TF Views

Dominic wrote:

Going Mach speed means you're going faster than you can hear. But, when we're going that fast, we don't hear things backwards. we hear on loud sonic boom when we break the sound barrier and after that we hear normally. I believe something similar would happen with light speed. There would be a bright flash of light and then we would just be going really really fast. No special effects, no time travel, nothing

There is some evidence that gravity and speed influence the "speed" of time. But, the science for this (and observation impact on quantum/probability) is still very rudimentary .

We know that as one approaches the speed of light, time slows down according to Einstein's theories of relativity. It has actually been tested, no where near the speed of light obviously but there is still a measurable effect with speeds we are capable of achieving. This is why science fiction had to invent concepts like warp drive and subspace. Without it, years could go by for the universe while time would pass significantly slower for a traveler.

Dominic wrote:But, why is a the idea of a multiverse needed to read a comic (or watch a show) as it is?

The multiverse idea is primarily a crutch to allow obsessive fans to easily reconcile everything if they really want to "make it all fit". But, it is not needed.

Being obsessive has nothing to do with it. It's about just keeping track of events in a story. If a story has events in it that contradict each other then how do you reconcile that without just writing it off as either a shitty story or being written by a writer that just can't keep shit straight? Multiverses. I often tend to think of fiction as someone telling me a story. If Simon Furman was standing in front of me and telling me the story of the Transformers, the events of that story should not contradict each other. Unfortunately, most writers can't do that now days so we have to have multiverses to explain continuity errors.

Dominic wrote:

Going Mach speed means you're going faster than you can hear. But, when we're going that fast, we don't hear things backwards. we hear on loud sonic boom when we break the sound barrier and after that we hear normally. I believe something similar would happen with light speed. There would be a bright flash of light and then we would just be going really really fast. No special effects, no time travel, nothing

There is some evidence that gravity and speed influence the "speed" of time. But, the science for this (and observation impact on quantum/probability) is still very rudimentary .

And, as I understand it, that "evidence" is questionable at best. I heard of an experiment where scientists had two atomic clocks where one was in orbit and one was on Earth and at the end the clocks were off. But here's the rub: The clocks measure time by measuring atomic decay. Atomic decay is measured by the movement of particles. Particles move differently is space than they do on Earth. Which invalidates the whole experiment. I get what they were going for but to accurately just measure the difference of time, movement has to be taken completely out of the equation. And at present, I cannot think of any other technology currently available to us that would allow us to do that. So it's all well and fine to say that gravity and speed affect the passage of time but until we find a way to conclusively prove that it's just a theory.

Dominic wrote:

There was even an acknowledgement on page that the two had essentially nothing in common except for the name but they were both regarded as "the" Smokescreen of their respective universes.

You are talking about "Transformers: Universe" #1. That was the first comic that I had to "count" purely because it was official, even though it read like fanfic. (I used to have a mutual friend with the artist, Dan Khanna. Khanna told my buddy that "Universe" was "Avengers Forever" with Transformers. In other words, "Universe" was derivative of another comic that in and of itself read like fanfic.)

I do not recall there being any mention on page about it being "Smokescreen v/s Smokescreen". If I am remembering correctly (and I can check later tonight), it was a visual gag that *everybody* and their mother picked up on.

(And, really, why should two guys with the same name have to be related in any way? There is a guy who works in this office suit who has the same name as me. The wrestling promotion I used to help out at had enough guys with the same first names that some guys ended up being known by last names or ring names for the sake of identification. Hell, when I was in school, there was another student with the same first and last name as me. But, in TF, when two guys have the same name, they are the same guy.....even across different universes.)

As I mentioned above, the book I'm referrencing was not the Universe comic. I have that too, but this book had aliens forcing TFs to fight each other and it was taking place just outside of Las Vegas. They were also enslaving all of humanity as well.

Anyway, as for why two guys with the same name have to be the same guy? Well, it seems to be more of a thing in TFs than any other fiction I've encountered. I think the idea is that in any given universe there's generally only one bot with said name and that's that universe's version of that character. There are exceptions. Say what you will about the quality of the IDW BW comic, one thing it did do that I actually liked was showing multiple characters with varying names of Convoy in the same setting, showing that not every "Convoy" is just another version of G1 Prime. I actually would like to see this expanded more often in TF, but that's not likely to happen again.

Shockwave wrote:And, as I understand it, that "evidence" is questionable at best. I heard of an experiment where scientists had two atomic clocks where one was in orbit and one was on Earth and at the end the clocks were off. But here's the rub: The clocks measure time by measuring atomic decay. Atomic decay is measured by the movement of particles. Particles move differently is space than they do on Earth. Which invalidates the whole experiment.

Atomic decay is the process of an atom loosing energy by emitting ionizing radiation. Of which, there are a number of radioisotopes with a decay rate that is unaffected by external conditions so it shouldn't matter if it was in space or on Earth. Besides that, orbital tests aren't the only tests they've done. Similar experiments have been conducted using jets.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Shockwave wrote:And, as I understand it, that "evidence" is questionable at best. I heard of an experiment where scientists had two atomic clocks where one was in orbit and one was on Earth and at the end the clocks were off. But here's the rub: The clocks measure time by measuring atomic decay. Atomic decay is measured by the movement of particles. Particles move differently is space than they do on Earth. Which invalidates the whole experiment.

Atomic decay is the process of an atom loosing energy by emitting ionizing radiation. Of which, there are a number of radioisotopes with a decay rate that is unaffected by external conditions so it shouldn't matter if it was in space or on Earth. Besides that, orbital tests aren't the only tests they've done. Similar experiments have been conducted using jets.

Oh. Well apparently I did misunderstand it.

Great. Between this and the color thing, my whole reality has just been turned upside down. I'm gonna go home and rethink my life.

There would be a bright flash of light and then we would just be going really really fast. No special effects, no time travel, nothing.

You should see Interstellar. (In fact, everyone should.)

But the main thing I want to point out is that if you are travelling faster than the speed of light, isn't it possible to--in a sense--travel through "time"?

The time it takes light to reach Earth from the Sun is about 8 minutes. Let's say I'm at the sun, and I throw a baseball into the air and catch it. Now, if I can travel faster than the speed of light--let's say I can get from the Sun to the Earth in only 5 minutes--will I not be able to see myself at the sun, throwing and catching the baseball?

Now if you shorten the distance--instead of from the Sun to the Earth, let's say from my house in PA to your house in California--and increase my ability to break the speed of light--let's say I can make the trip from PA to CA in less than a second--can I not theoretically travel to a point before I ever left?

Of course, going faster than the speed of light is impossible, so there's no point in theorising.

Dom wrote:The Terminator movies are another example, as Skynet is shown to be able to "remember" scenarios and circumstances across changes to the timeline, and is able to ensure its creation even after its original "birth" had been prevented.

After the TV series and the last few movies, the timeline is a piece of Swiss fucking cheese, but I think the plan as of T3 was that future events are inevitable. You can delay the future, but you cannot change it.

Hell, when I was in school, there was another student with the same first and last name as me

Who'd have thunk two people would be named Dominic Gobbledygooker?

Shocktrek again wrote:Being obsessive has nothing to do with it. It's about just keeping track of events in a story. If a story has events in it that contradict each other then how do you reconcile that without just writing it off as either a shitty story or being written by a writer that just can't keep shit straight? Multiverses. I often tend to think of fiction as someone telling me a story. If Simon Furman was standing in front of me and telling me the story of the Transformers, the events of that story should not contradict each other. Unfortunately, most writers can't do that now days so we have to have multiverses to explain continuity errors.

Except TF largely doesn't use the concept the way you explain. Sure, Furman wrote himself in a backdoor in case something would inevitably get messed up, but he didn't even use it when errors DID appear, such as when Megatron returned in the US comics. Furman could have easily wrote off either Megatron as being from an alternate timeline, but instead he invented a backstory that one of the Megatrons was Straxus in a clone body.

In TF though, the multiverse was primarily put into place to explain how there could be content that clearly contradicted each other on a base level (Armada cartoon, Armada comic) and not have either version be "wrong." GI Joe tends to have its insular fandom swear up and down that only the original Marvel comic written by Larry Hama is "true canon" and literally any other interpretation of GI Joe is blasphemy. This includes the Sunbow cartoon, the early 2000s CGI cartoon films, Sigma Six, the films, IDW's stuff, and any continuation of the Marvel run not written by Hama.

TF fans are somehow not nearly that insane, so we accept that there are alternate continuities that have next to nothing to do with each other, or are very similar to each other but have small (or large) conflicts and contradictions. (For example, the US and Japanese cartoon continuities are irreconcilable after Season 3, or even during Season 3.) The answer to the question of, "Which one is the 'true canon?'" for years was simply, "Whichever you prefer," because there had been no official ruling and in the end, it didn't matter anyway. Then Hasbro answered a bunch of nerdy dumbasses at a convention a decade ago and said, "Fuck it, it all counts somewhere," and here we are.

No. It might take a few minutes for your eyes to catch up, so you would wind up seeing yourself on the sun, but you wouldn't actually be there. You just would have gone to Earth really really fast. Also, why is faster than light impossible? What supposedly happens if we do? Does the universe implode, we turn into pumpkins...?

Straxus didn't take over a clone Megatron body. He took over actual Megatron and tried to trap Megatron's mind into his disembodied head. He failed and they both wound up in Megatron's body which is why Megs went insane. And Megatron returned because when he blew up the space bridge, it dropped him somewhere on Cybertron, rather than killing him like everyone thought and then later the Straxus thing happened.

Onslaught Six wrote:But the main thing I want to point out is that if you are travelling faster than the speed of light, isn't it possible to--in a sense--travel through "time"?

In a way... Given time slows down for the traveler at the speed of light while time would remain the same for the rest of the universe, technically the traveler would be traveling into the future.

The time it takes light to reach Earth from the Sun is about 8 minutes. Let's say I'm at the sun, and I throw a baseball into the air and catch it. Now, if I can travel faster than the speed of light--let's say I can get from the Sun to the Earth in only 5 minutes--will I not be able to see myself at the sun, throwing and catching the baseball?

Now if you shorten the distance--instead of from the Sun to the Earth, let's say from my house in PA to your house in California--and increase my ability to break the speed of light--let's say I can make the trip from PA to CA in less than a second--can I not theoretically travel to a point before I ever left?

That's just an optical illusion. TNG used this idea for "The Picard Maneuver". A ship jumps to warp for a few seconds, and given the time it would take for light to catch up to the observer, the ship briefly appears to be in two places at once when really the ship has just moved to a new location.

Of course, going faster than the speed of light is impossible, so there's no point in theorising.

Actually, faster-than-light travel is theoretically possible. It's just how to do it without breaking Einstein's theory of relativity that's the problem. Although NASA is working on it.

After the TV series and the last few movies, the timeline is a piece of Swiss fucking cheese, but I think the plan as of T3 was that future events are inevitable. You can delay the future, but you cannot change it.

Multiverse or not, everything after "Terminator 2: Judgement Day" is exclusive to itself. The third and fourth movies simply do not consider the series, which ignores the movies. Both of those ignore the theme park ride (which includes content that Cameron himself has sanctioned).

It is less a question of it being Swiss cheese and more a question of it being several different blocks of cheese altogether.

Anyway, as for why two guys with the same name have to be the same guy? Well, it seems to be more of a thing in TFs than any other fiction I've encountered. I think the idea is that in any given universe there's generally only one bot with said name and that's that universe's version of that character.

Does not make sense though. Why should there ever only be one guy with a given name, especially when there has been precedent in G1 for different (albeit obscure) guys having the same name? That annoys me almost as much as "recolours are related".

Who'd have thunk two people would be named Dominic Gobbledygooker?

No joke, at one point, I started thinking of my screen name and my real name as two wholly different people. (Once, when talking to Honey Bear on the phone, I referred to "Dom" in the third person. And, that is when I started scaling back on the alias.)

In TF though, the multiverse was primarily put into place to explain how there could be content that clearly contradicted each other on a base level (Armada cartoon, Armada comic) and not have either version be "wrong."

I am old enough to remember the first time through with this. I never gave it much thought as a kid. I just knew that the comic was the comic, the cartoon was the cartoon and the back of the box was the back of the box. There would be some similarities. But, the character on the back of the box did not perfectly match the comics I read or the cartoons I watched. Sometimes, the characters would not even look the same. In the case of "GI Joe", the file cards matched the comics a little better (as they were written by the same guy. But, even then, I just accepted differences.

Even after seeing Marvel's "What if....?" and being exposed to the idea of a formalized multiverse, I did not immediately apply it to TF or Joe because I understood that there was no need to and that there was no intention by the creators to do so.

A few years later, the "GI Joe" trading cards created the first "mixed" setting for Joe, where elements of the cartoon and comic mixed. For example, Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow had their history and an unusual successful Cobra gunner managed to kill 7 Joes when he should have let them go. But, the Joes also fought and defeated Cobra-La. Oddities of this setting include the first and (for 15 years) only appearance of Crystal Ball (the only original character whose card was not written by Hama), and that was posthumous.

GI Joe tends to have its insular fandom swear up and down that only the original Marvel comic written by Larry Hama is "true canon" and literally any other interpretation of GI Joe is blasphemy. This includes the Sunbow cartoon, the early 2000s CGI cartoon films, Sigma Six, the films, IDW's stuff, and any continuation of the Marvel run not written by Hama.

You forgot the absolute hatred they have for Devil's Due Productions. In fairness to the Joe fandom, they seem to (as a whole) have learned their lesson in '09 after the property nearly went away completely (after the movie did far worse than a long-running property should have). But, it took them decades longer to learn that lesson (and accept new things) than it should have.

Straxus didn't take over a clone Megatron body. He took over actual Megatron and tried to trap Megatron's mind into his disembodied head. He failed and they both wound up in Megatron's body which is why Megs went insane. And Megatron returned because when he blew up the space bridge, it dropped him somewhere on Cybertron, rather than killing him like everyone thought and then later the Straxus thing happened.

Not quite.

On page:
Straxus made two attempts to take over Megatron's body. The first involved trying to take the original Megatron. When that failed, Straxus took a "cloned" Megatron (built around a nameless Decepticon). The "clone" (which Straxus programmed with Megatron's memories and personality for reasons that I do not even pretend to understand) was the Megatron that Furman used for several years, until just after "Time Wars" in the UK, when Megatron was returning in the US.

Off page:
Around the time that the US comic was preparing to write Megatron and Optimus out, Furman was trying to build a cast of "forgotten" characters that he could use as needed. His idea was that lesser used characters would be easier to use as he would not have to reconcile them to US content. (Remember, the US:UK balance was very one-sided. The Marvel UK had to play ball with the US, and had no say in what Marvel US did.)

Prime's death in the comic was decisive enough that Furman could not do anything about it. (Though, reading "Prey", I get the feeling that Furman was planning to "wait and see" if he could pull something off.) Megatron on the other hand was accessible, having a less clear death.

Furman used Megatron (along with Ravage and a few others) after their apparent deaths in the US comics. (Despite Furman's efforts to keep things in order, real breaks start to appear between between the US and UK series around issue 50 of the US comic. These breaks would continue more or less to the end of the series, likely being made worse by Furman having less time than he planned to introduce the Action Masters.)

The "clone" Megatron (revealed and disposed of in later black and white strips) allowed Furman to use the same Megatron for late run US and UK comics without having to worry about the baggage that the UK Megatron would have accrued over the course of the UK exclusive strips. In order to work, the "clone" needed to have Megatron's memories and believe that he was Megatron (I forget if Furman even contrived a reason for this on page). This also does not account for how Straxus transferred *his* mind (rather than a copy) to the "clone" body.

While the "clone Megatron" did not patch all of the breaks between the UK and US comics, and it causes a few problems, it was probably the best solution that Furman had available.

Sparky Prime wrote:

Of course, going faster than the speed of light is impossible, so there's no point in theorising.

Actually, faster-than-light travel is theoretically possible. It's just how to do it without breaking Einstein's theory of relativity that's the problem. Although NASA is working on it.

I should rephrase, really: Going faster than light speed is practically and currently impossible. Theoretically anything can happen, but we literally can't do it right now, so.

Onslaught Six wrote:I should rephrase, really: Going faster than light speed is practically and currently impossible. Theoretically anything can happen, but we literally can't do it right now, so.

But what I'm saying is that it's not pointless to theorize about it like you'd said it was. Granted, the technology to actually travel faster-than-light likely wont come about in our lifetimes, but like that article I linked to said, scientists have taken some pretty significant steps by coming up with a theory that could make it possible some day and are currently working towards that means.