-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
(INPUT DESPERATELY NEEDED) Verse-Wide Katekyo Hitman Reborn Downgrades
- Thread starter ObberGobb
- Start date
Arkenis
They/Them- 17,293
- 8,014
You need mods
Arkenis
They/Them- 17,293
- 8,014
You're better off asking mods who work on Hitman
- 1,049
- 804
- Thread starter
- #86
I asked for input a few weeks ago on the message walls of all the knowledgeable members, but haven't gotten any response
- 155
- 27
There’s a lot of Japanese words that mean multiple things. That doesn’t invalidate anything. Going along those lines, almost all light novels are irrelevant and can’t be used because it would just be a hotbed for debates on what certain words mean. It’s called using context clues. We clearly know that the point of these orbs was to create black holes. Now let’s think here. Do planets or stars create black holes? Either way, if we assume these only have the gravity of a planet, that would upscale the feat even more as it requires a lot more energy to compress a planet into a black hole compared to a star.
As for you hinging your argument on the word like. Like I’ve stated before, that doesn’t follow along with English as a language. Sure it doesn’t have to be equal, but it’s around that level. If I said “I am very strong like a bull.” That simile is also using the exaggeration figure of speech. But in this case, we clearly understand contextually that it wouldn’t be an exaggeration for those to be around the level of a star. Gokudera even states that when a star collapses, a black hole is left behind. So logically, not saying they have the gravity of a star wouldn’t follow the canon.
Like I’ve said before, you’re really grasping at straws here. You don’t fully understand that a simile doesn’t inherently debunk anything as similes by nature are just comparisons and not exaggerations, the exposition stated would also imply that it is that of a star, and even if it didn’t have the gravity of a star, that would upscale the feat even more due to the crushing force required to turn something other than a star into a black hole is still above what you’re saying would downscale this feat.
- 1,049
- 804
- Thread starter
- #88
The statement "its own gravity like a planet" is clearly not about the gravitational strength. The comparison is about is having gravitational pull in the first place, it is not brought up how strong the gravity is.
The person who translated it knows Japanese. Neither of us do. They went off the original Japanese phrasing and confirmed that it isn't usable as a feat. You are going off fan translations that are not specific in this regard. Its pointless to argue about the phrasing when we do not know the original language, and the translator who said it's not usable does.
And even if the phrasing was open to being specifically about it's strength, it would still be an unusable feat because
1. It would be vague regardless
2. Its just a single statement not backed up by anything on screen
3. It isn't consistent with anything before or after
4. Black hole feats are inherently bad for powerscaling because it almost always gives results far higher than what is actually shown, and beyond what isnlikely intended by the author. Unless we have specific context that a fictional magic black hole is intended to be Planetary in scale it shouldn't be used.
The person who translated it knows Japanese. Neither of us do. They went off the original Japanese phrasing and confirmed that it isn't usable as a feat. You are going off fan translations that are not specific in this regard. Its pointless to argue about the phrasing when we do not know the original language, and the translator who said it's not usable does.
And even if the phrasing was open to being specifically about it's strength, it would still be an unusable feat because
1. It would be vague regardless
2. Its just a single statement not backed up by anything on screen
3. It isn't consistent with anything before or after
4. Black hole feats are inherently bad for powerscaling because it almost always gives results far higher than what is actually shown, and beyond what isnlikely intended by the author. Unless we have specific context that a fictional magic black hole is intended to be Planetary in scale it shouldn't be used.
- 155
- 27
Like I stated before, planet doesn’t make sense in this context. If something has the gravity of a planet, star, moon, or any celestial body, that determines how strong the gravitational pull is along with the distance. I don’t think you fully grasp the physics of gravity.
The person who translated it said it can’t be used on what basis? I also want to point out that who’s to say this translator is more accurate than the fan translator? Regardless, the translator you got told us what it translates to. And I have been doing nothing but going along the lines of what they said it translates to.
The statement isn’t vague. Using basic context clues, it’s pretty clear what it’s supposed to mean/say. We literally see the gravity of said orbs in use so I have no idea what you mean by not backed up on screen, it is consistent as those orbs were used to create black holes, and trying to dismiss this by using a blanket statement of saying all black hole feats are bad feats is a faulty generalization fallacy.
This has been going on for a few days now so let’s hop in vc and sort this out. Tetsuya#4495
- 1,049
- 804
- Thread starter
- #90
This is a debate site,
This is an issue of interpreting the text, I think your interpretation of the English translation is wrong. This was basically confirmed when someone who can actually read the original text confirmed that my interpretation of it was more in-line with the Japanese raws. There really isn't much point in discussing after that, he simply understands what was said better than you or I.
And regardless we can't really do anything right now since no mods have shown up. I have 4 "yes" votes to 2 "no" votes, but things are at a standstill until staff give official approval.
This is a discussion forum, we can't settle discussions off-site.
This is an issue of interpreting the text, I think your interpretation of the English translation is wrong. This was basically confirmed when someone who can actually read the original text confirmed that my interpretation of it was more in-line with the Japanese raws. There really isn't much point in discussing after that, he simply understands what was said better than you or I.
And regardless we can't really do anything right now since no mods have shown up. I have 4 "yes" votes to 2 "no" votes, but things are at a standstill until staff give official approval.
Arkenis
They/Them- 17,293
- 8,014
Don't know about the verse so I am neutral. Though could I have the relevant chapters for the bh stuff?
- 1,049
- 804
- Thread starter
- #93
Chapter 330 is where the one statement was. The ability pops up in later chapters, but this is the only chapter where any context is given.
- 155
- 27
Well I mean it’s taken days now so I’m just trying to speed things up. We can go anywhere else because the response times are lackluster on forums and comments. My interpretation of the English text isn’t wrong. The translator says it translated to the sentence you typed. The sentence you typed would mean that it has the gravity like a star/planet. Contextually speaking it would mean star as it was used as exposition later on to explain how black holes are made. You’re focusing on the word like as if a simile can’t be a direct comparison. I walked into work today and told my coworkers that an anvil we have was super hard like A-286 stainless steel. That anvil was in fact, A-286 stainless steel. Your simile that you’re thinking about is me saying I’m strong like a bull where it isn’t meant to be taken literally. That’s the use of both a simile and an exaggeration. This isn’t the use of an exaggeration. The word like doesn’t inherently dismiss anything. I don’t care if mods come and I don’t care what happens. The fact of the matter is, I believe what I claimed to be true. I have been in a room full of about 15 people and 12 of those people said the earth was flat. But that doesn’t mean I was gonna sit there and keep silent.
- 1,049
- 804
- Thread starter
- #95
The sentence was "that sphere appears to have its own gravity like a star."
The comparison here isn't the strength of the gravity. None of the words refer to the strength of its gravitational pull, they refer to it having gravity in the first place.
It doesn't say, "it has the gravity of a star." It says it has gravity, like a star has gravity.
Your anvil example doesn't make any sense either. You wouldn't use the word "like" in that situation. That just simply isn't how the word "like" is used, you are grammatically incorrect here. If you were talking about a A-286 anvil you'd say "that's an A-286 anvil," not "that's like an A-286 anvil."
The phrase "multiplying like rabbits" obviously doesn't mean you are talking about rabbits. If I said "tarantulas are venomous like cobras" that wouldn't mean that their venom is exactly as potent as a cobra's venom. Also, flowery language and hyperbole are a thing. When someone says "your hands are as cold as ice" that isn't literal.
We are taking about an objectively vague phrasing that, again, apparently is pretty clearly not literal in the original Japanese. If we do not know for absolute certain that it is a specific reference to the mass of those spheres then it should never be used for an upgrade this enormous and this far out of line with what is ever shown in the manga.
The comparison here isn't the strength of the gravity. None of the words refer to the strength of its gravitational pull, they refer to it having gravity in the first place.
It doesn't say, "it has the gravity of a star." It says it has gravity, like a star has gravity.
Your anvil example doesn't make any sense either. You wouldn't use the word "like" in that situation. That just simply isn't how the word "like" is used, you are grammatically incorrect here. If you were talking about a A-286 anvil you'd say "that's an A-286 anvil," not "that's like an A-286 anvil."
The phrase "multiplying like rabbits" obviously doesn't mean you are talking about rabbits. If I said "tarantulas are venomous like cobras" that wouldn't mean that their venom is exactly as potent as a cobra's venom. Also, flowery language and hyperbole are a thing. When someone says "your hands are as cold as ice" that isn't literal.
We are taking about an objectively vague phrasing that, again, apparently is pretty clearly not literal in the original Japanese. If we do not know for absolute certain that it is a specific reference to the mass of those spheres then it should never be used for an upgrade this enormous and this far out of line with what is ever shown in the manga.
Arkenis
They/Them- 17,293
- 8,014
Does the verse have a ues? That is a big factor in scaling people to this, if the spheres weren't created through it and only through some special Earth attribute then there's no reason for the scaling. And how do people scale to the bh anyway? Enma only collapses it through his Earth attribute powers. And furthermore, the calc gets its results by merging all the results of every bh. I don't know why this is allowed or how this even contributes to one's power but no one destroyed a bh with the combined mass of them all.
Last edited:
- 155
- 27
Yeah it refers to having gravity. But at the same time, they specifically chose that of a star. Because it has the gravity of a star. You don’t have to say it verbatim to transfer that concept. There’s multiple ways to say the same thing.
No that example perfectly fits. You would also be able to use the like word in that’s sentence. Grammatically, that sentence is correct. Are you saying it isn’t?
In those examples you gave, the “like” part is referring to aspects of the concept. This isn’t referring to an aspect of something, it’s speaking literally.
We do know it’s pretty spot on that that’s what it’s talking about. Like I said before, later exposition that explains how black holes are made imply towards that. You’re completely ignoring all contextual evidence to cherry pick at some shoddy argument of translation. That isn’t inherently enough evidence to debunk it alone let alone ignoring the entirety of the context.
Like I said, this has gone on for days now, let’s hop in vc and settle this in half an hour. All of this could’ve been said in 3 minutes.
- 972
- 833
Bump + Following
Similar threads
