the IMP

#1 Posted by Butchdog (10 posts) - - Show Bio

how often does the flash use this attack. I see a lot of people use this attack a lot in battles but always same scan has he used it more then once?

#2 Posted by TheFlash4740 (1263 posts) - - Show Bio

Yea he's used it more than once. Basically everytime he goes lightspeed and hits something. It's and IMP

#3 Posted by IamV (107 posts) - - Show Bio

I read somewhere that flash had troubles IMPing his way out of a GL construct, is that true?

#4 Posted by Video_Martian (5645 posts) - - Show Bio

@TheFlash4740 said:

Yea he's used it more than once. Basically everytime he goes lightspeed and hits something. It's and IMP
#5 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio

Flash never uses this attack, its a an illusory troll tactic Flash incorporates to see which readers know science. 

Moderator
#6 Posted by cattlebattle (12579 posts) - - Show Bio
@SC said:
  its a an illusory troll tactic Flash incorporates to see which readers know science. 
Thats most of Flashes arsenal for the most part....that and dues ex machina
#7 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

Flash never uses this attack, its a an illusory troll tactic Flash incorporates to see which readers know science.

Speed force is outside of science.

#8 Posted by Mercy_ (92444 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

Flash never uses this attack, its a an illusory troll tactic Flash incorporates to see which readers know science.

winnnnnn

Moderator
#9 Posted by Mercy_ (92444 posts) - - Show Bio

@mr.obvious: Please don't bump year old threads just to quote something that's already been said.

Moderator
#10 Posted by BlackArmor (6134 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

its a an illusory troll tactic Flash incorporates to see which readers know science.

This describes almost everything in comics as a whole.....

#11 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam:  Erm, science isn't a realm, its a tool, so nothing can be outside of science. Am I mistaken in thinking that you meant to say that the speed force operates in such a way that science in reality and science in he fictional narrative sense has not been able to be applied to the speed force in any real manner?    
 
 
@BlackArmor:  Exactly. So an autobiography comic about a normal person that does normal things isn't reality, because its fiction, but it can be very realistic. Now incorporating that that normal person is a "mutant" that has some abnormal advantage that allows them to better function as a vigilante more than most, see, that can still be realistic, since realistic is a relative term, not an absolute term used when describing reality. Now on the relativity scale, a writer thinking that if a character flies in space faster than light, it might be more realistic to have them enter say hyperspace? Where space and time operate differently, because if its believed that if something with mass is traveling up to the speed of light and faster, its mass is exponentially increasing. So if a writer goes hey? Flash can travel up to and faster than light with the speedforce, rather than treat it like say hyperspace, they might think - lets have him punch with infinite mass? Which sort of sounds like a common sense argument? Until hopefully they realize what infinite mass is, and the infinite energy required to get infinite mass. So you know, there are creative ways to explain how such things could make sense, like maybe the speedforce is a medium that layers over and is connected to an adjacent reality or sort where the laws of physics are vastly different and that Flash may be practicing a form of reality warping with his speed and the speedforce, or we can just dismiss as the writers ideas on this creative aspect of the character is less bothered about such things and thus not as realistic as say the examples I gave earlier.    
 
 
All that from a lil ol joke **grin**
Moderator
#12 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

@AweSam: Erm, science isn't a realm, its a tool, so nothing can be outside of science. Am I mistaken in thinking that you meant to say that the speed force operates in such a way that science in reality and science in he fictional narrative sense has not been able to be applied to the speed force in any real manner?

When I said that, I meant the speed force is something that can't understood. It'll contradict anything science has to prove.

#13 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam said:

When I said that, I meant the speed force is something that can't understood. It'll contradict anything science has to prove.

 
Oh right? Sort of how like the Earth being round contradicted anything science has to prove? As opposed to what I thought you were implying about people applying science simply not knowing? 
Moderator
#14 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

@AweSam said:

When I said that, I meant the speed force is something that can't understood. It'll contradict anything science has to prove.

Oh right? Sort of how like the Earth being round contradicted anything science has to prove? As opposed to what I thought you were implying about people applying science simply not knowing?

...I don't think you understand where I'm getting at.

#15 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam:  Alternatively I do not think you are quite making your point. lol Something can't contradict science unless one doesn't know what science is, or is applying the term incorrectly. A person can be contradicted, a theory can be contradicted, a persons idea of what science is can be contradicted, but science can not.    
Moderator
#16 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC: That's not actually what I said. Reread it.

#17 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam: Like this? " Speed force is outside of science." - You didn't say this? 
Moderator
#18 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC: I said reread, not copy and paste.

#19 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam:  Yikes, you almost sound like you don't want to discuss this lol. I am sorry I am not telepathic and magically know what you mean, and only address what you do write? See if someone says that something is outside of science, I can only assume that they do not know what science is. When you said this? "I meant the speed force is something that can't understood." Did you mean "I meant the speed force is something that can't be understood." Then again, since its fictional its at the writers discretion if it can be understood or not. So its something that can be understood. If its not understood, its not because science can't understand it since science is a tool, since science isn't a scientist. 
 
Or I mean, we could just have infinity replies telling each other to reread what we said right?    
Moderator
#20 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC: Science is a tool used to understand. The speed force can't be understood, it's not just fictional, but it goes against what we understand using science. You associated it with science.

#21 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam said:

@SC: Science is a tool used to understand. The speed force can't be understood, it's not just fictional, but it goes against what we understand using science. You associated it with science.

What is understood is not static, but relative. So to claim that speed force can't be understood is an argument from ignorance or argumentum ad ignorantiam. Take your pick. The proper form is to say that one may not understand currently something even with the use of science. Which is something astoundingly, and significantly, and vastly different from saying that something can not be understood. Something going against what we understand using science is also relative, because one persons understand of science or what we understand from it, may be poor compared to another persons understanding. So in a subjective sense it could go against what a person understandings but not an objective sense. Similar to how there is a Flat Earth society that endorses the idea that the Earth is flat. So its flawed to associate it with science. Which is why your quoting of me baffles me. 
Moderator
#22 Posted by AweSam (7371 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

@AweSam said:

@SC: Science is a tool used to understand. The speed force can't be understood, it's not just fictional, but it goes against what we understand using science. You associated it with science.

What is understood is not static, but relative. So to claim that speed force can't be understood is an argument from ignorance or argumentum ad ignorantiam. Take your pick. The proper form is to say that one may not understand currently something even with the use of science. Which is something astoundingly, and significantly, and vastly different from saying that something can not be understood. Something going against what we understand using science is also relative, because one persons understand of science or what we understand from it, may be poor compared to another persons understanding. So in a subjective sense it could go against what a person understandings but not an objective sense. Similar to how there is a Flat Earth society that endorses the idea that the Earth is flat. So its flawed to associate it with science. Which is why your quoting of me baffles me.

Not really. The speed force was put together with no scientific knowledge of any sort. Can't be understood because it makes no sense. You're counter-arguing what I'm saying because you're looking for a debate. That makes you look ignorant because you're implying there's an understanding to how it works. Also, the whole flat Earth argument is entirely irrelevant, I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

#23 Posted by SC (12675 posts) - - Show Bio
@AweSam said:

Not really. The speed force was put together with no scientific knowledge of any sort. Can't be understood because it makes no sense. You're counter-arguing what I'm saying because you're looking for a debate. That makes you look ignorant because you're implying there's an understanding to how it works. Also, the whole flat Earth argument is entirely irrelevant, I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

 
Just because something isn't put together with scientific knowledge doesn't mean that science can't be applied to it. Why do you think it doesn't make sense? In any case that you think it doesn't, and therefore can't be understood is again an argument from ignorance. I am merely offering my reasoning when you, remember, if you can't, I think you are you and not that person over there, you, challenged my post. If you know, I was looking for a debate I would go and find one and not wait for someone to quote me. I look ignorant, not based on actually having an absence of knowledge, but just by and your standards and understanding, implying? Implying lol, that there is an understanding to how it works? I look ignorant because of an implication? Does that mean you sound ignorant because you accuse me of being ignorant merely on an implication of knowledge that according to your understanding and argument of ignorance? The claim of your ignorance justifiable because its an odd turn to label someone ignorant for an implication of knowledge. I mean you could just say that I am wrong and explain why and how. Unless its defensiveness? For claiming your argument was argument from ignorant? Yikes I hope you don't Think I was saying you were ignorant.  If so I apologize if you are offended?  
 
An argument from ignorance is when a person claims something can't be understood or doesn't make sense, based on their own subjective viewpoint but applying it as an objective stance. So ironically your claim that my Flat Earth argument (its more of a comparison point) is irrelevant is another argument from ignorance. If you do not know why its relevant, why not just ask why I bring it up instead of assuming that it isn't relevant? So its relevant because your argument is a well known fallacious argument applying many times though out history. 
Moderator
#24 Posted by Video_Martian (5645 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC: Yeah, to be honest, I've only seen The Flash (Wally West) use the infinite mass punch attack at least once, I do admit that some users bring up this IMP attack in battle forums just to make Wally seem unbeatable or something, despite the fact he rarely uses it in the comics :P

@Mercy_: So we're not allowed to do that on this site? If not, then I promise I won't do it again.

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.