No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
@Goody Off topic. About Thor. Not sure where the high 6-B comes from (assumeing its Mjolnir), but the blast being 5-A would mean that Stormbreaker has a surface area that is somewhere around 4*10^12 to 2*10^13 times smaller than whatever caused that 6-B rateing. Thats quite a bit lol. |
@Goody Off topic. About Thor. Not sure where the high 6-B comes from (assumeing its Mjolnir), but the blast being 5-A would mean that Stormbreaker has a surface area that is somewhere around 4*10^12 to 2*10^13 times smaller than whatever caused that 6-B rateing. Thats quite a bit lol. |
||
| − | This would actually mean that the cutting edge would be thinner/somewhere around as thinn as an atom (roughly in the 5*10^-14m region, so still thicker than a proton). Oof. However, this is "only" |
+ | This would actually mean that the cutting edge would be thinner/somewhere around as thinn as an atom (roughly in the 5*10^-14m region, so still thicker than a proton). Oof. However, this is "only" 10million times thinner than something we can actually porduce today. |
Latest revision as of 21:43, 16 May 2019
@Goody Off topic. About Thor. Not sure where the high 6-B comes from (assumeing its Mjolnir), but the blast being 5-A would mean that Stormbreaker has a surface area that is somewhere around 4*10^12 to 2*10^13 times smaller than whatever caused that 6-B rateing. Thats quite a bit lol.
This would actually mean that the cutting edge would be thinner/somewhere around as thinn as an atom (roughly in the 5*10^-14m region, so still thicker than a proton). Oof. However, this is "only" 10million times thinner than something we can actually porduce today.