When the hell did Tapion go to?

[Dayspring]

"When" in the sense that what time did he go to? Is it another plothole? I know he went back to save Minoshia, but that would have been 1,000 years ago and the time machine has a max energy output to make a return trip for 20 years into the past. Granted he never has to return to the present, but wouldn't that just mean the furthest he could go back in time would be about 40 years?

[desirecampbell]

the time machine has a max energy output to make a return trip for 20 years into the past.

Where does that information come from?

[Duo]

The 20-year limit is news to me.

[Dayspring]

the time machine has a max energy output to make a return trip for 20 years into the past.

Where does that information come from?

Both the anime and manga version of Trunks the Story. When it's full, Mirai Bulma explains it should be "just enough" to make a return trip 20 years in the past.

[Olivier Hague]

When it's full, Mirai Bulma explains it should be "just enough" to make a return trip 20 years in the past.

Does it say that it would need more energy in order to go further back in time though? It's a time machine, not a car. Maybe that's just the energy it needs for two "time warps", whatever the destination may be.

[Dayspring]

When it's full, Mirai Bulma explains it should be "just enough" to make a return trip 20 years in the past.

Does it say that it would need more energy in order to go further back in time though? It's a time machine, not a car. Maybe that's just the energy it needs for two "time warps", whatever the destination may be.

Though possible, I don't think so. If it were, why would she specify the twenty years at all? Plus, when you think about it, it ends up explaining why time was fluid instead of linear.

[Conan the SSJ]

Well, one possible answer is that Bulma's time machine counterpart in the present may've been built to handle longer journeys into the past than the mirai version. Afterall, there're no terrorizing cyborgs or minimal supplies delaying her work. What's interesting about this is that when Tapion goes to the past, he's in essence creating another parallel timeline, as we have to take in account Future Trunks' explanation about how defeating the Androids in the past would mean next-to-nothing for his own future. Then again, some journeys to the past through particular measures seem to create predestined events in the main timeline; such as Goku's trip to the past in original DB to meet Mutaito, he manages to create a scenario of Roshi meeting him for the first time when he's 18 as opposed to their first island meeting in episode 3. Of course that was anime only, but then again so is movie 13's place in an acceptable canon IMO.

Dayspring, a direct quote from the Viz manga or FUNi DVDs' Japanese version would help. o.o

[Olivier Hague]

when you think about it, it ends up explaining why time was fluid instead of linear.

I don't follow you. What do you mean?

[Dayspring]

Well, one possible answer is that Bulma's time machine counterpart in the present may've been built to handle longer journeys into the past than the mirai version.

She built it? I just assumed it was Cell's time machine. But the same argument can still be made. Good point.

What's interesting about this is that when Tapion goes to the past, he's in essence creating another parallel timeline, as we have to take in account Future Trunks' explanation about how defeating the Androids in the past would mean next-to-nothing for his own future.

Another assumption on my part: Tapion was just going back in time to be with his brother, even if it is his brother from another timeline. That's another reason why I posted: wouldn't it be redundant and weird to go back in time? That would leave 2 Tapions in existing at the same time.

Then again, some journeys to the past through particular measures seem to create predestined events in the main timeline; such as Goku's trip to the past in original DB to meet Mutaito, he manages to create a scenario of Roshi meeting him for the first time when he's 18 as opposed to their first island meeting in episode 3. Of course that was anime only, but then again so is movie 13's place in an acceptable canon IMO.

Filler plothole. It happened years before Toriyama reached Trunks, so it really doesn't matter. Just chock it up to the same kind of mistake as Goku's pod being destroyed.

Dayspring, a direct quote from the Viz manga or FUNi DVDs' Japanese version would help. o.o

Didn't you guys just bitch at me yesterday for doing this too much? ^_^;;

Glenat's version didn't have it afterall, so I'm just going to assume I was wrong about it being in the manga too since 1) if Glenat doesn't have it, Viz probably doesn't have it and 2) there's no way in hell I'm spending another minute looking for my Shonen Jump magazines, let alone sifting through each one to find which has the chapter.

As for FUNi's dvd, it's the second thing Bulma says in Chapter 9, when Trunks arrives groceries.

[Dayspring]

when you think about it, it ends up explaining why time was fluid instead of linear.

I don't follow you. What do you mean?

An unknown amount of time passed in the future while Trunks was in the past, probably an equal amount. This would indicate that time is fluid, which we know it NOT to be.

In other words, from Mirai Bulma's perspective, Trunks should have returned the very instant he left. If the machine is programmed to only jump 20 years worth there and back, then the fact that Trunks spent two weeks in the past means two weeks would have gone by in the future as well.

[Iyouboushi]

Who says he had to go 1000 years in the past to save Minoshia? Couldn't he have jumped even a year or two back in order to reach him in time to stop his death?

Though I'm not exactly sure what Tapion had intended to do. He gave up the sword and doesn't seem like a guy who's capable of doing what Gokuu did to destroy the beast (it's been awhile since I've seen this movie, forgive me). Though I always found it weird that Minoshia was shown with another copy of the sword right before he died. How many swords were there? Two?

[Olivier Hague]

An unknown amount of time passed in the future while Trunks was in the past, probably an equal amount.

Erm... Yeah. I just don't buy that theory. Time passing in the future? Whuh?

In other words, from Mirai Bulma's perspective, Trunks should have returned the very instant he left.

Not necessarily. Maybe he simply set another date/hour for his return. Or maybe the machine, being kindy flawed, simply isn't that precise.

Why would he set another date/hour? Sure, it leaves Bulma by herself for a while, but on the other hand... If he were to return as soon as he left, and didn't, Bulma would instantly know that something went wrong and that she'd never see her son again. Pretty depressing.

[Lavender Saiyan]

I too have always been under the impression that it's just a matter of the Time Jump it's self and not the length of time. The quote from the Trunks Side Story is...

"I've finally built up enough power for a round trip in the Time Machine"

[Dayspring]

An unknown amount of time passed in the future while Trunks was in the past, probably an equal amount.

Erm... Yeah. I just don't buy that theory. Time passing in the future? Whuh?

In other words, from Mirai Bulma's perspective, Trunks should have returned the very instant he left.

Not necessarily. Maybe he simply set another date/hour for his return. Or maybe the machine, being kindy flawed, simply isn't that precise.

Why would he set another date/hour? Sure, it leaves Bulma by herself for a while, but on the other hand... If he were to return as soon as he left, and didn't, Bulma would instantly know that something went wrong and that she'd never see her son again. Pretty depressing.

There's nothing to "buy." We see it happen: Trunks returns in the time machine outside. He walks inside and shouts that he's back. Bulma gets up and welcomes him back and marvels over how tall he is.

I suppose it's possible that the machine can't land at the specific minute. Afterall, Trunks did arrive a few hours late to fight the Androids.

Iyouboushi: I figure it's 1,000 years since Tapion knows neither which planet Minoshia was sent to nor when he was killed. If I'm not mistaken, there were three magic swords: Tapion's, Minoshia's, and their Kami's.

Lavender Saiyan: Thanks for the confirmation. I guess it's officially anime only.

[Olivier Hague]

There's nothing to "buy."

Yes, there is. That thing about "time passing in the future as it does in the present" (again, "huh?!") is just a theory.

I suppose it's possible that the machine can't land at the specific minute. Afterall, Trunks did arrive a few hours late to fight the Androids.

Indeed.
And maybe Trunks simply decided not to come back at the exact same moment he left in the first place.

[Dayspring]

There's nothing to "buy."

Yes, there is. That thing about "time passing in the future as it does in the present" (again, "huh?!") is just a theory.

Go back and either watch the anime or read the manga. You intentionally misquoted me.

[Olivier Hague]

Go back and either watch the anime or read the manga.

Gee, thanks. Please don't come up with actual and precise arguments to explain your point.

You intentionally misquoted me.

Heh. Yeah, of course I did.
How so? Please do tell.

The fact that Trunks comes back in the future at a later date does not necessarily mean that "the same amount of time passed in the future as it did in the present". For one thing, you acknowledged that there could be another reason for that "late" time of arrival (and I gave you yet another one).

And of course, the idea of "the same amount of time passing in the future as it does in the present" simply doesn't make much sense. Just think about it. Please.

[Xyex]

And of course, the idea of "the same amount of time passing in the future as it does in the present" simply doesn't make much sense. Just think about it. Please.

Dunno why I'm posting, it's like talking to a brick wall but... here goes.

What doesn't make sense about it? Time passes, period. End of question. What? Because you went back in time the present suddenly stops going forward? No, it doesn't. That simply doesn't make any sense. Just think about it. If you move from the front car of a train to the back, does the front suddenly stop moving?

There's no reason to assume that the present is at stand-still while in the past. As I said, time moves forward, period. Time-lines in DBZ are like alternate realities. Just because Trunks is no long in his time-line, his reality, doesn't mean it's not still progressing forward.

[Olivier Hague]

What doesn't make sense about it?

Time passes when you (i.e. the observer, the referential) make your way in your timeline. That's "time passing".
At the risk of sounding like a zen monk, you could say that time doesn't pass unless you're here to feel it pass.

What? Because you went back in time the present suddenly stops going forward?

Well, yeah. In fact, it wasn't "going forward" in the first place. You were.
In your example, the "present" would be "the moment you pushed a button in your time machine in order to go back in time". "Moment". That's the keyword. That "present" is actually a moment. A point in the timeline. It doesn't "move" on that timeline.
Once you're in the past, that "present" is still a point (in the future, now, as far as you're concerned). And what happens the next second is another point in the future.

[Xyex]

Time passes when you (i.e. the observer, the referential) make your way in your timeline. That's "time passing".
At the risk of sounding like a zen monk, you could say that time doesn't pass unless you're here to feel it pass.

Wow, so Trunks was the only person who existed in his time. I did not know that.

Well, yeah. In fact, it wasn't "going forward" in the first place. You were.
In your example, the "present" would be "the moment you pushed a button in your time machine in order to go back in time". "Moment". That's the keyword. That "present" is actually a moment. A point in the timeline. It doesn't "move" on that timeline.
Once you're in the past, that "present" is still a point (in the future, now, as far as you're concerned). And what happens the next second is another point in the future.

You're confusing perceptive time with occurent time I see. Perceptive time is the passage of time that we experience by the pressence of 'moments' occuring in succession that we can then identify as time passing. Perceptive time is fluid and doesn't progress at a constant speed (hence why hours can feel longer or shorter than they actually are, to different people, at the same time).

Occurent time is the actual flow of time which is constant and consistent. It's occurent time that dictates a person traveling at the speed of light can reach a destination just a few years to them, but centuries to everyone not in their ship. If time worked as you suggest, that it was the perceptive that dicated the passing of time and not the occurent then traveling at the speed of light would not have a slowing effect on time aboad the ship.