Geryuganshoop's speed

[Shadow_x007x]

First of all, we’ve been using Geryuganshoop’s throwing speed at a Relativistic+ level (0.75c). But here’s the issue: where does this 0.75c figure even come from? Murata only mentioned that Geryuganshoop’s rock-throwing speed is 'near light speed.' I don’t understand how we got 0.75c as the specific value. Usually, when we don’t have clear evidence, we tend to interpret it at the lowest reasonable possibility. In this case, 'near light speed' could very well mean Relativistic (0.1c) or Relativistic+ (0.5c).

Another interesting question is why we interpret Murata’s statement about Geryuganshoop’s speed as 'near light speed' instead of 'sub-light speed.' In Japanese, he used the term 亜光速 (akousoku), which can mean either 'sub-light speed' or 'near light speed.' So why did we choose the latter interpretation over the former?

Murata’s statement

先生、海外の方からの質問です:グリュガンシュプは本当に重力でブラックホールを作れるほどの能力があったのか?めっ ちゃ気になってるそうです。ん〜どうなんですかね、ブラックホール作れたら最強な気がしますけど、そこらへんはONEさ んに聞いてみないとわかんないですね。物体を飛ばす能力ならタツマキ以上だったのかな、グリュガンシュプが念動力で小 石を飛ばしてたけど、タツマキがあれをやると出力が強すぎ て一瞬で小石が蒸発しちゃうんだけど、空気との摩擦と圧縮熱 で、グリュガンシュプは空気との摩接を0にして飛ばすことが できるから、亜光速で石が飛んでくるというね、っていうつも りで描いてました、タツマキはデッケーものは飛ばせれるけど、スピードには限界があるみたいで、やっぱり宇宙最高の超能 力者でしたね。埼玉は普通に石投げて勝っちゃたもんねソイ ツに。埼玉からしたら亜光速で石が飛んできてもただ石を投げ 「ただけにしか見えない、悪い冗談ですよね

 

[Huesito88]

First of all, we’ve been using Geryuganshoop’s throwing speed at a Relativistic+ level (0.75c). But here’s the issue: where does this 0.75c figure even come from? Murata only mentioned that Geryuganshoop’s rock-throwing speed is 'near light speed.'

Wiki general default consensus on near light speed statements in a vacuum

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Wiki general default consensus on near light speed statements in a vacuum

And this is exactly what I’m asking: where did we get the 0.75c figure from? And why is there a consensus that it’s 0.75c, when generally, we should interpret it as the low possible value?

 

[MrTayman616]

And this is exactly what I’m asking: where did we get the 0.75c figure from? And why is there a consensus that it’s 0.75c, when generally, we should interpret it as the low possible value?

How much speed does a "Near the speed of light" claim have?

If a character has only one declaration of going at a speed close to the speed of light, would he fall into the base category of Relativistic + [50% of the speed of light]? One could guess or assume that having the word "near the speed of light" means 90%, 99% of the speed of light, but these...

vsbattles.com

Seems like when it's say "near", if not a hyperbole, it's expected to be around there. I might have understand it wrong, so checking here might be better

 

[Shadow_x007x]

How much speed does a "Near the speed of light" claim have?

If a character has only one declaration of going at a speed close to the speed of light, would he fall into the base category of Relativistic + [50% of the speed of light]? One could guess or assume that having the word "near the speed of light" means 90%, 99% of the speed of light, but these...

vsbattles.com

Seems like when it's say "near", if not a hyperbole, it's expected to be around there. I might have understand it wrong, so checking here might be better

It seems that way. Since most people accept the lowest near light speed as 0.75c, there's nothing I can do.

I still have one question left.

 

[MrTayman616]

I still have one question left.

? (curious)

 

[Shadow_x007x]

? (curious)

Another interesting question is why we interpret Murata’s statement about Geryuganshoop’s speed as 'near light speed' instead of 'sub-light speed.' In Japanese, he used the term 亜光速 (akousoku), which can mean either 'sub-light speed' or 'near light speed.' So why did we choose the latter interpretation over the former?

 

[MrTayman616]

Probably the intent of the sentence? in a sentence like this, using sub light doesn't make sense, as it would mean "anything below light speed". yet here he talks about the throwing speed, so "near" makes more sense for the context.

 

[Chariot190]

And this is exactly what I’m asking: where did we get the 0.75c figure from? And why is there a consensus that it’s 0.75c, when generally, we should interpret it as the low possible value?

The discussion basically boiled down to who in the actual **** would use "near" or other synonyms for say, 50% light as an example (literally half the value, by definition not "near" and instead the average).
75 is like the middle of being actually close, and by definition not being close.

As dude said, basic intent. The fact he specified light at all, evidently conveys that's the closest benchmark. If it wasn't, he could of used any other indicator, sound, lightning, just not specify at all, whatever, the fact he picked light while denoting the speed tells us that's supposed to be indication of the velocity, that general ballpark.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Like Chariot said, 75% lightspeed was chosen mostly off those reasons. There's no explicit standard saying it must be X% with Y statement to my knowledge.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

The discussion basically boiled down to who in the actual **** would use "near" or other synonyms for say, 50% light as an example (literally half the value, by definition not "near" and instead the average).
75 is like the middle of being actually close, and by definition not being close.

As dude said, basic intent. The fact he specified light at all, evidently conveys that's the closest benchmark. If it wasn't, he could of used any other indicator, sound, lightning, just not specify at all, whatever, the fact he picked light while denoting the speed tells us that's supposed to be indication of the velocity, that general ballpark.

Like Chariot said, 75% lightspeed was chosen mostly off those reasons. There's no explicit standard saying it must be X% with Y statement to my knowledge.

I have no problems with 0.75c now, it seems the discussion is correct.

Now all I am wondering about is the use of Murata's quote about the meaning of 亜光速 (akousoku).

 

[Qawsedf234]

Now all I am wondering about is the use of Murata's quote about the meaning of 亜光速 (akousoku).

Afaik it was went with near-light because that's how the translation used for the upgrade wrote it and it wasn't really questioned in depth about the sentence structure. Either one fits and the artbook uses the same kanji for a feat we know is pretty close to lightspeed so I think that's why we ultimately just went with the near-light translation over sub-light (though you can easily argue that the phrasing still gives the same meaning either way).

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Afaik it was went with near-light because that's how the translation used for the upgrade wrote it and it wasn't really questioned in depth about the sentence structure. Either one fits and the artbook uses the same kanji for a feat we know is pretty close to lightspeed so I think that's why we ultimately just went with the near-light translation over sub-light (though you can easily argue that the phrasing still gives the same meaning either way).

I don't think this is a very good answer. The kanji 光速 already means the speed of light. In the context of Boros, it's used as ほぼ, which means almost. In this context, there's no other way to interpret it. But in the context of Geryuganshoop, it still has two possible meanings.

And the word 亜 also means sub. If we translate it directly, 亜光速 should be translated as sub-light speed rather than near light speed.

 

[Chariot190]

I don't think this is a particularly strong answer. The kanji 光速 already translates to 'speed of light.' In Boros's context, the word ほぼ, which means 'almost,' is used, leaving no room for alternative interpretations in this case. However, in Geryuganshoop's context, it can still be interpreted in two different ways.

Literally just basic linguistics. You would never say "sub-light speed" while describing how fast something is, if it was like mach 1 or some shit, there's to huge a gap that wording it like that is straight up stupid.

Lightspeed is being used as the general ballpark, but specifying it isn't equal to, or exceeding it.
Even if we use "sub-light speed", nothing changes because it's saying the exact same thing in the end. The fact "near" actually is viable is just like... Why even argue it?

Besides you're thinking about this wrong. There is no "near" or "sub" in the word technically speaking, it's just a translation into english to convey the meaning of the word. It's just meant to convey it's not quite there. To give an idea, you wouldn't argue 亜熱帯 (anetttai) "Subtropical" meaning regions just below the tropics, or 亜音速 (aonsoku) "Subsonic" often referring to speeds slightly below the speed of sound, means the artic or like 0.1mps, would you? The word still has the connotations of describing something just below light speed.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

In my understanding, "near" and "sub" are not the same. A speed lower than the speed of sound does not mean that the speed is slightly lower than the speed of sound. It can be much lower. So I don't understand this concept.

 

[MrTayman616]

In my understanding, "near" and "sub" are not the same. A speed lower than the speed of sound does not mean that the speed is slightly lower than the speed of sound. It can be much lower. So I don't understand this concept.

It's not just about the translation but it's about how murata talks about it. just read the whole text, the context of the text shows it to be "near" even if it were used as "sub".

 

[Chariot190]

In my understanding, "near" and "sub" are not the same. A speed lower than the speed of sound does not mean that the speed is slightly lower than the speed of sound. It can be much lower. So I don't understand this concept.

You're proving my point. The word has specific nuance and connotations. It means just below. It's "sub" because it is below the thing in question, but it's still close to it.

As said in the examples, subsonic or subtropics. That's an actual term, for speed and climates just below. Just because it says sub, doesn't mean it isn't close, the whole point is excentuate what it's just below.

Couple that with the actual context of the statement (explaining that he can throw rocks super fast, quicker than Tats even, because he can remove friction and stuff, and thus can toss rocks at sub-light speed. The highlight here is the impressiveness of the speed), with the follow up saying that sub-light is a joke to Saitama (This makes it clear that sub-light is supposed to be super fast, as they're highlighting Saitama's own impressive nature).

Like, why do you think that word is almost always translated as "near" in english? Because it conveys the meaning better.
The term is almost exclusively used in contexts talking about how close a velocity is to light, specifically in talks involving relativistic velocity.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

You're proving my point. The word has specific nuance and connotations. It means just below. It's "sub" because it is below the thing in question, but it's still close to it.

I don't think "sub" means that it's still close. Being below doesn't have to be just a little bit below it. Why does being below have to be just a little bit below? This is where I get confused.

Couple that with the actual context of the statement (explaining that he can throw rocks super fast, quicker than Tats even, because he can remove friction and stuff, and thus can toss rocks at sub-light speed. The highlight here is the impressiveness of the speed), with the follow up saying that sub-light is a joke to Saitama (This makes it clear that sub-light is supposed to be super fast, as they're highlighting Saitama's own impressive nature).

Vaporizing rocks is already a proud achievement for speed, but does it need to be near-lightspeed to vaporize a rock a few centimeters in size? I don't think it needs to be Relativistic+ fast to do that. A meteorite only needs to go as fast as 2000-4000 m/s to vaporize, which is pretty fast for most people.

 

[Chariot190]

I don't think "sub" means that it's still close. Being below doesn't have to be just a little bit below it. Why does being below have to be just a little bit below? This is where I get confused.

Because that's what it means? Like idk what to tell you, that's what the term means, it's used for speed close to but below light, used in contexts talking about relativistic velocity approaching light.

Sub is being used to denote it's below, but the term is used for speeds approaching. It literally just means "close to, but not quite". This is how that word is used in Japanese, this is ALSO the intent the word is being used in.

Again, subtropics, you wouldn't call the artic subtropical would you? Of course not, because subtropics, despite using 亜 too, still has an established usage. Thinking about it as "sub" as used in english is wrong anyway, it isn't english to begin with, we just use the equilavent words or words that convey the meaning to convey what the japanese text means, which is why it's often translated as "near" instead, because it conveys what it means better to english speakers, which case and point, you're proving exactly that, you're getting confused because sub doesn't inherently mean what the word is being used for in the line.

Vaporizing rocks is already a proud achievement for speed, but does it need to be near-lightspeed to vaporize a rock a few centimeters in size? I don't think it needs to be Relativistic+ fast to do that. A meteorite only needs to go as fast as 2000-4000 m/s to vaporize, which is pretty fast for most people.

Literally missing the point. It's stating because he can nullify all that, he can toss rocks at speeds just below light. He would not be able to because they'd long since evaporate if tossed without that ability. That doesn't change the fact it's emphasizing the cap of what he can do without such restrictions.

 

[MrTayman616]

I don't think "sub" means that it's still close. Being below doesn't have to be just a little bit below it. Why does being below have to be just a little bit below? This is where I get confused.

Vaporizing rocks is already a proud achievement for speed, but does it need to be near-lightspeed to vaporize a rock a few centimeters in size? I don't think it needs to be Relativistic+ fast to do that. A meteorite only needs to go as fast as 2000-4000 m/s to vaporize, which is pretty fast for most people.

Because of the context of the text.

Going based on vaporizing rocks or friction doesn't make sense when he already talks about the speed. The point is that their output is so powerful that it vaporizes instantly without being able to approach that level of speed. But he got rid of the problem via getting rid of the friction. Which is why he's now able to throw things at this level of speed.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

I think I have enough answers to what I want to know. You can close this thread. Thank you for your answers.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I think I have enough answers to what I want to know. You can close this thread. Thank you for your answers.

Alright, I'll close this