Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

[Shadow_x007x]

I do agree with Chariot that if 13 milliseconds isn't usable, the persistence of the light trails leads me to believe that 1 second is much too high

We can use 0.1 second for this reason. Does everyone think it's good?

Even 1 second is still too long. No matter the distance for creating a light trail, it must use a shorter time frame because the light trail we see is the afterimage left by Saitama. A 1-second time frame would make the afterimage disappear before 1 second is up.

And the timeframe for creating a light trail in the story should use at least 0.1 seconds to create the light trail. Garou cannot create a light trail in 0.1 seconds from the perspective of a normal person, which means the light trails that appear during FF vs Garou vs PS must occur in less than 0.1 seconds. We can infer that the timeframe for creating the light trail must be at least 0.1 seconds.

 

[Second22]

Honestly, I was just giving an example. The timeframe shown in the story might not be applicable. It would be more appropriate to use the standard timeframe for afterimages, which might be more suitable (though I'm not sure what it is, maybe 0.2 s).

 

[MrTayman616]

13 milliseconds.

i believe that's honestly the best timeframe to use. we're doing it after garou continued to grow even more (considering he grew to the point of blitzing platinum sperm after 0.0013 second). then even Cosmic mode. and then both of them going all out. which this feat is supposed to be massively superior.

oh also. did this get accepted?

 

[DavidTPPM]

In my opinion the 0.1 second timeframe is like the worst proposed time frame.
1 second comes from the wiki standard for quick 1 panel feats.
To use any smaller timeframe we would need some point of reference that would indicate the smaller timeframe. We can't just make up small time frames because the results are disappointing otherwise. With any other feat and series, if there was no point of reference and the 1 second result was useless we would just drop the feat as useless for scaling.

The 13 milliseconds are also really bad. There is literally no real argument as to why Saitama did all those jumps in that time frame. Just because a stated timeframe exists doesn't mean you can apply it to every feat in the verse.

So I think there's 2 options.
1. We drop the feat as not useful for scaling and instead focus on other feats.
2. We find a point of reference that can be used to justify a smaller timeframe.

 

[CloverDragon03]

The persistence of light trails is the justification for a smaller timeframe, as suggested by Chariot. There's no need for an arbitrarily high timeframe

 

[DavidTPPM]

The persistence of light trails is the justification for a smaller timeframe, as suggested by Chariot. There's no need for an arbitrarily high timeframe

So what are the light trails created by? What timeframe would that indicate?

 

[Kin201]

There's no definite timeframes to reference from. It's unquantifible as far as I know.

 

[MrTayman616]

So what are the light trails created by? What timeframe would that indicate?

those lights are afterimages being connected and it shapes like a snake cuz of it. at the very least, that seems like how flash does it.

 

[MrTayman616]

by the way. why can't we use the sneeze for the speed of post balding saitama? even if it happened later. we accept it as weaker than the serious punch from before. both strength and speed wise.

 

[Kin201]

Someone needs to make a CRT to get the sneeze calc accepted first before we can discuss it further.

 

[Damage3245]

1 second is not an arbitrarily high timeframe. It's a pretty standard assumption.

If that's unacceptable to people then the alternative is we can just dismiss the Io feat as something that can't be reasonably calced.

 

[DavidTPPM]

those lights are afterimages being connected and it shapes like a snake cuz of it. at the very least, that seems like how flash does it.

And how do we know how long the after images last? In fiction an after image can sometimes last only a short period of time even for an MFTL character while other times it can last really long even for a subsonic character.

1 second is not an arbitrarily high timeframe. It's a pretty standard assumption.

If that's unacceptable to people then the alternative is we can just dismiss the Io feat as something that can't be reasonably calced.

Exactly what I've been saying

 

[MrTayman616]

Someone needs to make a CRT to get the sneeze calc accepted first before we can discuss it further.

i see.

can't we say the shockwave's are frozen based on the images? or if not frozen, can't we scale it via scaling the distance one of the shockwave's move? we can find the speed of sound in IO and use it to find a timeframe?

 

[Damage3245]

i see.

can't we say the shockwave's are frozen based on the images? or if not frozen, can't we scale it via scaling the distance one of the shockwave's move? we can find the speed of sound in IO and use it to find a timeframe?

No, we do not have enough evidence for them being frozen.

 

[DavidTPPM]

Iirc the "frozen shockwaves" argument was brought up in the old version of the calc and was dismissed due to lack of evidence or something like that

 

[MrTayman616]

then we can use them to find how much an average shockwave move's?

because considering the colored page of IO. shockwaves size are close to each other. we can find the speed of sound in IO, then use it to compare them and find a timeframe. considering a shockwave goes around the size of garou. it would probably give something like 0.04 (guessing). would it be fine to do something like that?

 

[MrTayman616]

Iirc the "frozen shockwaves" argument was brought up in the old version of the calc and was dismissed due to lack of evidence or something like that

why not though? apparently all of them are in the same page and the distance they move seems to be very close.

if it's not a problem, can you send me the thread pls? i would like to see the arguments for it.

also there is this page which seems to support it more

 

[Shadow_x007x]

I agree with DavidTPPM if the 1 second time frame is too much of a lowball. And we don't know any other time frames. Putting off this achievement until we know the exact time frame seems the most optimistic to me right now.

 

[DavidTPPM]

why not though? apparently all of them are in the same page and the distance they move seems to be very close.

if it's not a problem, can you send me the thread pls? i would like to see the arguments for it.

I don’t remember if there was a whole thread but multiple calc group members explained some reasons why it's wrong in the calc itself

also there is this page which seems to support it more

That panel actually shows Garou and Saitama moving a comparable distance to the shockwave which, if anything, seems to contradict the idea that the shockwaves were frozen.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

I would like to review it again. Now we have a proposal is this thread

• Proposal 1: Use a 1 second time frame for immediate events and vary the distance.
• Proposal 2: Use the same 0.0013 second time frame, but change the distance.
• Proposal 3: Delete the calculation and wait until we receive confirmation of a suitable time frame.

 

[Damage3245]

Proposal 1 or 3 seems best to me.

 

[CloverDragon03]

1 second is not an arbitrarily high timeframe. It's a pretty standard assumption.

If that's unacceptable to people then the alternative is we can just dismiss the Io feat as something that can't be reasonably calced.

We don't have to go with either of these, no

 

[MrTayman616]

We don't have to go with either of these, no

can i ask something? i'm not sure if it would work so... they are in IO. if we find the speed of sound there. can't we just compare the first shockwave and one of the shockwave's from the colored page then divide it with the speed of sound there. would it give an acceptable timeframe?

 

[Damage3245]

We don't have to go with either of these, no

Well, we have to do something.

 

[MrTayman616]

Well, we have to do something.

we might open another thread for the sneeze scaling. if it gets accepted. since saitama's sneeze after his growth is still massively inferior to their punches. and saitama&garou should have relative speed to their punches unlike sp^2 since the increase in velocity, we might choose an suitable timeframe based on the result?

 

[Damage3245]

we might open another thread for the sneeze scaling. if it gets accepted. since saitama's sneeze after his growth is still massively inferior to their punches. and saitama&garou should have relative speed to their punches unlike sp^2 since the increase in velocity, we might choose an suitable timeframe based on the result?

Not a solution to this thread's issue though.

 

[MrTayman616]

I would like to review it again. Now we have a proposal is this thread

• Proposal 1: Use a 1 second time frame for immediate events and vary the distance.
• Proposal 2: Use the same 0.0013 second time frame, but change the distance.
• Proposal 3: Delete the calculation and wait until we receive confirmation of a suitable time frame.

proposal 3 seems the best if 0.0013 is not usable.

if it is, then proposal 2.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Well, we have to do something.

I agree, and I apologize for not being as proactive about this (got hit with the real life debuff and all), but I don’t agree with what you said being the only two options available

 

[Damage3245]

I agree, and I apologize for not being as proactive about this (got hit with the real life debuff and all), but I don’t agree with what you said being the only two options available

Okay, I'll rephrase it as those are the two most reasonable options to me so far. I'm open to considering any other practical alternatives.

 

[Kin201]

Bump.

We need more CGMs to comment here, right?

 

[Chariot190]

Well, in theory we could calc the timeframe? But we'd need the width and length of the trails, given the bigger an object is, the quicker it'd need to be to leave an afterimage, among a bunch of other wacky stuff.

How long did it take the light trails to vanish in the other scene?

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Bump.

We need more CGMs to comment here, right?

Yes

 

[Shadow_x007x]

How long did it take the light trails to vanish in the other scene?

What we do know is Movement in the 0.1 second to 0.5 second time frame cannot create light trails. (or the light trail disappears first) and moving in the time frame of 0.0001 seconds to 0.0013 seconds, the light trail still appears and does not disappear.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Do we have a better idea for what a minimum time could be? Whether it's via freefall of something, light dissipation off the prior feats, etc? Because as it stands both ain't exactly accurate I think.

Not without seeing the feat animated or the 13 ms figure.

Well other than like, the sneeze scaling I guess, but that only applies to post-amp Saitama/Garou.

 

[Chariot190]

What we do know is Movement in the 0.1 second to 0.5 second time frame cannot create light trails. (or the light trail disappears first) and moving in the time frame of 0.0001 seconds to 0.0013 seconds, the light trail still appears and does not disappear.

Well, 0.1 might work, better than nothing. That's like a ch before the light fuckery too so pretty safe to say at 0.1, light stuff ain't possible or it vanishes in that timeframe, and given the feat in question had them across the moon without vanishing...

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Well, 0.1 might work, better than nothing. That's like a ch before the light fuckery too so pretty safe to say at 0.1, light stuff ain't possible or it vanishes in that timeframe, and given the feat in question had them across the moon without vanishing...

Ok I'll create a 4th option and add your name for those who agree with the 0.1 second time frame.

 

[Second22]

If there are no other numbers or standard figures for afterimages, 0.1 seconds is considered the best option for me. 1 second is too long a timeframe for the trailing light streaks to persist anyway. To give a simple example, if a normal human runs at a speed of 10 m/s, there's no way they would leave an afterimage in the position 10 meters behind where they were running before.

Even if it's just one panel, we should consider the feat that the character is performing in that scene. Saitama creating afterimages or light streaks clearly indicates a very short timeframe. The one panel we see is not just a feat that shows the character's movement. Even if 0.1 seconds isn't applicable, 0.2 seconds is still better when considering normal human reaction times.

 

[DavidTPPM]

What we do know is Movement in the 0.1 second to 0.5 second time frame cannot create light trails. (or the light trail disappears first)

We don't how the light trails are generated at all and this time frame doesn't make any sense in general. Saitama isn't moving the same distance as Garou was in that scene in that time frame.

In other words, even if the time frame was 1 second Saitama would still move a LOT larger distance in less time than Garou did in the 0.1 second feat you mentioned. Hell given that the 1 second calc gives us 2c results while the PS calc gives us 4c with a timeframe of 13 milliseconds, that means Saitama is still moving the same distance as that feat but in around 26 milliseconds. Which while wrong based on in-universe scaling, is not illogical while separated

I feel like saying "moving at hypersonic speeds didn't create light trails so moving at ftl speeds shouldn't either unless it happened in a shorter timeframe" doesn't make any sense at all.

and moving in the time frame of 0.0001 seconds to 0.0013 seconds, the light trail still appears and does not disappear.

Yeah, the problem is that Saitamas Io feat covers FAR larger range. You're focusing on the timeframe difference while ignoring the enormous distance difference

 

[MrTayman616]

Not without seeing the feat animated or the 13 ms figure.

Well other than like, the sneeze scaling I guess, but that only applies to post-amp Saitama/Garou.

why though? we know this sneeze scales lower than their punches before the amp in any way. wouldn't it be fine to give them the scaling before amp?

 

[Shadow_x007x]

We don't how the light trails are generated at all and this time frame doesn't make any sense in general. Saitama isn't moving the same distance as Garou was in that scene in that time frame.

In other words, even if the time frame was 1 second Saitama would still move a LOT larger distance in less time than Garou did in the 0.1 second feat you mentioned. Hell given that the 1 second calc gives us 2c results while the PS calc gives us 4c with a timeframe of 13 milliseconds, that means Saitama is still moving the same distance as that feat but in around 26 milliseconds. Which while wrong based on in-universe scaling, is not illogical while separated

I feel like saying "moving at hypersonic speeds didn't create light trails so moving at ftl speeds shouldn't either unless it happened in a shorter timeframe" doesn't make any sense at all.

Yeah, the problem is that Saitamas Io feat covers FAR larger range. You're focusing on the timeframe difference while ignoring the enormous distance difference

I know that. I'm just trying to offer one more option, but to me option 3 always looks the best.