• 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.

Uncompositing the Dragon Ball Cosmology

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vietthai96 said:
Hypertimeline was there already, unless you claim that Macrocosm = Timeline, which was never a thing, because the verse clearly define Timeline as Timeline, Macrocosm as Universe, both term is completely separate and used for two different thing, a Timeline that contain a Macrocosm with multiple space-time within it, the hypertimeline was already there, Super just add more Macrocosm and some more place, that all
Click to expand...
what term do they use in japanese? could be one of the cases where they use a word that can mean both
 
omegabronic said:
what term do they use in japanese? could be one of the cases where they use a word that can mean both
Click to expand...
Well, i'm on phone and it was long ago, however in DB, Macrocosm was always refered by the word Universe, in Japanese is Uchu, it is a tradition until now, even in Super, with super they just add a number into the word Uchu to identify what Universe they refered to, such as Universe 7 is Dai-Nana (7) Uchū (Universe). Those are the Romaji form of the Japanese text

About Timeline, i'm not remember exactly, but sure 100% they didn't use Universe or Macrocosm to refering to it, they used entirely different term
 
Vietthai96 said:
Well, i'm on phone and it was long ago, however in DB, Macrocosm was always refered by the word Universe, in Japanese is Uchu, it is a tradition until now, even in Super, with super they just add a number into the word Uchu to identify what Universe they refered to, such as Universe 7 is Dai-Nana (7) Uchū (Universe). Those are the Romaji form of the Japanese text

About Timeline, i'm not remember exactly, but sure 100% they didn't use Universe or Macrocosm to refering to it, they used entirely different term
Click to expand...
does japanese even have a specific term for "timeline"?
 
Vietthai96 said:
Hypertimeline was there already, unless you claim that Macrocosm = Timeline, which was never a thing, because the verse clearly define Timeline as Timeline, Macrocosm as Universe, both term is completely separate and used for two different thing, a Timeline that contain a Macrocosm with multiple space-time within it, the hypertimeline was already there, Super just add more Macrocosm and some more place, that all
Click to expand...
Again, I was explicitly referring to the multiple space times of the universes (as in the space times of U1-U12) being within one larger timeline. Unless you're trying to say there's evidence of the multiverse (a DBS exclusive thing) in the original material, you are incorrect as THAT is what I'm referring to. ANYTHING ELSE is irrelevant.
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:
For the first time, an episode is drawn that occurred between "Z" and "GT" in the animation series, i.e. the blank period of 10 years until episode 518 after the battle with Majin Buu in episode 517 of the original.

I strongly disagree with this
Click to expand...
Huesito88 said:
Where did you get the translation?
Click to expand...
"「Ｚ」と「ＧＴ」の間、つまり、原作517話で魔人ブウとの戦いが終わった後、518話までの空白の10年の間に起こったエピソードが初めて描かれる。"


It also says: "クリリンからピッコロ、べジータなどお馴染みの魅力的なキャラクターが総出演し、子供たちも親世代も、原作ファンもアニメファンも納得の、スピンオフでも番外編でもない、ドラゴンボール正史のストーリーが誕生する。"

Or "Beloved characters like Krillin, Piccolo, Vegeta, and others will make appearances, and this new movie will present a story that satisfies children, parents, original fans, and anime fans alike, a Dragon Ball canon story that is not a spin-off or side story."

This can be interpreted as declaring GT as a spin-off and side story.


Look at this:
"この原作の物語はアニメでは「ドラゴンボール」＆「ドラゴンボールZ」で描かれた。そして、原作の「その後」をアニメのオリジナルで展開したのが「ドラゴンボールGT」！コミックとはひと味違う、孫悟空の新たな冒険ストーリーなのだ！"

The story of the original work was depicted in the anime through "Dragon Ball" and "Dragon Ball Z". And the aftermath of the original work was developed as the anime original in "Dragon Ball GT"! A new adventure story of Son Goku, different from the comic, awaits!


Not sure if this is relevant, but it seems to imply GT is entirely original and separate from the original work.
 
The_Yellow_Topaz said:
"「Ｚ」と「ＧＴ」の間、つまり、原作517話で魔人ブウとの戦いが終わった後、518話までの空白の10年の間に起こったエピソードが初めて描かれる。"


It also says: "クリリンからピッコロ、べジータなどお馴染みの魅力的なキャラクターが総出演し、子供たちも親世代も、原作ファンもアニメファンも納得の、スピンオフでも番外編でもない、ドラゴンボール正史のストーリーが誕生する。"

Or "Beloved characters like Krillin, Piccolo, Vegeta, and others will make appearances, and this new movie will present a story that satisfies children, parents, original fans, and anime fans alike, a Dragon Ball canon story that is not a spin-off or side story."

This can be interpreted as declaring GT as a spin-off and side story.


Look at this:
"この原作の物語はアニメでは「ドラゴンボール」＆「ドラゴンボールZ」で描かれた。そして、原作の「その後」をアニメのオリジナルで展開したのが「ドラゴンボールGT」！コミックとはひと味違う、孫悟空の新たな冒険ストーリーなのだ！"

The story of the original work was depicted in the anime through "Dragon Ball" and "Dragon Ball Z". And the aftermath of the original work was developed as the anime original in "Dragon Ball GT"! A new adventure story of Son Goku, different from the comic, awaits!


Not sure if this is relevant, but it seems to imply GT is entirely original and separate from the original work.
Click to expand...
Did you look at that part? What goes on between Dragon Ball Z and GT


For the first time, an episode that took place between "Z" and "GT" in the animation series is drawn, i.e. the blank period of 10 years until episode 518 after the battle with Majin Buu in episode 517 of the original.
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:
Did you look at that part? What goes on between Dragon Ball Z and GT


For the first time, an episode that took place between "Z" and "GT" in the animation series is drawn, i.e. the blank period of 10 years until episode 518 after the battle with Majin Buu in episode 517 of the original.
Click to expand...
I know. It's just saying the ten year timeskip is being depicted, it's not really that relevant. Plus I have equally strong counterevidence not two lines after
 
since this is in a draw now, i will take my time to read through the thread, summarise the arguments for both sides and then have a staff tag the others, and maybe a few more if nescesary, to the message for us to break the tie and not make this reach 10 pages like in the past, i will probably be done summarizing by tommorow
 
Can’t say I agree, tbh. Pretty apparent that the cosmology between the two series are pretty 1 to 1. While the power levels might not be the same, I’d hesitate to say the universes themselves get much change. The GT world isn’t smaller than the Super world because it’s not necessarily canon. The GT world is just retroactively bigger.
 
Honestly? Truly? DB Supporters are just making a false correlation by pointing out that the term "different worlds" are used both in the show and describing spin-off, and side stories. I can't fathom WHY we're pretending like these two facts correlate in any way with the conclusion proposed by the opposing side, when they obviously don't.

It doesn't take a GENIUS to understand that the simple fact that a show has the concepts of multiple worlds doesn't mean that anything off-media that gets called a different world is sharing a multiversal cosmology, like, actually, I've seen Pokémon Supporters doing the same mistake and the counter argument is simple. It also doesn't take a genius to realize that it's CLEAR that statements surrounding Dragon Ball GT, whether it's called a different world, or a side story (a much more aggravating term), is trying to portray the story as being completely separate from the main "original work", not just the main timeline, but the original WORK, INCLUDING THE SEVERAL TIMELINES included in that original work.

The_Yellow_Topaz said:
Look at this:
"この原作の物語はアニメでは「ドラゴンボール」＆「ドラゴンボールZ」で描かれた。そして、原作の「その後」をアニメのオリジナルで展開したのが「ドラゴンボールGT」！コミックとはひと味違う、孫悟空の新たな冒険ストーリーなのだ！"

The story of the original work was depicted in the anime through "Dragon Ball" and "Dragon Ball Z". And the aftermath of the original work was developed as the anime original in "Dragon Ball GT"! A new adventure story of Son Goku, different from the comic, awaits!
Click to expand...
Like literally, how does this NOT SEAL THE DEAL, it's blatant in every single official stance about the canonicity of the show.

The show is VERY straightforward about how timelines work, even in Super where SEVERE changes in the timeline via time travel still result in pretty straightforward changes.
 
The_Yellow_Topaz said:
Honestly? Truly? DB Supporters are just making a false correlation by pointing out that the term "different worlds" are used both in the show and describing spin-off, and side stories. I can't fathom WHY we're pretending like these two facts correlate in any way with the conclusion proposed by the opposing side, when they obviously don't.

It doesn't take a GENIUS to understand that the simple fact that a show has the concepts of multiple worlds doesn't mean that anything off-media that gets called a different world is sharing a multiversal cosmology, like, actually, I've seen Pokémon Supporters doing the same mistake and the counter argument is simple. It also doesn't take a genius to realize that it's CLEAR that statements surrounding Dragon Ball GT, whether it's called a different world, or a side story (a much more aggravating term), is trying to portray the story as being completely separate from the main "original work", not just the main timeline, but the original WORK, INCLUDING THE SEVERAL TIMELINES included in that original work.


Like literally, how does this NOT SEAL THE DEAL, it's blatant in every single official stance about the canonicity of the show.

The show is VERY straightforward about how timelines work, even in Super where SEVERE changes in the timeline via time travel still result in pretty straightforward changes.
Click to expand...
How is it blatant? Except if I'm missing something it literally says the aftermath of the original work (meaning it's still a continuation which further boosts the connection between them) and that it is an anime original story ( yeah it is but that proves nothing) that's different from the comic ( again it's also referring to the fact that it comes after the end of the dragonball story at that time and it's also in anime form). Like I see nothing concrete in here especially when it has been included in several references and the universe very obviously is nearly a one for one.
 
203123123-12-3-4-1.png

"「DB』 世界の人気キャラたちが鳥山明先生の手で「正史」に加えられる!! ボタラで誕生するのが「ベジット」なら、フュージョンで誕 生するのは「ゴジータ」!! いずれ劣らぬ最強最後の切札だ!! しかも本作のゴジータは、 超サイヤ人、 さらに超サイヤ人ブルーへと変身!! そのとんでもない実力は、 是非劇場で体 験してほしい!!ところでゴジータは原作「DB』には登場 していない、 ブロリー同様映画限定キャラ!! つまり本作の 原作者・鳥山先生による描き直しは、ブロリーやゴジータ を 「DB」 の 「正史」に加える試みなのだ!!"

""DB": The beloved character is being added to the "official history" by the hand of Toriyama-sensei! If the fusion with Potara creates "Vegito," then the fusion with the Fusion Dance creates "Gogeta"!! Both are the ultimate last resort that is unmatched in strength! Moreover, in this work, Gogeta transforms into Super Saiyan and even further into Super Saiyan Blue!! You absolutely have to experience this unbelievable power in the theater!! By the way, Gogeta doesn't appear in the original "DB," he's a movie-exclusive character like Broly!! In other words, Toriyama-sensei's reinterpretation in this work is an attempt to add Broly and Gogeta to the "official history" of "DB"!"


Like WHY ARE WE ENTERTAINIING THIS? It's literally depicting any appearance of Gogeta as something outside of the OFFICIAL HISTORY, can we get any more clear than this?

All the disagreeing side has is the same term being used in two different occasions, literally everything else is pointing against the upgrade. The Arale example can so easily be shrugged off as marketing, GT was running at the time, and it made sense for Arale to meet GT Goku because he was the one that was present.
Not to mention it's a gag manga, it's literally contradicted by a later version of Arale meeting Super Goku.
 
Serlock_Holmes said:
(meaning it's still a continuation which further boosts the connection between them)
Click to expand...
Huh?

Being a continuation of a third party means there is a connection between the two?
You mean a connection besides the fact the continuation takes context from the original?

Okay,

I'll write a continuation of DBZ

"After Goku killed Majin Buu, he went on to become a great husband and get a job"

Done, this is an aftermath of the end of Dragon Ball Z before the timeskip, does that mean it has any connection? This is a crude example, but it highlights the flaw of your argument, the simple fact it's continuing where the story ended is not evidence of anything. GT is also not a continuation of the original, it's a continuation of the toei-verse.
Serlock_Holmes said:
and that it is an anime original story ( yeah it is but that proves nothing)
Click to expand...
Do... I need to explain- hold on
Serlock_Holmes said:
that's different from the comic ( again it's also referring to the fact that it comes after the end of the dragonball story at that time and it's also in anime form).
Click to expand...
You're chopping and chopping at this phrase like they're not all connected, it's said to be an original story, that's basically a declaration that the story is not part of the original work, that's the same kind of declaration used in OVAs, movies, across all non-canonical media, like in One Piece as well. The different from the comic is a continuation of the declaration, "it's an original story different from the comic". The term would be REDUNDANT if it was simply referring to the fact the story will be different from what Z expressed, that's obvious, it's a sequel, it's bound to have new things by default.
 
The_Yellow_Topaz said:
Huh?

Being a continuation of a third party means there is a connection between the two?
You mean a connection besides the fact the continuation takes context from the original?

Okay,

I'll write a continuation of DBZ

"After Goku killed Majin Buu, he went on to become a great husband and get a job"

Done, this is an aftermath of the end of Dragon Ball Z before the timeskip, does that mean it has any connection? This is a crude example, but it highlights the flaw of your argument, the simple fact it's continuing where the story ended is not evidence of anything. GT is also not a continuation of the original, it's a continuation of the toei-verse.

Do... I need to explain- hold on

You're chopping and chopping at this phrase like they're not all connected, it's said to be an original story, that's basically a declaration that the story is not part of the original work, that's the same kind of declaration used in OVAs, movies, across all non-canonical media, like in One Piece as well. The different from the comic is a continuation of the declaration, "it's an original story different from the comic". The term would be REDUNDANT if it was simply referring to the fact the story will be different from what Z expressed, that's obvious, it's a sequel, it's bound to have new things by default.
Click to expand...
Did you bring that up to Toriyama for approval? Pretty sure Toriyama worked on characters for Gt including ssj4 if my memory serves me right and oversaw the production. Also your story ain't possible in any timeline.

As for the other points I can't talk about as I haven't really participated in this. My peeve was with your statement which you claimed was clear cut to which I disagreed and still do.
 
I respectfully disagree with the thread. My contention stems from the notion that a direct correspondence between the events depicted within the series and the broader cosmological framework should not be presumed, unless explicitly delineated as subject to modification within this context.

Regarding counter-arguments, (since I read there are some size differences between both)
the noticeable differences in size (size as in cosmological size) between the narrative contexts of the two stories, particularly concerning cosmological aspects, have a bearing on the validity of this contention. It's noteworthy that size assumes a pivotal role within cosmological considerations, thus rendering the argument worthy of consideration, albeit not entirely dismissible.

Hence, I inquire whether the discernible variation in size between the two stories stands as a substantiated assertion in this context.

Moreover, I posit that if substantive incongruities are absent, the imperative for substantiating evidence might not be requisite. It is at this juncture that the crux of my disagreement is situated.

My two cents here.
 
Last edited:
ImmortalDread said:
I respectfully disagree with the thread. My contention stems from the notion that a direct correspondence between the events depicted within the series and the broader cosmological framework should not be presumed, unless explicitly delineated as subject to modification within this context.

Notably, the observable dissimilarities in scale between the narrative contexts of the two stories, particularly concerning cosmological aspects, have a bearing on the validity of this contention. It's noteworthy that dimensional magnitude assumes a pivotal role within cosmological considerations, thus rendering the argument worthy of consideration, albeit not entirely dismissible.

Hence, I inquire whether the discernible variation in scale between the two stories stands as a substantiated assertion in this context.

Moreover, I posit that if substantive incongruities are absent, the imperative for substantiating evidence might not be requisite. It is at this juncture that the crux of my disagreement is situated.

My two cents here.
Click to expand...
Until now I thought I could understand English.
 
The_Yellow_Topaz said:
203123123-12-3-4-1.png

"「DB』 世界の人気キャラたちが鳥山明先生の手で「正史」に加えられる!! ボタラで誕生するのが「ベジット」なら、フュージョンで誕 生するのは「ゴジータ」!! いずれ劣らぬ最強最後の切札だ!! しかも本作のゴジータは、 超サイヤ人、 さらに超サイヤ人ブルーへと変身!! そのとんでもない実力は、 是非劇場で体 験してほしい!!ところでゴジータは原作「DB』には登場 していない、 ブロリー同様映画限定キャラ!! つまり本作の 原作者・鳥山先生による描き直しは、ブロリーやゴジータ を 「DB」 の 「正史」に加える試みなのだ!!"

""DB": The beloved character is being added to the "official history" by the hand of Toriyama-sensei! If the fusion with Potara creates "Vegito," then the fusion with the Fusion Dance creates "Gogeta"!! Both are the ultimate last resort that is unmatched in strength! Moreover, in this work, Gogeta transforms into Super Saiyan and even further into Super Saiyan Blue!! You absolutely have to experience this unbelievable power in the theater!! By the way, Gogeta doesn't appear in the original "DB," he's a movie-exclusive character like Broly!! In other words, Toriyama-sensei's reinterpretation in this work is an attempt to add Broly and Gogeta to the "official history" of "DB"!"


Like WHY ARE WE ENTERTAINIING THIS? It's literally depicting any appearance of Gogeta as something outside of the OFFICIAL HISTORY, can we get any more clear than this?

All the disagreeing side has is the same term being used in two different occasions, literally everything else is pointing against the upgrade. The Arale example can so easily be shrugged off as marketing, GT was running at the time, and it made sense for Arale to meet GT Goku because he was the one that was present.
Not to mention it's a gag manga, it's literally contradicted by a later version of Arale meeting Super Goku.
Click to expand...
By the way, the term 正史 (seishi) is being used as official history, Herms stated that it's the closest equivalent to "canon" in Japanese, so this basically confirms that the movies aren't "正史"/canon in any way. GT as well.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Hence, I inquire whether the discernible variation in size between the two stories stands as a substantiated assertion in this context.
Click to expand...
I disagree that this is required, the whole point stands from the fact that a connection between the two is held by bare bone evidence that can easily and should be interpreted as just attempts to disconnect GT/Movie from the main story.

We don't think it's fair to come up and say "Hey, 20 years later they used the term "different worlds" in the series, this surely proves that these past comments meant something else entirely", thus making a false correlation. It requires hindsight that was not available at the time of the comments, and gives it a new context that simply isn't valid.
 
Hasty12345 said:
I respectfully also understood very little of it
Click to expand...
If I'm following correctly, Immortal is disagreeing because she doesn't think that the cosmologies shouldn't be composited because it wasn't explicitly stated/shown that GT and DBZ anime are alternate timelines to DB in the story like the timelines cause by the time machines. Then she argues that if there are no substantial contradictions for the cosmologies to be composited (besides some slight size variables) then evidence supporting the compositing is not necessary.
 
LNZO19 said:
If I'm following correctly, Immortal is disagreeing because she doesn't think that the cosmologies shouldn't be composited because it wasn't explicitly stated/shown that GT and DBZ anime are alternate timelines to DB in the story like the timelines cause by the time machines. Then she argues that if there are no substantial contradictions for the cosmologies to be composited (besides some slight size variables) then evidence supporting the compositing is not necessary.
Click to expand...
I ran the response through ChatGPT so I could get it in words I understand:


I don't agree with the main point of the discussion. I don't think we should automatically assume that the events in the series are directly related to the bigger universe unless it's clearly stated they can be changed in that setting.

About the counter-arguments I've seen, there are clear differences in the size (like the scale of the universe) in both stories. This difference in size is important when talking about the universe, which makes the argument worth looking into, but not enough to completely dismiss it.

So, I'm asking if the size difference between the two stories really supports the main argument.

Also, if there aren't any big differences, then maybe we don't need more proof. This is the main reason why I disagree.

Just sharing my thoughts.
 
Hasty12345 said:
I ran the response through ChatGPT so I could get it in words I understand:


I don't agree with the main point of the discussion. I don't think we should automatically assume that the events in the series are directly related to the bigger universe unless it's clearly stated they can be changed in that setting.

About the counter-arguments I've seen, there are clear differences in the size (like the scale of the universe) in both stories. This difference in size is important when talking about the universe, which makes the argument worth looking into, but not enough to completely dismiss it.

So, I'm asking if the size difference between the two stories really supports the main argument.

Also, if there aren't any big differences, then maybe we don't need more proof. This is the main reason why I disagree.

Just sharing my thoughts.
Click to expand...
Actually fairly close. It just missed the fact that Immortal finds issue with the second sentence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RedReaper616
  • Locked
GT Goku Profile
2 3
Replies
112
Views
4K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
LuffyRuffy46307
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Special Addition Ki
Replies
19
Views
1K
Damage3245
Damage3245
Ednaxel2
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Toei: Bits & Bobs
Replies
16
Views
2K
Ednaxel2
Ednaxel2
Killerdrone123
  • Locked
To be canon or not to be that is the question.A Dragon ball Super revision
2 3 4
Replies
152
Views
11K
AwkguyDB
AwkguyDB
Vietthai96
  • Locked
Dragon Ball CRT: The..........................Dragon Balls?
Replies
34
Views
2K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
Back
Top