- 40,947
- 35,401
The slowdown requires an assumption. Last I checked we went for the route with the LEAST assumptions.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ohh okay.If you were to find another feat where they traveled across the universe in 10 minutes, with some explicit indication that their speed was constant in that instance only, we wouldn't use that with their current calc'd speed of traveling across the universe in 3 seconds. It would need its own calc.
But if you find some reason for there to be no slowdown in the 3 second feat, it'd be fine to use.
To account for the slowdown, I'd say try to pixel-scale the speed visually seen in that scene, but idk how enthusiastic you'd be about that.
EDIT: Thinking about it, if you account for the slowdown I doubt it'd get even normal human reaction speeds. Since I'm pretty sure that scene took more than 0.2 seconds, which is the requirement for normal human reactions. This is probably only useful if you don't assume slowdown.
Okay, so hypothetically, if we took the landing scene and measured the frames to be of a time shorter than 0.2, then where does that leave the slowdown on whether it happens or not?Since reactions are technically just measured in seconds, we could rate it as being the length of the landing scene. If it's 2 frames in a 25-60fps series, that'd be Superhuman.
The only thing in the destination the character would at best roughly know beforehand is the general vicinity of the planet. Not the location on the planet however.But more importantly, this sort've returns to one of my earlier points. Slowing down would only happen once you actually witness the place you are stopping at / obstacle you are avoiding.
Sure, and while that'd help with certain feats, I'm not sure it'd help here. Since the character knew roughly where the destination was from the beginning, if they wanted to, say, slowdown when they got within the moon's orbit, they could plan that during the flight with normal human reactions.
And I'm saying there could be a significant speed drop once in the vicinity of the planet to make finding the location on it a bit easier.The only thing in the destination the character would at best roughly know beforehand is the general vicinity of the planet. Not the location on the planet however.
I'm writing up a thread for it now.Well I would but I think you and I know how that story would end here.
You didn't, I did. To show how that is an animation inconsistency.I didnt say "there are no clouds".
Even if that is, doesn't mean it was happening at MFTL+ speeds.Does not take rocket science to discern that this is a trajectory change.
That's the least assumption according to our standards. You'd require proof that they were maneuvering at MFTL+ speeds. Kindly read the note on speed page and get a clear understanding of the standards and how they work, because this point is just going back to square 1.The slowdown requires an assumption. Last I checked we went for the route with the LEAST assumptions.
Then I don't see the point in why you would try arguing this in the first place when that would only be more beneficial to my argument than anything else.You didn't, I did. To show how that is an animation inconsistency.
It does, because you reasonably aren't going to be slowing yourself down until the place you want to stop or land at is in view to discern that choice.Even if that is, doesn't mean it was happening at MFTL+ speeds.
This assumption is being made that you would choose to slow down before your landing point is even in view, so no it's actually not. That adds more of an assumption to what would already be thought of.That's the least assumption according to our standards.
It doesn't.Then I don't see the point in why you would try arguing this in the first place when that would only be more beneficial to my argument than anything else.
The place being the planet.It does, because you reasonably aren't going to be slowing yourself down until the place you want to stop or land at is in view to discern that choice.
Not really.This assumption is being made that you would choose to slow down before your landing point is even in view, so no it's actually not. That adds more of an assumption to what would already be thought of.
It does, because if you argue there's clouds on the original path before trajectory comes, then they wouldn't see the ocean until after passing the clouds to discern that.It doesn't.
And you're wrong. It's not the planet. It's a location on the planet.The place being the planet.
Nice counter argument. But im sure it's based on your false view towards what this feat is, so I'll kindly say see above.Not really.
Someone has to decide otherwise it will just go on and on. And no, I have read everything new that has been brought up. The landing thing you brought up does NOT change things. Nothing suggests that they entered the atmosphere at MFTL+ speeds.You can't just decide when this ends when your take is based on false information from the start and then choose to not address the new information.
How does it not? AKM, slowing down is only going to happen when the location you want to stop at is in view so you can discern when to slow down. We have no reason to say slowing down will happen before that information becomes available to start discerning.Someone has to decide otherwise it will just go on and on. And no, I have read everything new that has been brought up. The landing thing you brought up does NOT change things. Nothing suggests that they entered the atmosphere at MFTL+ speeds.
I really don't have any counter to arguments like these. They seem to be coming from sheer desperation alone with no logic whatsoever.You're take, again, is that this feat is simply seeing the planet and then slowing. But that isn't what this feat is. We wouldn't be here arguing this in the first place if seeing the planet was all that this was.
What is the destination, Kukui? Is the destination not on the planet? Specifications don't matter, someone coming in from a different galaxy wouldn't say I am going to visit Tokyo. They'd say I am going to visit Tokyo on Earth, because Earth is an inherent destination when it comes to interstellar travel. Why wouldn't a reasonable person going at MFTL+ speeds throughout space slow down upon reaching a planet they want to land on.
Hilariously big false equivalence that has nothing to do with what the point or discussion here is.Do you directly slow down your car at the exact parking spot if you go to a shop? Or do you slow down when you reach near the shop and then make your way to the parking spot?
Concession accepted then. It's not my problem that you don't want to respond anymore because you don't have an actual legitimate argument to have here and have nothing else to fall back on besides admin powers.Come on.
I am not going to respond to these comments anymore. Frankly, I feel like I am wasting time on someone who is being willfully ignorant and would never change his mind no matter what. So there's that. Unless something comes up worth commenting again, I am not going to.
Not your call. I still have more agreement on my side, so until you address my points that at least Agnaa bothered to discuss here, you don't have the authority to do this by yourself.I will wait for some time, and then move ahead with the changes. My apologies.
That, however, would require more assumptions than initially set. You normally wouldn't begin to drop your speed until you have witnessed the place you definitely want to stop at. Particularly if there's any hurrying in the mixture.
That's my fault, that's the old justification and I forgot to omit it.Also the scaling suggested makes no sense for the 2rd key... (Check the bolded part)
"At least Peak Human reactions with Massively Hypersonic attack speed (Some Unit's can manipulate lightning) and Massively FTL+ travel with Units (The souls of Cardfighters are far inferior to the Units of Planet Cray, explicitly requiring them in order to battle in cardfights; Aichi's Units have shown to be fast enough to attack his soul; Superior to the speed of Ren's Units)"
If you aren't scaling flight speed of the souls to their reaction speed, why are them requiring Units for fighting, and Aichi's Units being fast enough to attack his soul in the justification? Because if thier fast enough to attack his soul and battle and it's put under the justification of their Massively FTL+ rating, it would suggest they have Massively FTL+ Combat/Reaction/Attack Speed.
Again, none of this is relevant in proving that they were shown to land at MFTL+ speed. As already pointed out before.However, here we see the character fly straight down to the planet as the same streak of light he was when he took off and flew through space. We even see he still applying force from his speed since the clouds part when he passes and then smashing into the ground to gain all the characters attention. He showed no indication that he slowed down tremendously and I think evidence should be provided that he did slow his decent.
What would be the new justification?That's my fault, that's the old justification and I forgot to omit it.
However, here we see the character fly straight down to the planet as the same streak of light he was when he took off and flew through space.
We only see this light when they take off, and when they land. Not anywhere in between where the speed would be highest. Unless there is proof that this light only appears when they travel at their full speed and gets dissipated when they get slower, this point holds no value.Seeing this, this should also be a good supporting detail. Staying as the same streak of light through the journey all the way through to the landing would be an indicator of not slowing too. Otherwise, the light streak coming from the speed's movement would've dissipated the slower they got.
Should just scale from being superior in general.What would be the new justification?