Indeed, the other people there certainly seemed surprised about it.MythSearcher wrote:this is actually what he said, but might not be canon.(Tomino is famous for ranting strange things just to surprise you while completely ignoring what the original planning is)
How is "Black History" defined?
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
Interesting. Its nice to see that the societies depicted in Turn A reach a reasonable level of tech progress, even if it takes 500 years. I myself would like to see the era of the Federation falling apart explored more (outside of G-Saviour), but that's neither here nor there. I still think the timeline makes no sense if Turn A is in G-Reco's past, but meh.
- MythSearcher
- Posts: 1846
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:36 pm
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
My POVAlexeon wrote:Interesting. Its nice to see that the societies depicted in Turn A reach a reasonable level of tech progress, even if it takes 500 years. I myself would like to see the era of the Federation falling apart explored more (outside of G-Saviour), but that's neither here nor there. I still think the timeline makes no sense if Turn A is in G-Reco's past, but meh.
If the circle is a true indication of the CC time"line", it would be a self enclosed loop and thus 500 years "after" Turn A will still be a time "before" Turn A if you just go further.
Or, whatever
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
You know what... I just read that interview.
No offense to fans of his works, but SCREW Tomino... he is a bastard.
No offense to fans of his works, but SCREW Tomino... he is a bastard.
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
Gundam has the appearance of being scientific. It never has been genuinely scientific in any real sense, beyond setting decoration.Alexeon wrote:The thing is, Gundam is more grounded in real life physics than some soft sci-fi series. Yeah, Gundam has Newtypes and Minovsky particles, but aside from that, they try to be grounded in realism for the setting. Its a lot harder to accept Gundam pulling a "the multiverse is merging" than say Star Trek where anything goes.
The "universes colliding" thing is just a part of string theory and its derivatives; it's not even a scientific theory because string theory is untestable and undisprovable. There's plenty of stuff about multiverses and whatnot, but there's no genuine way to check they exist in reality. It's all philosophical guessing, not scientific testing.Alexeon wrote:Based on stuff I read in the past, the big bang might have been caused by another universe colliding with this one, but colliding doesn't mean the same thing that we usually use the word for. Its not like two cars colliding, more like they interacted in a higher dimension and there might have been some transfer of energy.
Nothing suggests that two universes colliding would just merge anywhere near like what CC portrays.
Turn A was probably inspired by the TV shows talking about it, I remember them, but as you've said it's not the same idea at all.
Re: How is "Black History" defined?
You're right as far as Gundam goes, but string theory is not unprovable or untestable. Its hard to test, but there have been experiments made. The LHC might help point us in the right direction, for example. Its not some new-age mysticism stuff. Its science.