was supported by numerous experiments and observations in the regime of low energies. However, the attempts to quantize general relativity led to various severe problems, therefore, the microscopic structure of gravity is still ill-defined. There may be a fundamental reason for this—the degrees of freedom of general relativity are based on may be only approximate and effective. The question of whether general relativity is an effective theory has been raised for a long time.

According to SVT, the curved space-time arises as the small-amplitude collective excitation mode of the non-relativistic background condensate. The mathematical description of this is similar to fluid-gravity analogy which is being used also in the analog gravity models. Thus, relativistic gravity is essentially a long-wavelength theory of the collective modes whose amplitude is small compared to the background one. Outside this requirement the curved-space description of gravity in terms of the Riemannian geometry becomes incomplete or ill-defined.

so lets do some star trek stuff and go light speed or hyperjump into liquid space,what would happen? your thoughts?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2612949/Are-living-underwater-Researchers-believe-universe-liquid-superfluid.html for help.

Start the Conversation

Powers of narutos four tail bijuu bomb in naruto

ok so correct me if i am wrong but i am gonna try to calculate the four tail bijuu bomb naruto did.

ok so the first ever bijuu bomb we see in the series is narutos four tail bomb

No Caption Provided

We can see it was easily able to destroy and blast though orochimarus Rashomon,which could tank a whole lot of damage considering its his most powerful defense. to blow it up you need a 104 kt explosion, displaced 11 million tons of soil, about 100 ton of soil for a ton of TNT. Let's say for the sake of getting a lower bound, that the Rashomon is Mount Everest .

Mt. Everest has a volume of about 1.5 million million cubic meters, and a cubic meter of soil weighs about 1.5 tonnes, so a soil Everest should weigh a little over 2 million tons. So we should need at least 20 000 million tons of TNT for the job. If instead we used thermonuclear bombs of the highest yield, we'd only need 344 of them. In 1960 the combined yield of the US nuclear stockpile was just about 20 000 Mt, so that would be in the ballpark of what is required.

Of course, Mount Everest isn't made of soil, but on the other hand, you may be able to use the weight of the mountain to crush most of the rock, by starting at the base. but to level it you need the necessary force would be at minimum 3.332\times 10^{10} tons of TNT to level Mt Everest.

we can see it went though and completely past it,leaving allmost nothing in its wack. to im gonna say deroot a tree and throw it away.

OK, let's say the following are true facts:

1) The tree is old, an oak.

2) It has a root system which is fairly shallow (some roots are at the surface, some 24 in/60cm, maybe as far as 36 in/90cm, but nothing further I could see). The earth around it is packed relatively tightly

3) The circumference of the tree at the base is 10 feet/3 meters

4) The backhoe front loader has a breakaway capacity of 3800 pounds and can lift 1800 pounds

Assuming all constants on the part of the tree, what amount of force can the front loader produce? And would it be enough to push over or uproot the oak? And what kind of force am I using (footpounds?)

Thanks for reading this and correct me if i am wrong.

Start the Conversation

What would happen if the earth had two moons

First we have to find out what the normal moon does. first off..tides. Tides are caused by gravitational forces of the moon and the sun. ... The moon's gravitational force pulls on water in the oceans and causes bulges that create “high tide." The moon's gravitational pull is strongest on the side that faces the Earth.Pull of the moon you may ask?The moon's "perigee" is the point in its orbit where it is nearest to the Earth. The moon's gravitational pull on Earth is the strongest when the moon is at the perigee, which results in greater tide variation than normal. This variation creates slightly higher high tides and slightly lower low tides. the pull is 1.62 m/s²Moon/Gravity.Many sources state that the Earth's gravity is stronger at the poles than the equator for two reasons:The centrifugal "force" cancels out the gravity minimally, more so at the equator than at the poles.The poles are closer to the center due to the equatorial bulge, and thus have a stronger gravitational field.

and now for distance.The average distance from the Moon to the Earth is 384403 kilometers (238857 miles). and The Moon orbits the Earth every 27.3 days.

now to do this. you must add theses variables at least by two or more.

firstly

The tides on Earth would definitely be affected by the presence of other moons, because the Moon (and also the Sun) is the reason why we experience tides at all. If they were many moons around Earth, the amplitude of the tides might be smaller or larger, since the effects of each other could partially cancel out or add up. There could also be more than two high tides per day, and the cycle of the tides could be less regular than it is.

If Earth had more moons, there would also be more solar eclipses. These two things would probaly be the more noticeable effects. That's because the seasons and the variation of temperature over the course of the year are caused by the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, and the fact that the Earth's rotation axis is tilted. Unless the presence of more moons could affect one of these, we shouldn't notice any chages in the course of the seasons. As for our body cycles, there are no scientific theories relating them to the presence of the Moon.

just some infomation

Start the Conversation

To destroy the moon

To destroy the moon, you would need to provide at least 1.24×10291.24×1029J of energy to exceed the Moon's gravitational binding energy. (This provides a lower bound on the energy to "blow up" the moon.) A megaton of TNT releases 4.184 PJ of energy.Put this together, and you would need at least: 2.96×10132.96×1013 megatons of TNT.Said another way: you would need some 30 trillion million tons of TNT.If you would like to perform this calculation yourself, see the Planetary Parameter Calculator. Based on a couple inputs, it will calculate the gravitational binding energy of a body.For a sense of scale: 30 quadrillion tons of TNT = a 470 km sphere. That's large enough to be its own dwarf planet. Or you could use 6 trillion thermonuclear bombs (in the entirety of the Cold War, 60000 nukes of any size were produced, getting you at most 1/100000000th of the way there). For the most efficient option, you could use 10^12 kg of antimatter = a 10 km sphere.

just some more information to share. correct me if i'm wrong.

4 Comments

the speed of light

The speed of light in free space (that is, in a vacuum) is a constant that has been measured to considerable accuracy. To nine significant figures, it is 299,792,458 meters per second (2.99792458 x 10 8 m/s). now if someone moved the speed of light,Because of this equivalence, the energy an object has due to its motion will increase its mass. ... If an object tries to travel 186,000 miles per second, its mass becomes infinite, and so does the energy required to move it. For this reason, no normal object can travel as fast or faster than the speed of light.now there are theorys that say some objects move faster then light. A tachyon for example. Tachyon (/ˈtækiɒn/) or tachyonic particle is a hypothetical particle that always moves faster than light. Most physicists believe that faster-than-light particles cannot exist because they are not consistent with the known laws of physics. but i did get questions if time stops if you move the speed of light and Only massless particles such as photons can go at the speed of light. ... There is no sense in saying that time stops when you go at the speed of light. This is not a failing of the theory of relativity.

This is just a little knowledge that i would like to share.

cited from Google- https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/speed-of-light

18 Comments