I remember the thread we had a while ago. An exponential increase of less than 2 is enough to generate a 4x increase, and e is considered the natural mathematical baseline for exponentials literally anywhere, which is 2.71. If we went the limiter route, he would only be unmeasurably above 3-C even if he's stated to be "leaps and bounds" stronger until his next best feat. The former, is measurable evidence.
I'm never replying to you again LOL
sure
Basic logic of power scaling and fiction eludes this man.
Well MFTL requires it to move 2.998e+10 meters per second. The nearest solar system to Earth is about 4.068e+16 meters away, meaning as long as the blast could reach that in less than 15 days it would be MFTL. Because we see the hole in space being restored and stars being visible again it crossed that distance fast enough to be MFTL or MFTL+.
We see the hole in space being restored and stars being visible again vs a void. Barring a redraw of the page, the current assumption is that the former void is the same as the later void while having time reversed and the damages repaired.
While I do get where you're coming from with the implication of FTL light, fiction in a soft science verse like OPM doesn't follow that. Its why Gurren Lagann can throw galaxies like a shuriken without leaving a light smear or why Thor can see the destruction of galaxy in real time.
my gripe with the MFTL speed interpretation is that it's based on the pure specualtion that the energy beam atuall travelled that distance when we have no idea if it actually did or not, if it did,of course it's seed is several orders of magnitudes faster than light, my problems stems from the fact that there is no evidence that it did
no we don't because, again, it literally can't be that based on basic physics of how light works,and if there is one thing we can be absolutely sure we're not seeing, that would be whatever is happening light years away from the fight, this all speculations backed by nothing but the fan's head canon of what's happening, and the fact that garou is even remotely bothered by planetary attacks later further proves my point but then again this site has that rule of DC =/= AP so this approach probably won't work
...no, i never really argued for FTL light?
what i argued is the light won't disappear, it would still exist even the stars were to blow up, which doesn't happen, we just see a void and nothing else, and so far the only responses i had are people making up whatever interpreation they can come up with to try and justify the event they just deemed correct for no reason, and it doesn't matter, because it doesn't make them any more valid, they have no justification for it nor can they porve it they just statewhat t hey want it to mean and are try to make up reasons why they're right instead of ctually looking at what happened and trying to figure it out
I mean there is evidence. There's a void that when seen later shows that it was restored from Saitama's time travel. Meaning it was damaged.
What other giant circular void was shown in the manga?
I mean, it can easily be that.
The entire series is based on a flawed logic of physics. Garou moves faster than the speed of light without having infinite energy, Saitama weighs 180 kg but can output enough strength to shatter a moon, they can speak in a void of space, fly by ignoring gravity and their biology in most cases is completely nonsensical. Light not working how it should isn't counter evidence since the series already displayed examples of light not working how it should.
There is both a justification and proof for that justification. You can disagree with both of those things, but that doesn't make it non-existent.
I mean I think there's a 90% chance that its just the moon and Murata forgot to color it in but we'll have to wait on that. For now we go with the void interpretation of the scene.
We should also downgrade the verse to Relativistic because MFTL ignores science
what's that "void" then?
no it can't, i already went full in depht on why
...ok, and?
of course it is
the justification existing, and it being valid, are 2 entirely different concepts, i can just as easily say the void is a black veil covering the earth and justify it by saying we can't see the stars so it exists and i'd have just as good a justification and proof as you do, this isn't a matter of disagreeing, it's a matter of everything being poorly tought flawed word salad that everyone is accepting for whatever reason because they don't what they're talking about and refuse to admit it
we still don't know what that void is, is the thing i've been saying this entire time
The empty space after the redirect shockwave destroyed everything.
I get where you're coming from but I also explained why that doesn't really apply to fictional verses
Seeing things happen at FTL speeds is only really a anti-showing if the verse itself has depicted light following a realistic property like that and OPM hasn't done so.
It doesn't. It falls apart under the basis that we can't see it happen realistically. The other parts of the calculation of it destroying things are supported by the void being restored at the end of the fight, meaning it was wiped out from the punch.
Its not random, we're using stuff from the work as a spring board for the feat. If the work didn't support it we wouldn't use it. Its why we don't have like Immeasurable speed Saitama or anything like that.
It's the destroyed portion of space from the serious punch clash.
...okay?
and i explained why it does in the post above, i guess you didn't read it when you wrote this
what's happening at FTL speeds here?
...no, i already explained this in detail, and it honestly feels like you're just conveniently ignoring most of the post and seperating connected points to deal with an easier argument, the fact that this can't happen realistically isn't my argument
I have proved it:
You going "No" isn't a valid counter showing when your only counter point is it being unrealistic.
I did, it just doesn't apply here as an anti-showing. Saitama's Io jump is treated as MFTL without a timeframe as well for example.
The beam crossing interstellar space and destroying things.
We do, since that is the accepted interpretation of the scene. You would have to first get rid of that interpretation to then push for the calc to be disregarded. Which would be its own CRT topic.
Its not a nothing burger, the text in front of the panel is directly saying Saitama is undoing all the effects of their fight with his Zero Punch.
No it wouldn't, because a dark sphere devouring the light has no mention or note. The scene has:
You not liking it doesn't make it nothing. It is something that we're basing it on.
...i can go "no", because you only said "yes", and i didn't just go "yes", your statement has no logic baking it, mine does in the form of how light works, stop strawmaning my position to "it can't happen because it's unrealistic" when it's actually "your logic isn't logic and thus it's false"
explain why it doesn't
prove those assertions is what actually happening, you can't, because the god damn black disk is evidence against it in the form of "light does not work like that so we have no idea what that black thing actually is beyong what our wildest imagination tells us"
a whole lot of assumption, evidence doesn't exist, wonderful
you assume it's destruction, you don't confirm it in any way shape or form, then make a calc based on a false premise, the circular reasoning i was talking about is
oh nice, more work than i could ever be bothered to do
...i wasn't arguing against the fact that whatever that thing is was being undone, i said the fact that it's being undone is not supporting evidence for your claims, because you're simply assuming the stars were destroyed in the first place, the black thing being undone isn't evidence for the destruction of any star because we're blissfully unaware of whatever it is that's happening several hundred light years away from the fight, all you can get from that is the fact that whatever that black thing is is being undone
point of the matter you have no idea what that thing is and you're just guessing, and the fact that somehow light doesn't exist in that sphere makes the "stars were destroyed" assertion have just as much basis because it was pulled out of nowhere because there is nothing to show for it or evidence to prove it, even if the stars were indeed destroyed, their light won't disappear, so whatever that thing is, it isn't evidence of any sort of destruction
by "nothing" i meant nothing that has any sort of consistent logical basis, and you failed to answer the question
state the evidence backing your assetion, the existence of the black sphere isn't evidence for reasons i already explained
We see big beam head in direction > Violent sound effect > Massive hole appears in that direction.
bro stfu
You can feel that way but it's not going to get you anywhere.
Try to not get heated over another person's argument. It's really not that important.
Blast and Others reacted to that explosion initially before directing It's omnidirectional vector to one direction, should they be upgraded to beams speed?
We don't know how fast the explosions speed was before it was redirected.
I mean technically it shouldn't be far less than before if capable of nuking stars, and in anycase should increase attack speed of blast/others as they are the one who redirected it(?)
Condensing the explosion and folding it into a thinner angle could also increase its speed. Like focusing a water hose or explosion down a linear path.
Afaik redirecting something with Spatial Manipulation doesn't scale to speed. Just whatever the initial thing was.
i don't know if you've been paying attention to the past conversation at all, but the whole crux of this is you have no idea what that hole is, you're assuming it entails destruction in any way shape or form when all it is just that, a black sphere, even if the stars were indeed destroyed, such black sphere won't exist, you saying "me can't se stars stars no exist" is the intellectual equivalent of saying a man who just turned corner no longer exists because you can't see him, peek-a-boo games must be exciting for you but this isn't exactly a place for that kinda logic to fly lol
how about you get off your high horse and bring logic to this conversation instead of what's the equivalent of "lolz me is right and everyone who says otherwise is coping"
bro i'm not feeling anything, this is just basic logic, hichens razor is a widely knowns concept, it's just a tool cut away unfounded claims ,something that was asserted with no evidence can be ignored with no evidence
The key point here is that there is evidence that people agreed upon. You can claim that the evidence is invalid but its not a baseless claim.
....brother, the claim is baseless because people came to agree upon it while agreeing upon a flawed interpretation that's based on faulty logic, a black sphere isn't evidence of destroyed stars, it's evidence of something blocking the light of those stars, i'm not even claiming his, this is objectively correct
It is when we see a panel reversing damages and the Black void now has stars again in it.
...like i said, you have no idea what that blakc void is, you're simply starting at the conclusion and going backwards from there to justify and prove it, suffice to say that's not how it works, just because it's reversing whatever the black thing is isn't evidence of destroyed anything, it simply means that, the black thing is being removed, you still have no idea what it is
we already know the conclusion to this lol
trust me, you, and everyone in this thread for that matter, are more than welcome to try and explain how saying "a black spehre isn't evidence for destroyed stars because that's not how light works, as even if the stars were indeed destoryed, their light would still be there" is egregious downplay based on flawed logic
Rightttt, they should also explain why stating MFTL is incorrect because the theory of blah blah says so is a flawed logic. It doesn't make any sense.
this word slad means just about nothing, but the main point you're trying to present but miserbaly failed to do so has already been presented and addressed
