jediuser's avatar

jediuser

  • Joined Dec 5, 2010
  • ? / M

Vash is awesome. My favorite anime are shounen style action anime, with some good humor and drama mixed in, though I'll try other types of anime if I hear good hype (i admit to liking the moe-style Clannad after watching it). Oh, and I've watched some of the anime running on Cartoon Network's Toonami block.

Here is a list of anime I plan to review

 

Life on anime

  • 52 Minutes
  • 14 Hours
  • 4 Days
  • 1 Weeks
  • 0 Months
  • 0 Years

Anime ratings

  • 5
  • 4.5
  • 4
  • 3.5
  • 3
  • 2.5
  • 2
  • 1.5
  • 1
  • 0.5

29 total

Manga ratings

  • 5
  • 4.5
  • 4
  • 3.5
  • 3
  • 2.5
  • 2
  • 1.5
  • 1
  • 0.5

9 total

I adore these characters

See all loved characters

I'm not a fan of these characters

See all hated characters

Comments

You must be logged in to leave comments. Login or sign up today!

Sheex says...

If they're talking about "tremor resistant foundations" then you really shouldn't give them much credence. The only thing that comes to mind from that term is base isolation, but again that's not something that an ordinary anime viewer would have information about. Plus, there are other techniques for dealing with relative structural motions due to earthquakes than base isolation, so it's really a moot point.

Anyway, I'm not really interested in carrying on a discussion with you about this. It's pointless given the lack of information, not to mention you are not familiar with the technical aspects of structural behavior under seismic motions. Regardless, you're free to believe whatever you like - I've long stopped caring about what people think about such topics. My only intent on pointing it out was that if you're going to be extended a staff position on a review site, you can't simply discuss technical aspects of a show without any knowledge about them. And no, discussing something on a forum with random people does not equate knowledge. Opinions are valid insofar as they (or their justifications) do not tread on factual errancy, which is exactly what you'd be doing if you included a comment like that in a review.

May 7, 2011
Sheex says...

Who was making the comments - people who think they know what they're talking about or people who do?

And they have very well have underestimated the damage in the series. I really don't know anything outside of the generalities presented, which - to me - seemed rather credible. I am not familiar with Japanese design codes, nor were the details of the hypothetical quake presented, Regardless, however, the point was that your comparison to the March 2011 quake was not valid whatsoever, since the two scenarios were entirely different. The Richter scale value is meaningless as a single value to quantify damage, and trying to extrapolate technical judgment based on it is completely wrong.

May 7, 2011
Sheex says...

Tsunamis aren't really within my field, but they're essentially sine waves that travel through the water - the larger the quake, the larger the wave (more energy = more amplitude). You could probably look up the mechanics relatively easily, but I'd expect that an earthquake right in Tokyo bay wouldn't generate a tsunami wave simply because there would be no time or space for the sine wave to develop. To see what I mean by this, fill up your bathtub with water. Try pushing the water an inch from the tub wall and see how much of a wave develops; not much of one, right? Now push in the middle. Then push in the back. You should observe notable differences.

When Tokyo Magnitude 8.0 said it did its homework, I see no reason to disbelieve it. From a structural point of view, they seemed quite accurate in portraying modes of failure and seismic behavior in general. Was it 100% accurate? Likely not. It wasn't produced by engineers and scientsists to be an accurate quake - it was produced to be an experience of human drama in the aftermath of a tragedy.

May 7, 2011
Sheex says...

No, I do not watch dubbed anime. Yes, I was one of the people asked to look at your work.

May 6, 2011
Sheex says...

I have no idea where this avatar is from. I've had it for a long time, though.

Oh, I should note something about your profile comment about Tokyo Magnitude 8.0 and the damage. You seem to be under the impression that an earthquake's damage is proportional to its Richter scale rating, but that's not the case; the Richter scale merely measures energy released by the quake's epicenter, which has very little meaning outside of being a good number for a quick survey of scale. Local ground motions are what actually cause structural damage, be it through accelerations induced in the structure, liquefaction of underlying soil, etc.

Tokyo Magnitude 8.0 was premised on the quake's epicenter being located 25km undernearth the Tokyo bay, whereas the March quake was epicentered several hundred (read: almost 400) km away. I don't know how damped the motions felt in Tokyo were in comparison to the epicenter, but here's some context: the 7.2 Mexicali earthquake in 2010 generated motions equivalent to a ~5-5.5 quake in San Diego about 200 km away, so you can probably guestimate the motions that hit Tokyo would be about the equivalent of a 5 to a 6 - meaning that the energy generating the underground motions would be 100-1000 times less than the scenario that was propositioned in Tokyo Magnitude 8.0. I'm not sure what level of quake Japan's design codes aim to mitigate, but I can say with certainty that a developed, earthquake-prone region like Japan would no doubt have pretty stringent seismic requirements. In San Diego, for instance, code makes us design for, approximately, a 7.5 equivalent quake (this varies based on distance from faults). 

Anyway, don't mean to pick on you, but it's a good idea to get your facts straight about technical things like that before jumping to conclusions and coming up with commentary. =P

May 6, 2011