I need a place to put my Ashley speed calc, so here.

[WarriorWare]

This was copied and pasted from something I'd posted on a different forum. In this video, Ashley flies all the way to the moon in about four seconds; at about 0:09. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4Z9mZfwY0 I'm going to calculate the speed required to do that. Correct me if I screwed this up in any way; though I think the most likely blunder here is that I assumed that the moon is just as far away from Ashley's planet as it is from ours, which is 238,900 miles.

Anyway, as we know, speed is distance over time. So, I divided 238,900 by (4/60), as four seconds is four sixtieths of an minute. This calculation will conclude a flying speed of 3583500 miles per minute. Multiply that by 60, and you get 215010000 miles per hour. And if my calculations are correct... That's 282459.285838 times the speed of sound. That's roughly a third of the speed of light.

I guess the main argument here would be the same one used on other moon-related Mario feats; that the moon may not be as far away from Planet Mario as ours. After all, Ashley is later shown sitting on the moon and taking up most of it. Unless it's implied somewhere that she can make herself gigantic ("Grandma's wig, this will make you big"?), it's hard to tell what can be made of this.

I revised this calc with the assumption that Planet Mario's moon is closer to it than our moon is to Earth. This calculation assumed that Mario's moon is at low orbit, which is at about 160 km from the surface, so long story short, I ended up with her speed ending up at about mach 11, which is far less impressive, but still pretty good.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, as you said, if the Moon is very different from ours, it is hard to make anything substantial out of this.

 

[WarriorWare]

Even at low orbit, the lowest something can be while still orbitting the planet, it's still a crazy speed feat.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, it is a kids' fantasy world, so not necessarily.

 

[WarriorWare]

Well, until it's actually stated that the moon being, like, two feet away is an aspect of this particular kids' fantasy world, we've no choice but to use real life science.

Let's say Ashley had never done this, and I'd said that the moon in the Mario world is just as far away as our moon is from Earth. Would anyone really be arguing against that?

 

[Antvasima]

Well, if it is just barely larger than Ashley, it wouldn't remotely be seen from Earth unless it was much closer than ours, so I don't think that this is useful. Sorry.

 

[WarriorWare]

Ah, ah, ah! It wasn't shown to not be much larger than Ashley until she got there! Kinda like how you can see the curvature of the moon when it zooms in on He-Man pushing it, but the moon is shown immediately prior to be, in fact, way too big for that to be possible.

As she was flying there, the moon definitely appeared to be far, far bigger than her, just like the moon that He-Man pushed. It's just a matter of animation silliness.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I think that said animation silliness makes it unreliable. Sorry.

 

[WarriorWare]

Can't you at least agree that it's more reliable than other means by which people have calculated the speed of Mario characters, such as Mario outrunning (super slow) cannon balls and scaling Wario to Shake King?

 

[Antvasima]

I don't know. I am not informed about the issue. But this particular instance still seems unreliable.

 

[WarriorWare]

If the moon was actually as small as it looked, it wouldn't be able to create waves or illuminate the night sky, even though it does both in the Mario series, even if it was closer to Earth.

Plus, the planet that Mario games take place on has been referred to as Earth before, and tremors have been referred to as earthquakes before.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

If the moon was actually as small as it looked, it wouldn't be able to create waves or illuminate the night sky, even though it does both in the Mario series, even if it was closer to Earth.

Plus, the planet that Mario games take place on has been referred to as Earth before, and tremors have been referred to as earthquakes before.

I think that statement makes the feat pretty reliable.

 

[Antvasima]

If it is displayed at a certain soze, then that is a more reliable gauge than being able to light up the night, given that, again, this is a kids' fanrasy world.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Just because it's made for kids doesn't make it any less than what it really is. Axe Cop is pretty much for kids yet that doesn't change the fact that he has insane feats on the reg. that make him multiversal.


Ashley being able to move at relativistic speeds is pretty spot on for her universe considering it contains Mach 260 fat guys, a country level monkey, and princesses who tank castle sized explosions to the face.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

And it can also be explained that the reason she looks to be the size of the moon is depth perception

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, but as he said himself, the Moon was shown as much smaller than our own. That is a major contradiction that we cannot just ignore.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Nothing about a different sized moon states that it'd be a different distance away though.

 

[Antvasima]

If it is still possible to see from Earth, yes it does.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Isn't our moon visible from Earth? I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here.


Also there's such things as moon illusions which are commonly occurring events that make the moon bigger. There's all sorts of explanations.

 

[Antvasima]

If an object is not large enough it will not be visible from nearly as great a distance as our Moon is from our Earth.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Your argument is that the feat is purely stylistic, based on the fact it's made for children. So with that same logic I can also argue that the reason she's visible on the moon is stylistic. That logic also gos into the size of the moon.

In all honesty it doesn't seem fair that a feat for a cartoon character must always be taken into consideration based on art style. It always seems to put these characters at huge disadvantages.

 

[Antvasima]

No, my argument is that: "Ashley is later shown sitting on the moon and taking up most of it."

This explicitly contradicts and makes the feat unreliable.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

And he even took this into account and still got Mach 11 yet this is still being argued.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Can it just be left off as between possibly Mach 11 - relativistic?

 

[Antvasima]

"Unknown" seems better given the huge discrepancy between the values.

 

[HomestuckLover1]

Saying unknown is pretty much dismissing the entire thing, which also seems like we're downplaying here.

He gave a real life science answer and even gave an idea as to what her speed would be if it were MUCH MUCH closer and lowballed it to Mach 11. Dismissing this seems hugely unfair.

 

[Antvasima]

No, it is entirely fair. Unknown doesn't take one side or the other. It simply states that it is too hard to gauge. I have grown tired of this discussion. Goodbye.