qwertyboss:

AC is safer?
Hope you are not mistaking DC for AC because with my engineering background I can assured you that AC is nothing close to been safe compared to DC

"A.C. is said to be four to five times more dangerous than D.C. For one thing, A.C. causes more severe muscular contractions..... The frequency of the AC has a lot to do with the effect on the human body. Unfortunately, 60 cycles is in the most harmful range. At this frequency, as little as 25 volts can kill."

hulk616:
Yes, i agree. But i am talking about the case of iron man suit.

One key to understanding brick breaking is a basic principle of motion: The more momentum an object has, the more force it can generate. When it hit the brick, [karateka Ron] McNair's hand had reached a speed of 11 meters per second (24 miles per hour). At this speed, his hand exerted a whopping force of 3,000 Newton's -or 675 pounds-on the concrete.

A slab of concrete could likely support the weight of a few people weighing a total of 675 pounds (306 kilograms). But apply that amount of force concentrated into an area as small as a fist and the concrete slab will break.

qwertyboss:

Breaking is a work, hence there is work done. And strength is a measures of resistance or overcoming resistance.

But weight which is an element of gravitation can only act vertically downward and you know quiet well that work done against gravity is infinitesimally zero

hulk616:
Yes

DriggityDre:
Hulk616
About the AC vs DC, they are both dangerous but it would take less AC to kill than DC.

hulk616:
Your quote, was based on frequency only, but we have current which is very important. At no load (open circuit, high voltage, zero current), DC is more dangerous than AC. 230V AC at no load wont kill you, but at short circuit( zero voltage, high current), DC is still more dangerous than AC.
you can read on Tesla coils.

qwertyboss:

Iron man's suit is built and design base on mathematical and scientific principles.
So you need to considered the principle of mathematical modelling in its entirety

qwertyboss:

Then in breaking a concrete weight is of lesser importance than strength...
And did you even know that it still depends on the compressive strength of the concrete because concretes are design to achieve different compressive strength.
Hence even the action of the iron man's suit breaking a concrete is relative to the compressive strength of the concrete in question

hulk616:
I am using the principles

DriggityDre:
Ah, yes. I am aware.. but only when frequency is exempted.
Still the two currents can kill, it just depends on how much is put out.

hulk616:
You are going to far, if the force applied is more than the compressive strength, or any other strength it will break.

hulk616:
Yes, but for iron man suit, AC is the best.

hulk616:
You are going to far, if the force applied is more than the compressive strength, or any other strength it will break.

hulk616:
You are going to far, if the force applied is more than the compressive strength, or any other strength it will break.

qwertyboss:

You are misconceiving one thing, an AC can be created at the circuital outlet were they are needed by inverting.
And this AC happens to carry electromagnetic field around them which will certainly interfere with other processes. Hence the need for DC

qwertyboss:

All concretes are not design to a unified compressive strength hence the strength of the material been it an iron man's suit or not is inversely proportional to the concretes' compressive strength

qwertyboss:

All concretes are not design to a unified compressive strength hence the strength of the material been it an iron man's suit or not is inversely proportional to the concretes' compressive strength

qwertyboss:

You are misconceiving one thing, an AC can be created at the circuital outlet were they are needed by inverting.
And this AC happens to carry electromagnetic field around them which will certainly interfere with other processes. Hence the need for DC

qwertyboss:

I don't think nuclear energy is the option to power a suit like that...
If modern electric cars can be powered by a battery then that suit can certainly be powered by a battery

hulk616:
1. Batteries cannot be used because of space limited and they are too heavy. 2. Batteries are DC, they need to be recharged.

Nickshrapnel:
An Ironman like suit may be possible in the future but it would definetly be an investment without returns because it would be practically useless. No man can fit in in such suit

MetalJigsaw:
Iron man also had to recharge his suits.

hulk616:
the suit has its own reactor that needs to be recharged sometimes

MetalJigsaw:
What do you mean "practically useless"? Such suit can be used at warfront and/or against insurgency. Very very useful

MetalJigsaw:
Do the cars accommodate Fire powers and weapons as the suit?

hulk616:
the suit has its own reactor that needs to be recharged sometimes

hulk616:
the suit has its own reactor that needs to be recharged sometimes