How do you explain plot holes within Dragon Ball?

[caejones]

Certain branches of quantum physics would disagree with the statement "timetravel doesn't exist".
What I've heard lately is that experiments with ... light or some such thing suggest that it's actually impossible to force a paradox to happen.

However, we're talking about fictional timetravel, which has no reason to care about extremely shaky science.

[FNF]

'Just...because'.

Problem solved.

[Piccolo Daimao]

You can its easy you just take what you know as true and put it together to form an explanation just like a crime case. Take the grandfather paradox as an example, an easy way to explain it would be the idea of multiple timelines, this is exactly how it works in Dragon Ball btw.

Take Back to the Future, for example. That clearly doesn't go by multiple timelines (at least, the first one); the plot is pretty much based around the grandfather paradox, and when it looks like Marty's parents aren't going to get together, Marty literally begins to phase out of existence.

Well that show is purposefully being illogical, the grandfather paradox would entail an infinite loop logically it wouldn't work that way but hey there aren't any rules in fiction. This thread is based on speculation of course, but your point that it is impossible to explain away a plot hole is just plainly false, I've already explained why.

If you could explain it away in a plausible and rational manner, then it wouldn't be a plothole, would it?

But my Back to the Future example is a perfect reason of something that you can't just handwave away with some farfetched theory. But whatever, it's fine and stuff, but I don't really entertain it, except in certain situations where I think there's a good enough explanation.

[Nex Carnifex]

If you could explain it away in a plausible and rational manner, then it wouldn't be a plothole, would it?

But my Back to the Future example is a perfect reason of something that you can't just handwave away with some farfetched theory. But whatever, it's fine and stuff, but I don't really entertain it, except in certain situations where I think there's a good enough explanation.

There are some plot holes that are really just too out there but I don't think that's the case in Dragon Ball, they touched on time travel but the alternate timeline theory doesn't have anything paradoxical about it. My point is that you can explain plot holes, or at least things previously considered plot holes.

[Piccolo Daimao]

OK, fair enough.

[matt0044]

Are you referring to Fridge Brilliance?

[LiamKav]

The time travel rules in DBZ are clearly laid out: Any attempt to change the time line merely creates another timeline, leaving the original unchanged. Hence, in the show we see 3 distinct timelines and a forth is implied.

1/ A timeline where everyone was killed by #17 and #18 apart from Trunks, who travels back in time to warn everyone, creating timeline 2. On Trunks's return, he kills #17 and #18 before being killed by Cell, who then travels to timeline 4.
2/ A timeline where Trunks (from timeline 1) arrives from the future, giving them time to prepare for the Androids. We don't know if he was successful, all we know is that he eventually returned to his own time.
3/ A different timeline where everyone was killed by #17 and #18, apart from Trunks who travels back in time to warn everyone, creating timeline 4. On Trunks's return, he kills #17, #18 and Cell.
4/ A timeline where Trunks (from timeline 3) arrives from the future, giving everyone time to prepare for the Androids. However, Cell (from timeline 1) also arrives. We then see Gohan beat Cell, Trunks return to timeline 3, and then everyone fights a big pink blob.

Regarding plot holes, I'd say it depends on the severity and situation. Comical stuff can be ignored, because of the Rule Of Funny. The other stuff, it depends. If Goku can suddenly breath in space, after it being a big plot point that he can't, then that's just bad writing. For Cell though, as has been said, we could theorise that his most special cell can be moved around his body. Doesn't make it true, but just because it isn't spelled out to you doesn't make it wrong.

[Bussani]

Certain branches of quantum physics would disagree with the statement "timetravel doesn't exist".

Eh, I guess what I should have said is, "if time travel exists, we can only guess how it might work."

What I've heard lately is that experiments with ... light or some such thing suggest that it's actually impossible to force a paradox to happen.

I'd like to hear more about that.

[Super Vegetto]

[LiamKav]

Merci, monsieur. Er, got a translation? I remember seeing that before, but years ago...

[Bussani]

http://magikarp46.com/dragonball/guideb ... utures.php

[hleV]

Can anyone explain me the History 4?

When it comes down to that, there must be a history where Trunks is absent at the time of the Cell Game.

[Fox666]

It is simply. History 4 happened just like History 1, but instead of going to the RoSaT, Trunks returned to his own time-line with the shutdown controller.

To think about it, without Vegeta attacking Cell, a fair duel beetween Gohan and Cell would happen instead of the Kamehame-ha clash.

[hleV]

It is simply. History 4 happened just like History 1, but instead of going to the RoSaT, Trunks returned to his own time-line with the shutdown controller.

To think about it, without Vegeta attacking Cell, a fair duel beetween Gohan and Cell would happen instead of the Kamehame-ha clash.

I'm not following how does one come to the conclusion that such timeline/history exists where Trunks is absent and Cell Games happens, that's why I'm asking.

[Fox666]

It's not a conclusion one come in, it's a piece of information given in the Daizenshuu.

And it's reasonable. Trunks from History 3 managed to obtain the shutdown controller in the past (History 4), however in the main timeline (History 1) Trunks only get to know about it because Cell told them Dr. Gero had a second laboratory in the underground.

[hleV]

I don't get on what basis was it decided that such history exists at all. I understand everything perfectly up to the point where it says that a history where Trunks is absent during the Cell Games must exist. WHY?

[Beji]

I don't get on what basis was it decided that such history exists at all. I understand everything perfectly up to the point where it says that a history where Trunks is absent during the Cell Games must exist. WHY?

I think it is like this

These is a point where that history MUST exist because of the history #3 in which Cell comes from. When Cell came from a time in which the androids were already defeated by Trunks(and is now in history #1). Those androids were defeated by the controller he brought back, in the instance trunks brought a controller back, a new history was branched off. The history that Trunks beats the androids with the controller and dies, he doesn't come back so there is a new timeline(#4) where cell is there and trunks is not for the cell games.

[hleV]

I think it is like this

These is a point where that history MUST exist because of the history #3 in which Cell comes from. When Cell came from a time in which the androids were already defeated by Trunks(and is now in history #1). Those androids were defeated by the controller he brought back, in the instance trunks brought a controller back, a new history was branched off. The history that Trunks beats the androids with the controller and dies, he doesn't come back so there is a new timeline(#4) where cell is there and trunks is not for the cell games.

But time-travelling Cell is kinda exclusive to the main series' timeline, isn't he..?

• Trunks goes back in time (let's call it timeline X);
• obtains blueprints;
• returns to his own time;
• destroys #17 & #18;
• gets killed by Cell;
• Cell goes back in time (to the main timeline of the series).

How come it was decided that this particular timeline X has a Cell which came from the future at all (otherwise there would be no Cell Games)?

[Beji]

I'd love to draw it out because there is no other way I can think of explaining


Trunks goes back in time (let's call it timeline X);<--- Timeline X is split based on a decision.
obtains blueprints;
returns to his own time;
destroys #17 & #18;
gets killed by Cell;(never comes goes back to timeline X, new timeline forms one where Trunks inter veined but was killed when he returns to his own time so time traveling cell is in 2 timelines because of this)
Cell goes back in time (to the main timeline of the series).

[hleV]

I don't understand what are you saying xD