The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Discussion, generally of an in-universe nature, regarding any aspect of the franchise (including movies, spin-offs, etc.) such as: techniques, character relationships, internal back-history, its universe, and more.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Thu Oct 01, 2015 8:18 am

Darkprince410 wrote:Not really. He physically was still young enough appearance wise that, according to Roshi, Gohan described him as an infant. If Bardock had last seen him as an embryo, and now sees him as he is in the chamber, he'd still say that he's grown up, and given that Gine comments about him having Bardock's hair, that suggests that Bardock's never seen him with hair prior to that moment.
Saiyans are very short as kids. Goku as an 11 year old (or 12 year old as you support) had the appearance of a 4 year old (see his height being 1.00m-1.05m). So grandpa Gohan describing a 3 year old Goku as an infant should not come as a surprise at all. As for the comment about Goku's hair - well as with all human newborns in real life they have very little or even no hair when born - it takes some time to be fully developed. Besides Bardock may have never seen Goku before and just compared him with a standard newborn and there was not chance to comment about his hair before.
TheDevilsCorpse specifically said the Dragon Ball era Budoukai, as in the 21st-23rd.
I can't see to which point you object. I said that I find it reasonable to assume that the 23rd tournament took place in May as the 22nd took place in May and nothing had changed between the 22nd and 23rd organisation however between the 21st and 22nd the number of years were reduced and the date could have been altered. His point was that I admitted that the 21st would be in May. I did not.


---------
Just some food for thought for those who support that Trunks didn't have to wait 3 years for his second journey for the events to unfold in the second timeline.

OK so we have the timeline 1 (Trunks’ timeline) and the timeline 2 (the main time we followed in the anime/manga). Trunks went from year X back in time 20 years i.e. to year X-20 and informed the Z fighters that 3 years later i.e. in year X-17 the Androids will appear. Now if Trunks simply travelled back to year X, waited just 8 months (say 1 year for simplicity) and then went from that year X+1 back in time 18 years i.e. to year X-17 to help the Z fighters it would mean that the entire timeline 2 including all of its events were already unfolded and there to be visited independently of his own involvement- just the fighters didn't get to experience them yet.

But if so this would mean that Trunks could theoretically go to a later point on that year or say in year X-16 and see the outcome of the fight ... and it had to be an outcome without himself been involved in the fight against the Androids and Cell. But that would be inpossible as if there was one pre-determined history for timeline 2 Trunks would have been involved as per the events we saw in the manga/anime.

As this is a paradox the conclusion is that timeline 2 events could not pre-exist and as a result he had to wait an equal amount of time since his first visit allowing for the events to unfold differently from that point onwards.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:09 am

Saiyans are very short as kids. Goku as an 11 year old (or 12 year old as you support) had the appearance of a 4 year old (see his height being 1.00m-1.05m). So grandpa Gohan describing a 3 year old Goku as an infant should not come as a surprise at all. As for the comment about Goku's hair - well as with all human newborns in real life they have very little or even no hair when born - it takes some time to be fully developed. Besides Bardock may have never seen Goku before and just compared him with a standard newborn and there was not chance to comment about his hair before.
They have a lengthy adolescence, that's all. Just a few years before puberty sets in, they're slow to grow, and then when it does kick in, it affects them quickly. So Goku's growth prior to adolescence, given all that's established, would be no different than that of a human child. Therefore, the only reason that Gohan should reasonably conclude that Goku an infant is because he is legitimately an infant, not 3+ years old and just happening to look like one.

If Bardock hadn't seen him before, then you saying that Bardock's comment regarding him having grown up doesn't hold much any weight to indicating that it works the way you're intending.
I can't see to which point you object. I said that I find it reasonable to assume that the 23rd tournament took place in May as the 22nd took place in May and nothing had changed between the 22nd and 23rd organisation however between the 21st and 22nd the number of years were reduced and the date could have been altered. His point was that I admitted that the 21st would be in May. I did not.
I don't get where you're saying that the time between the 21st and 22nd was altered. The time between the 22nd and the 23rd Budoukai was 3 years, as was the difference in time between the 21st and 22nd. The only established difference in time between when the Budoukai are held was the large gap between the 23rd and 24th Budoukai, established to be because it took so long for them to build a new tournament stadium.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Thu Oct 01, 2015 10:47 am

Darkprince410 wrote: They have a lengthy adolescence, that's all. Just a few years before puberty sets in, they're slow to grow, and then when it does kick in, it affects them quickly. So Goku's growth prior to adolescence, given all that's established, would be no different than that of a human child. Therefore, the only reason that Gohan should reasonably conclude that Goku an infant is because he is legitimately an infant, not 3+ years old and just happening to look like one.
Goku did not have the same height growth as ordinary human kids. As an 11.5y.o. boy Goku was 25% shorter than the shortest normal 11y.o. human. Take a look at this chart. The range for an 11 year old is 1.32m-1.55m. Goku was just 1.00m-1.05m (you can calculate this by comparing him with Bulma, Launch, Roshi and others)
If Bardock hadn't seen him before, then you saying that Bardock's comment regarding him having grown up doesn't hold much any weight to indicating that it works the way you're intending.
He can still compare him with a standard newborn.
I don't get where you're saying that the time between the 21st and 22nd was altered. The time between the 22nd and the 23rd Budoukai was 3 years, as was the difference in time between the 21st and 22nd. The only established difference in time between when the Budoukai are held was the large gap between the 23rd and 24th Budoukai, established to be because it took so long for them to build a new tournament stadium.
All the tournaments before the 21st were taking place every 5 years. The gap between the 21st and 22nd was reduced due to the increased demand. This is sated in the manga.

User avatar
Herms
Kanzenshuu Admin Emeritus
Posts: 10550
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 6:40 pm
Location: Jupiter
Contact:

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Herms » Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:36 am

Speedster wrote:That is actually very true but my problem with the 26th of May version is that the Androids appeared on May 12th and...
1. Goku had the heart virus attack on that day.
2. Trunks said that knowing Goku he could get well even as early as in 10 days meaning that 10 days was the best case scenario.
Trunks does say that, but then in chapter 365 after the first encounter with Cell, the narrator says 3 days pass, at which point Goku wakes up. In chapter 366 Trunks likewise says that Vegeta has spent the last three days staring off into space. So Trunks must have been way off when he said it would take Goku 10 days to recover, or somehow an entire week passes between when Trunks says it'll be 10 days and when Piccolo first encounters Cell, which is an awkward fit. Anyway, the May 26th date goes off the narrator's statement that three days pass before Goku wakes up.
Kanzenshuu: Is that place still around?
Sometimes, I tweet things
We might, if they screamed all the time, for no good reason.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:22 pm

Speedster wrote:Goku did not have the same height growth as ordinary human kids. As an 11.5y.o. boy Goku was 25% shorter than the shortest normal 11y.o. human. Take a look at this chart. The range for an 11 year old is 1.32m-1.55m. Goku was just 1.00m-1.05m (you can calculate this by comparing him with Bulma, Launch, Roshi and others)
Toriyama was never consistent with the heights of characters when he drew them, so basing your entire argument going off of just height comparisons you make between Goku and other characters isn't very reliable.
He can still compare him with a standard newborn.
Or he's comparing him to when he was very possibly just an embryo in the incubation chamber when he last saw him.
All the tournaments before the 21st were taking place every 5 years. The gap between the 21st and 22nd was reduced due to the increased demand. This is sated in the manga.
All that's mentioned though is a change to how many years. Assuming a change to the month and day that it started, when nothing of the sort is mentioned, doesn't really hold up well. Especially so when one has to take into account that Goku managed to show up on time, albeit barely, in order to sign up. Within minutes of learning they changed the time between them from five years to three, Goku set off on his own to go train in the wild (and we see evidence of that later when he shows up wearing animal pelts). For someone as naive and "simple" as Goku is, would it make sense for him to know when the Budoukai was if it was changed any more drastically than simply a reduction of two years? It wouldn't make sense the 21st Budoukai took place sometime in August or something, and then Goku miraculously shows up in May just in time to make the entry for the 22nd Budoukai. It just doesn't make sense in comparison to assuming the 21st also took place in May, and all that was changed was the number of years in between.

User avatar
dbgtFO
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7888
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:07 pm
Contact:

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by dbgtFO » Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:37 pm

It's funny, because some months back, I was contemplating making a thread exactly like this with much of the same arguments, particularly this:
Speedster wrote: But if so this would mean that Trunks could theoretically go to a later point on that year or say in year X-16 and see the outcome of the fight ... and it had to be an outcome without himself been involved in the fight against the Androids and Cell. But that would be inpossible as if there was one pre-determined history for timeline 2 Trunks would have been involved as per the events we saw in the manga/anime.

As this is a paradox the conclusion is that timeline 2 events could not pre-exist and as a result he had to wait an equal amount of time since his first visit allowing for the events to unfold differently from that point onwards.
..always annoyed the hell out of me, as to me it doesn't make any logical sense, that Trunks could wait for less time, than the guys in the newly created timeline, though it's possible that all timelines will eventually catch up with each other, so when Trunks went back he conveniently returned the day he needed to by coincidence.. okay maybe not.

The truth is that Toriyama wasn't very consistent and so the Daizenshuu timeline is a pretty damn good timeline all things considered(ignoring the 13 months passing between Goku's 1st death and Vegeta and Nappa arriving).
But my manga only based timeline would also be based on the 788 number and Cell's 24 years from now statement, which was very obviously referring to 24 years from that current age ie. when the Cell arc took place, and Trunks' 20 years from the future statement, and we get:

788: Cell is completed and steals Trunks' time machine.
785: Trunks messes with time for a 2nd time.
782: Trunks messes with time for the 1st time.
764: The androids slaughter Dragon Team/Cell Arc takes place.
761: Goku/Trunks kills Freeza & Cold.
760: Cell arrives from the future.

As we can see it lines up brilliantly. The first time Trunks appears, he says he comes from about 20 years into the future(782-761 = 21, so ~20), 3 years later, Cell says he'll be completed in 24 years and Trunks says Cell came from 3 years further into the future from when he(Trunks) came from. Given the numbers Toriyama was throwing around at the time, it makes sense Cell would state 24 years from then, as 3 years had passed, from when Trunks came, who came 20 years into the future, whereas Cell came from a further 3 years into the future from Trunks' 2nd trip.
The guys doing the timeline in Daizenshuu 7 might have went with the logic, that one year in the RoSaT had Trunks grow significantly, which makes more sense from a 17~18 year going to a 18~19 year old, rather than a 20~21 year old going to a 21~22 year old. Or they used the information from the Trunks special, that it would take the time machine 8 months to recharge, which I'm pretty sure they actually did.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Thu Oct 01, 2015 2:26 pm

Darkprince410 wrote: Toriyama was never consistent with the heights of characters when he drew them, so basing your entire argument going off of just height comparisons you make between Goku and other characters isn't very reliable.
I have researched that over a large number of samples and the highest kid Goku was shown to be was 1.07m and the lowest 99cm. That is why I gave a range 1m-1.05m which was the most typical range. Anyway the point is that on a consistent basis Goku was never shown to be anywhere near the height of a normal 11-12 year old kid.
All that's mentioned though is a change to how many years. Assuming a change to the month and day that it started, when nothing of the sort is mentioned, doesn't really hold up well.
You can't possibly know what happened during that 3 year period. In the anime Goku adventures in various villages/towns during the start of his training and he finds himself in an airport though he misses the plane. Besides the way the change in number of years was announced by Roshi at the end of the Uranai Baba saga could well mean 3 years from then which was 4-5 months after the 21st tournament.
Last edited by Speedster on Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Thu Oct 01, 2015 7:54 pm

Speedster wrote:
All that's mentioned though is a change to how many years. Assuming a change to the month and day that it started, when nothing of the sort is mentioned, doesn't really hold up well.
You can't possibly know what happened during that 3 year period. In the anime Goku adventures in various villages/towns during the start of his training and he finds himself in an airport though he misses the plane. Besides the way the change in number of years was announced by Roshi at the end of the Uranai Baba saga could well mean 3 years from then which was 4-5 months after the 21st tournament.
Going by that, then obviously Kuririn thought it was 5 years from that point, since he mentioned the 22nd Budoukai being in 5 years, only for Roshi to correct him and say it was in 3 years now. The anime's portrayal of those events are irrelevant, as we see from said filler content that he runs into a number of the usual contradictions and problems inherent with trying to incorporate filler into the manga's continuity.

As far as the manga goes, we can't say or assume that Goku met anyone during his time training for the 22nd, so reasonably, Goku shouldn't know if the Budoukai were being held during a different month than the previous one, or different days within the same month. It's a baseless assumption that they changed the day and the month, when all that's established is that they changed the number of years.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Fri Oct 02, 2015 6:42 am

Some more food for thought for those who dispute my timeline and think that the guide timelines are correct.

So we have the following facts:
(i) The Cell Games were in in 26th of May (or 17th of June take your pick…). By the end of May Chi-Chi didn’t look pregnant at all so the earliest Goten needed to be conceived was in early February of that year. And the latest would be during the during the 10 day gap between the defeat of Trunks and the start of the Cell games.
(ii) The Buu arc started 7 years after the end of the Cell games.
(iii) The 25th TB took place 1.5 month after the start of the Buu arc.
(iv) When Goten entered the 25th TB he was said to be 7 y.o.

Now let’s check what the guides’ timeline say and how that fares against the above constraints.
1. Gohan’s birth – 18th May 757
2. Cell Games – 26th May 767
3. Goten’s birth – November 767 – February 768
4. Start of Buu saga – 28th March 774
5. 25th TB – 07th May 774

The guides put the start of the Buu arc in late March i.e. Gohan would be 16.8 and despite in the manga being introduced as 16. At the same time if Goten was born in Nov. 767 he would be 6.5y.o. and state he was 7 or if he was born in Feb 768 he would be 6.25 and state he was 7. Now not only the ages are wrong but the rounding practice itself is inconsistent as it would be rounding Gohan’s age 0.8 years DOWN and Goten’s age 0.5-0.75 years UP.

Whereas with my TRUE timeline which does not place the 25th TB in May we have:
1. Gohan’s birth – 18th May 756 (or 9th of June 756)
2. Cell Games – 26th May 765 (or 17th of June)
3. Goten’s birth – November 765 (– February 766)
4. Start of Buu saga – 21st September 772
5. Gohan starts school -- 3rd October 772 (as many universities start)
6. 25th TB -- 4th November 772
7. Battle of Gods -- 18th August 773

In my timeline Gohan is 16.3 and referred to as 16 (reasonable) and Goten just turned 7 before the tournament. Then Super takes place 6 months + “some time” later. I would say “some time”= 3 months. So a total of 9 months. So August 773 which correlates with Bulma’s birthday being on August 18th. Bingo!
dbgtFO wrote:The first time Trunks appears, he says he comes from about 20 years into the future, 3 years later, Cell says he'll be completed in 24 years and Trunks says Cell came from 3 years further into the future from when he(Trunks) came from. Given the numbers Toriyama was throwing around at the time, it makes sense Cell would state 24 years from then, as 3 years had passed, from when Trunks came, who came 20 years into the future, whereas Cell came from a further 3 years into the future from Trunks' 2nd trip.
Trunks said 20 without the "about" so it needs to be 19.5-20.5. The 24 years Cell referred to could be 23.6 years rounded up to 24. If Cell travelled from Dec 788 then from May 765 Cell would be completed 23.6=24 years afterwards.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:55 am

5. Gohan starts school -- 3rd October 772 (as many universities start)
That's not consistent with when Japanese schools start. As mentioned earlier on in here, Japanese schools start their year around April, rather than September-October as they do in the United States. That fits the official timeline's time frame, with the Daizenshuu listing him entering school on April 7th of Age 774.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:26 am

Darkprince410 wrote:
5. Gohan starts school -- 3rd October 772 (as many universities start)
That's not consistent with when Japanese schools start. As mentioned earlier on in here, Japanese schools start their year around April, rather than September-October as they do in the United States. That fits the official timeline's time frame, with the Daizenshuu listing him entering school on April 7th of Age 774.
That is not an in-universe inconsistency and hence not an issue at all. Gohan’s school is in not Japan as there is no Japan in the Dragonworld. Also Gohan was travelling a very long distance to get to that school – the equivalent of 5 hours by jet plane. So when Toriyama wrote it he may had in mind Gohan attending a prestigious school in US.

User avatar
VegettoEX
Kanzenshuu Co-Owner & Administrator
Posts: 17537
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:10 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by VegettoEX » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:28 am

Speedster wrote:So when Toriyama wrote it he may had in mind Gohan attending a prestigious school in US.
Or he may have had the Japanese school system in mind. You're just saying "No, that's an out-of-universe assumption" and then turning around with your own out-of-universe assumption.
:: [| Mike "VegettoEX" LaBrie |] ::
:: [| Kanzenshuu - Co-Founder/Administrator, Podcast Host, News Manager (note: our "job" titles are arbitrary and meaningless) |] ::
:: [| Website: January 1998 |] :: [| Podcast: November 2005 |] :: [| Fusion: April 2012 |] :: [| Wiki: 20XX |] ::

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:37 am

VegettoEX wrote:
Speedster wrote:So when Toriyama wrote it he may had in mind Gohan attending a prestigious school in US.
Or he may have had the Japanese school system in mind. You're just saying "No, that's an out-of-universe assumption" and then turning around with your own out-of-universe assumption.
But that was exactly the point of my response. My point was that if you want to use “out of universe” explanations I can come up with “out of universe” explanations too. We don't know which education system Toriyama had in mind, therefore such “out of universe” details cannot be a constraint.

User avatar
VegettoEX
Kanzenshuu Co-Owner & Administrator
Posts: 17537
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:10 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by VegettoEX » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:59 am

You can't dispute an official source, make up your own explanation based on out-of-universe information, expect people to accept it, dispute someone else's explanation using an equally-viable out-of-universe explanation, and then go "AH HAH! Yeah, I'm saying the same thing!"

You're not saying the same thing. You're just back-tracking on what you said, contradicting yourself, and now nothing you've said makes any sense.
:: [| Mike "VegettoEX" LaBrie |] ::
:: [| Kanzenshuu - Co-Founder/Administrator, Podcast Host, News Manager (note: our "job" titles are arbitrary and meaningless) |] ::
:: [| Website: January 1998 |] :: [| Podcast: November 2005 |] :: [| Fusion: April 2012 |] :: [| Wiki: 20XX |] ::

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 10:01 am

Speedster wrote: But that was exactly the point of my response. My point was that if you want to use “out of universe” explanations I can come up with “out of universe” explanations too. We don't know which education system Toriyama had in mind, therefore such “out of universe” details cannot be a constraint.
It takes a lot more to assume that he, an ordinary Japanese man in the early 90's, would know or bother to seek out information on when foreign schools start for what, for him, would have been undoubtedly a minor, rather insignificant point in the manga.

Additionally, since no date is mentioned within the manga itself, wouldn't it be most reasonable to assume, given the audience he was writing it for (Japanese children and teens), that he expected them to just assume that Gohan was probably starting school around April because kids over in Japan start school around then? I mean, when a comic or show in the US shows kids starting school, do we need to be told when they most likely are? No, because our experiences tell us the time frame of the year that kids normally start school.

The same can be said for a comic from Japan. Without mention made to the time of year that school started for Gohan, to let the readers know that it's different than what they've experienced, any reader at the time it came out in Japan would most likely assume that it's starting for Gohan the same general time that it started for them.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Fri Oct 02, 2015 10:36 am

VegettoEX wrote:You can't dispute an official source, make up your own explanation based on out-of-universe information, expect people to accept it, dispute someone else's explanation using an equally-viable out-of-universe explanation, and then go "AH HAH! Yeah, I'm saying the same thing!"

You're not saying the same thing. You're just back-tracking on what you said, contradicting yourself, and now nothing you've said makes any sense.
Wait a second. Where exactly did I use “out of universe” information in my timeline in order to contradict myself? The Gohan’s starting date of school was derived from the 25th TB estimated date which in turn was derived from Goten’s birthday which in turn was a result of the constraints I explained earlier. All the relative differences were derived from the manga. I just put in brackets that this is also happens to be when schools start in the West so it fits well even with "out of universe" constraints. It was a mere complementary consideration which played no role in my timeline creation. Perhaps I should had made it clearer.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Sat Oct 10, 2015 3:26 pm

Darkprince410 wrote:in the Trunks the Story chapter of the manga, specifically states was 8 months, so there's nothing indicating that he needed to wait three years in his time.
In the original manga, Chapter 419 (One More Conclusion - Kanzenshuu synopsis here), page 14, after Trunks defeated the Androids the narrator says
Three years passed…The time machine finally gained enough power for Trunks to return and tell everyone that the androids were defeated…
So the time required to charge the time machine was 3 years. The 8 months you quoted is from the “History of Trunks” TV special and is a direct contradiction to the original manga. Not to mention that the TV specials are only "semi-canon" -see "Bardock the Father of Goku" and "Yo Son Goku and his friends return" getting written off by DB Minus and Super.
In fact, he specifically says that, if he can live long enough for his time machine to recharge, he'll come see them again to help them battle the Jinzou-ningen.
Here is what Trunks said about the motives of his time travel in the original manga
Yamcha: What was the point of you coming to the past? Your future isn't going to change!
Trunks: Mom said…It’s so horrible what the androids did to us…that there deserves to be a peaceful future where they’ve been destroyed. But also…maybe I could find their weakness by watching Goku fight them. And if that didn't work…then maybe we could bring Goku to our future with the time machine.
So Trunks' ultimate reason to return was not just to help them battling the Androids as a favour but to see how the Androids could be defeated and use that knowledge to defeat the androids in his own timeline. And having to wait 3 years makes way more sense for him to say "if I can live long enough" as surviving 3 years would be a much greater challenge than 8 months.

Besides. Why do you think Trunks the first time he travelled to the past went to 3 years before the Androids' appearance? He had no other reason to travel to that point in time apart from that after going back to his time he would have to wait 3 years for his time machine to recharge. Remember that Goku would have just needed the medicine only 6 months before the Androids - choosing to give him the antidote 2.5 years before he needed it while also risking his own existence in the new timeline doesn't make much sense. People wrongly assume that Trunks picked that point in time due to Freeza’s appearance but that doesn’t make sense either as in the original timeline Goku did kill Freeza and King Cold himself. Trunks probably just stepped in and faced Freeza thinking that his time travel caused a delay in Goku’s arrival - unaware that in the original timeline Goku was 2 hours behind Freeza’s spaceship too and used instant transmission to get there in time.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:09 pm

So the time required to charge the time machine was 3 years. The 8 months you quoted is from the “History of Trunks” TV special and is a direct contradiction to the original manga. Not to mention that the TV specials are only "semi-canon" -see "Bardock the Father of Goku" and "Yo Son Goku and his friends return" getting written off by DB Minus and Super.
Except that the 8 months quoted comes from the manga chapter Trunks the Story, where Bulma specifically mentions that it took 8 months for it to charge. The anime special takes that number from Toriyama's original manga chapter it is based on.

Kanzenshuu's synopsis of the chapter
“Then about three years later…” Trunks, now older, takes some groceries inside, saying hi to his mom. She’s busy working on the time machine, and says it’s finally able to charge enough energy for a round trip. It takes eight months just to charge it, so they don’t have time to test it. It would’ve come out better if the lab hadn’t been destroyed, though.
Besides, given that Trunks knew that Cell came from three years after his second trip back in time, and that he knew that Cell was trying to sneak up on him when he was preparing to leave, Trunks likely intentionally waited to return to the past just to draw Cell out of hiding, and the three years wasn't meant to indicate that it took that long for the time machine to charge again. Rather, it was meant to indicate that three years passed since Trunks returned, and in that time, it was charged.
So Trunks' ultimate reason to return was not just to help them battling the Androids as a favour but to see how the Androids could be defeated and use that knowledge to defeat the androids in his own timeline. And having to wait 3 years makes way more sense for him to say "if I can live long enough" as surviving 3 years would be a much greater challenge than 8 months.
Nevertheless, the manga indicates that Trunks would be waiting for however long it took to charge the time machine, and the specific figure we're given for that is 8 months by Bulma.
Besides. Why do you think Trunks the first time he travelled to the past went to 3 years before the Androids' appearance? He had no other reason to travel to that point in time apart from that after going back to his time he would have to wait 3 years for his time machine to recharge. Remember that Goku would have just needed the medicine only 6 months before the Androids - choosing to give him the antidote 2.5 years before he needed it while also risking his own existence in the new timeline doesn't make much sense. People wrongly assume that Trunks picked that point in time due to Freeza’s appearance but that doesn’t make sense either as in the original timeline Goku did kill Freeza and King Cold himself. Trunks probably just stepped in and faced Freeza thinking that his time travel caused a delay in Goku’s arrival - unaware that in the original timeline Goku was 2 hours behind Freeza’s spaceship too and used instant transmission to get there in time.
Trunks stated that he wanted to contact and talk to Goku alone so as to minimize his interaction with the others in the past. Given that he chose the time period he did, it's likely that it's the one time that his mother remembered that would have been the most optimal opportunity to contact him, since that's when he'd be returning to Earth. In addition, contacting him and warning him so soon after he returned allowed for Goku and the others to train for those three years, allowing for the best chance they had to change the future. Changing history so that Goku didn't die from the heart virus would be one thing, but to do that and give them three years time to prepare would improve the odds even further.

User avatar
Speedster
Regular
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Speedster » Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:34 pm

Darkprince410 wrote:Except that the 8 months quoted comes from the manga chapter Trunks the Story, where Bulma specifically mentions that it took 8 months for it to charge. The anime special takes that number from Toriyama's original manga chapter it is based on.
Kanzenshuu's synopsis of the chapter
Except that it doesn’t matter either as Chapter 419 was written AFTER it. It was written in 1993 whilst the special in 1992. It is the last word of Toriyama that matters the most. Don't forget that the Androids that Trunks originally referred to when he told his story to Goku were #19 and #20, yet #19 and #20 were later unknown to Trunks and he was “always” referring to #17 and #18 which he also identified in the main timeline.
Besides, given that Trunks knew that Cell came from three years after his second trip back in time, and that he knew that Cell was trying to sneak up on him when he was preparing to leave, Trunks likely intentionally waited to return to the past just to draw Cell out of hiding, and the three years wasn't meant to indicate that it took that long for the time machine to charge again. Rather, it was meant to indicate that three years passed since Trunks returned, and in that time, it was charged.
No, the narrator specifically says that eventually after 3 years the time machine gathered enough energy for a round trip to the past. And that was with a better lab facility and energy supply network too as the city was rebuilt. It is clear as day. Besides why do you think in the original timeline Cell stole the machine in 788 i.e. 3 years after Trunks' second trip? Why in the original timeline Trunks had to go to the past from 788 instead of 785? Took him 3 years to beat the Androids? Unlikely given that it is hinted that he beat them with the remote switch and Bulma created one from the blueprints in a day or so.
Nevertheless, the manga indicates that Trunks would be waiting for however long it took to charge the time machine
No that is not the conclusion at all. It was because he had to wait 3 years for his time machine to recharge that he chose to travel back 3 years in the first place but if say hypothetically the time machine was improved and had to wait only 8 months he is still constrained by the following time-travelling principle (which prevents the paradox I described in an earlier post):

“Each time you travel to the past a new timeline is created which has the same past as the original timeline up to the point in time you travelled to. Once you travel back to your future the only way to travel back to the same new timeline (instead of creating another new one) is by travelling in "parallel" to the direction of your original journey. For that to happen you have to wait an equal amount of time for the events in the new timeline to unfold.”

For example Trunks travelling from 782 to say April 762 created a new timeline 2 with common events up to the original up to April 762. Now if say Trunks went back to his timeline waited 8 months and returned again to the same point he travelled the first time (April 762) he would create ANOTHER timeline 3. To land to timeline 2 he had to go to April 762+8months=December 762. That would be a journey "parallel" to the original one. And if say he travelled to Age 770 he would create yet another new timeline 4 the past of which up to Age 770 would be identical to the original one.
Trunks stated that he wanted to contact and talk to Goku alone so as to minimize his interaction with the others in the past. Given that he chose the time period he did, it's likely that it's the one time that his mother remembered that would have been the most optimal opportunity to contact him, since that's when he'd be returning to Earth.
How was that supposed to be the optimum time to meet him? He was expecting Goku to appear, battle Freeza and King Cold and like the events we saw in the main timeline the rest of the Z fighters and Bulma would have been around. He would probably had to hide and follow Goku to his house afterwards but in any case this scenario is far from being the "optimum" point to meet him as far as Trunks’ existence is concerned. It was riskiest choice of all.
In addition, contacting him and warning him so soon after he returned allowed for Goku and the others to train for those three years, allowing for the best chance they had to change the future. Changing history so that Goku didn't die from the heart virus would be one thing, but to do that and give them three years time to prepare would improve the odds even further.
First Trunks was only interested on Goku and second future Bulma never implied that Goku would need to get much stronger to beat the Androids but rather that if he were alive when the Androids appeared he would have figured a way to beat them - exploit a weakness or whatever. Additionally Trunks did not expect the present-time Androids to be stronger that those of his time and it was likely (from Trunks' perspective) if Goku just trained normally for the next 3 years (though he wouldn’t become as strong as when he trained while fully dedicated) to become strong enough for Androids only as strong as the future ones.

User avatar
Darkprince410
I Live Here
Posts: 2306
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: The TRUE timeline of Dragonball

Post by Darkprince410 » Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:56 pm

Except that it doesn’t matter either as Chapter 419 was written AFTER it. It was written in 1993 whilst the special in 1992. It is the last word of Toriyama that matters the most. Don't forget that the Androids that Trunks originally referred to when he told his story to Goku were #19 and #20, yet #19 and #20 were later unknown to Trunks and he was “always” referring to #17 and #18 which he also identified in the main timeline.
As said before, the dialogue you're using to draw that it takes 3 years is inexact, and can be taken just as easily that three years past, and in those three years, the time machine was charged. It doesn't explicitly state that it took three years for the machine to charge, whereas Bulma's statement from the special chapter explicitly establishes that it was 8 months. So when you have a specific line saying it was 8 months, and a vague line that can be taken multiple ways (only one of which being that it takes the time machine 3 years), then most logical idea is to go with the 8 months.

Besides, since the special chapter was written after Trunks' first visit and his subsequent return to the past, he wrote that with it in mind that it took Trunks 8 months to charge it in his timeline.
No, the narrator specifically says that eventually after 3 years the time machine gathered enough energy for a round trip to the past. And that was with a better lab facility and energy supply network too as the city was rebuilt. It is clear as day. Besides why do you think in the original timeline Cell stole the machine in 788 i.e. 3 years after Trunks' second trip? Why in the original timeline Trunks had to go to the past from 788 instead of 785? Took him 3 years to beat the Androids? Unlikely given that it is hinted that he beat them with the remote switch and Bulma created one from the blueprints in a day or so.
No, even in the version of the narrator's dialogue you gave, it doesn't explicitly state that it took 3 years to charge it up, just that it finally charged up in three years time. The two situations are very different, with the latter leaving it open that it took an unspecified amount of time to charge it up, but that they just waited 3 years to return to the past again. Who knows the reason why Cell's timeline Trunks decided to go back again three years after the relative defeat of #17 and #18.

As was implied in Trunks' time, perhaps Trunks wanted to work on helping to rebuild everything, and then, once things really got underway, and he felt that everything was well on its way to being restored, he could take another trip to the past for some unspecified amount of time. He wanted to get the process of rebuilding underway, so it would make sense for him to want to work on that first, and then take a trip to the past once all was situated in his timeline.
For example Trunks travelling from 782 to say April 762 created a new timeline 2 with common events up to the original up to April 762. Now if say Trunks went back to his timeline waited 8 months and returned again to the same point he travelled the first time (April 762) he would create ANOTHER timeline 3. To land to timeline 2 he had to go to April 762+8months=December 762. That would be a journey "parallel" to the original one. And if say he travelled to Age 770 he would create yet another new timeline 4 the past of which up to Age 770 would be identical to the original one.
We don't know how time travel works to assume it works like that. For all we know, each timeline has some form of "signature" to it, and time travel back and forth involves locking onto the signature of the desired timeline and traveling back to it, before traveling forward to the home timeline.
How was that supposed to be the optimum time to meet him? He was expecting Goku to appear, battle Freeza and King Cold and like the events we saw in the main timeline the rest of the Z fighters and Bulma would have been around. He would probably had to hide and follow Goku to his house afterwards but in any case this scenario is far from being the "optimum" point to meet him as far as Trunks’ existence is concerned. It was riskiest choice of all.
It's the one location and time that Bulma, for certain, knew where and when Goku would be. Besides, given that Trunks' calculations on when Goku would arrive was based on what information Bulma would have given him, and that Trunks didn't know about Goku's ability to teleport, we can actually assume that, for whatever reason, Bulma (and potentially the others) weren't there to witness Goku taking on Freeza and Cold. Trunks was under the impression that Goku arrived to stop Freeza and Cold using his space pod (hence why he stepped in when he thought Goku would get there too late), and Bulma clearly didn't know about the Shunkan Idou (or for whatever reason, never told Trunks, despite it being important).

Nevertheless, according to Trunks, his arrival when he did was because he had intended to meet Goku privately at that time, and it was only due to perceiving that Goku would be late to stop Freeza and Cold that he stepped in.
First Trunks was only interested on Goku and second future Bulma never implied that Goku would need to get much stronger to beat the Androids but rather that if he were alive when the Androids appeared he would have figured a way to beat them - exploit a weakness or whatever. Additionally Trunks did not expect the present-time Androids to be stronger that those of his time and it was likely (from Trunks' perspective) if Goku just trained normally for the next 3 years (though he wouldn’t become as strong as when he trained while fully dedicated) to become strong enough for Androids only as strong as the future ones.
Still, a full three years of forewarning on top of the heart virus medicine would give Goku and the others their best chance at victory.

Post Reply