• 65 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

According to the first comic, Superman was sent with a rocket/spaceship to Earth. This happened when he was three years old. Over time, the origin story changed a little, but their core remained the same. A closer look reveals that the story has some weaknesses.

______________________________________________________________________________________

To clarify one thing: I am well aware that this is a comic. It's not about to stir things up or to make Superman implausible. In comic books everything is possible; suspension of disbelief, etc.

However, it´s never wrong to do some things more believable or realistic. Sometimes realism helps to be able to better identify with the comic book character or it helps to make the told story more interesting. But realism does not mean that everything has to work in reality. Science fiction is the main factor for good superhero stories. The main thing is that the science fiction elements are believable or logical in the fictional world.

______________________________________________________________________________________

The weaknesses of Superman's origin story

1. Distance: The nearest star is Proxima Centaurie, 4.2 light years away from Earth. The nearest large galaxy is Andromeda Nebula, around 2.5 million light years away. Super-Earth Gliese with the catalog number 1214b is about 40 light years away from Earth and orbits a sun in the constellation Ophiuchus. One light year is 9.46 trillion km. The speed of light is 300,000 km/s. If a spaceship could fly at the speed of light, then it would take ...

... 4.2 years to Proxima Centaurie,

... 2.5 million years to Andromeda Nebula,

... 40 years to Earth Gliese.

According to the Green Lantern Corps, Krypton is 50 light years away from Earth. With speed ​​of light, the spaceship would take 50 years. Even at twice the speed of light, the spacecraft would take 25 years. And now calculate how much times the speed of light would be necessary to take only 3 years for this route. Besides the fact that huge amounts of energy would be needed to reach the speed of light, what about maneuvering and throttling of speed or about free-floating or flying matter in space? The spacecraft may be made of a very resistant material, but at the speed of light there is no protection. Also a spaceship with an energetic shield would require a lot of energy and would be destroyed or thrown from the trajectory. Only the enormous G-forces inside the spaceship could be avoided by a special technology.

2. The age of the child: If the child was sent to Earth at the age of three years, then his stepparent would have adopted a 53 years old man; unless one uses Einstein's time dilation, then his parents would have been dead (twin paradox), or they were either not even born at the time of the journey or still been children, depending on how long the journey took. In addition, a three year old child would already be able to speak, in this case it would be the kryptonian language. Can american parents teach an alien three year old an earthly language? O.K. the age of the child has changed. In Man of Steel, the child was a suckling. (I wanted to mention it anyway.)

Solutions

1. A portal, an artificial wormhole: The spaceship would only be drawn or brought to Earth. That would be faster and safer. But it does not sound believable.

2. Teleportation without receiver: The spaceship could appear at any point in space. A solution, but not spectacular and even more unbelievable.

3. Another dimension: Krypton´s universe would be very close. A stone's throw for the spaceship. Believable? Not at all.

4. Long journey: The speed of the spaceship is far below the speed of light. It takes centuries or even millennia until it reaches the Earth. Before the spaceship is sent, the mankind is still in the median age or antiquity. The advanced kryptonian technology ensures that the baby can neither age nor starve. (That´s my favorite.)

What do you think?

Does Superman´s origin story need a change?

PS: Sorry if my english is faulty, I´m german.

#2 Posted by UltimateSMfan (1406 posts) - - Show Bio

I think In the new 52 his ship traveled through a wormhole to earth much like it did in Man of Steel. And even if it didn't I think relativity would be a factor, also new 52 kal was some months old when he was sent to earth.

#3 Edited by SanoHibiki (1521 posts) - - Show Bio

Well, I always thought that Kal’s ship leave Krypton’s atmosphere, open wormhole in space, fly through it, appears in Solar system and then fly to Earth. Kind of like in MoS.

P.S. Something similar I read in MoS novelization. After Zod’s trial Lara mused what Kal would find on Earth, since between moment when his ship entered wormhole in Krypton system and moment when it released from it somewhere near Jupiter, in real time it would take nearly 2 thousand years.

#4 Edited by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

In many origin stories, Superman's ship travels through a wormhole from Krypton to Earth thus accounting for baby Kal-El staying a baby or not aging that much along with explaining how Kal-El's ship covered the vast distance between Krypton and Earth. There problem solved.

#5 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

In many origin stories, Superman's ship travels through a wormhole from Krypton to Earth thus accounting for baby Kal-El staying a baby or not aging that much along with explaining how Kal-El's ship covered the vast distance between Krypton and Earth. There problem solved.

Are they natural or artificial wormholes?

#6 Posted by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

In many origin stories, Superman's ship travels through a wormhole from Krypton to Earth thus accounting for baby Kal-El staying a baby or not aging that much along with explaining how Kal-El's ship covered the vast distance between Krypton and Earth. There problem solved.

Are they natural or artificial wormholes?

Artificially generated by the ship usually.

#7 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

In many origin stories, Superman's ship travels through a wormhole from Krypton to Earth thus accounting for baby Kal-El staying a baby or not aging that much along with explaining how Kal-El's ship covered the vast distance between Krypton and Earth. There problem solved.

Are they natural or artificial wormholes?

Artificially generated by the ship usually.

Does not sound realistic. The spaceship would produce more energy than a dying star with more than 4 solar masses. What do you think about my point 4: Long journey?

#8 Posted by toplel (906 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

Does not sound realistic.

I guess a dude benching the Earth sounds realistic, right? The amount of energy that Superman uses is more than the amount which reaches Earth. He should be blind considering the extreme heat generated by his eyes would evaporate the tear film. Stop trying to make sense of this.

#9 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@toplel said:

@zardu said:

Does not sound realistic.

I guess a dude benching the Earth sounds realistic, right? The amount of energy that Superman uses is more than the amount which reaches Earth. He should be blind considering the extreme heat generated by his eyes would evaporate the tear film. Stop trying to make sense of this.

Superman is known to be overpowerd. And as for the eyes: he is an alien and his body tissue may be different than ours. Moreover, it would be better if he wouldn´t shoot laser beams from his eyes, but uses the space energy to heat certain areas telekinetically. There are many things that should be changed.

#10 Posted by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu: Superman's a super powered alien sent from a scientifically and technologically advanced species. Realism goes out the window. Don't try and make sense of it as it's more enjoyable if you don't place exact scientific laws on the events.

#11 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@zardu: Superman's a super powered alien sent from a scientifically and technologically advanced species. Realism goes out the window. Don't try and make sense of it as it's more enjoyable if you don't place exact scientific laws on the events.

Why not, if it works?

Physicists have dealt with the issue. Today it says: Krypton is bigger than Earth. Thus, the gravity is stronger. Due to the lower gravity on Earth, Superman is stronger, because heavy objects weigh less on Earth than on Krypton. What's wrong with it?

#12 Posted by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

@zardu: Superman's a super powered alien sent from a scientifically and technologically advanced species. Realism goes out the window. Don't try and make sense of it as it's more enjoyable if you don't place exact scientific laws on the events.

Why not, if it works?

Physicists have dealt with the issue. Today it says: Krypton is bigger than Earth. Thus, the gravity is stronger. Due to the lower gravity on Earth, Superman is stronger, because heavy objects weigh less on Earth than on Krypton. What's wrong with it?

Don't try and make scientific sense of things all the time. Stuff like this works because it's fairly basic science. But the nature of wormholes not making sense in real life shouldn't be quibbled with by scientific laws.

#13 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

@zardu: Superman's a super powered alien sent from a scientifically and technologically advanced species. Realism goes out the window. Don't try and make sense of it as it's more enjoyable if you don't place exact scientific laws on the events.

Why not, if it works?

Physicists have dealt with the issue. Today it says: Krypton is bigger than Earth. Thus, the gravity is stronger. Due to the lower gravity on Earth, Superman is stronger, because heavy objects weigh less on Earth than on Krypton. What's wrong with it?

Don't try and make scientific sense of things all the time. Stuff like this works because it's fairly basic science. But the nature of wormholes not making sense in real life shouldn't be quibbled with by scientific laws.

Wormholes were invented by science. Books, films, and comics have used this invention for themselves.

I think it's better if the spaceship is flying far below the speed of light. Krypton doesn´t need to be 50 light years away. The spaceship takes centuries or even millennia until it reaches the Earth. Before the spacecraft is sent, the mankind is still in the median age or antiquity. The advanced kryptonian technology ensures that the baby can neither age nor starve.

Sounds kind of more comprehensible than the production of a wormhole.

#14 Edited by Dernman (14954 posts) - - Show Bio

Heh make something more real by replacing one fake thing with another fake thing.

#15 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@dernman said:

Heh make something more real by replacing one fake thing with another fake thing.

Then make a suggestion for a real thing.

#16 Posted by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@dernman said:

Heh make something more real by replacing one fake thing with another fake thing.

Then make a suggestion for a real thing.

Why do we need to make a suggestion about how Kal-El's ship got to Earth in a fictional medium that is about people bending steel, flying and doing other stuff that flips the bird to the law of physics? Can you not see the fallacies in your argument?

#17 Posted by YourNeighborhoodComicGeek (20146 posts) - - Show Bio

Guys.

Guys.

It's comic books.

#18 Posted by THEOCITYLEGEND (1200 posts) - - Show Bio

When you apply logic to comics nothing makes sense, you are supposed to just shut off your brain and enjoy the story lol.

#19 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@dernman said:

Heh make something more real by replacing one fake thing with another fake thing.

Then make a suggestion for a real thing.

Why do we need to make a suggestion about how Kal-El's ship got to Earth in a fictional medium that is about people bending steel, flying and doing other stuff that flips the bird to the law of physics? Can you not see the fallacies in your argument?

You have misunderstood my post. That was just a counterargument to the comment of dernman.

As I stated before, I am aware that there is a fictionale/comic world. However, in my opinion, the elements should be logical and comprehensible also in a fictional world.

#20 Edited by Dernman (14954 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@dernman said:

Heh make something more real by replacing one fake thing with another fake thing.

Then make a suggestion for a real thing.

Why do we need to make a suggestion about how Kal-El's ship got to Earth in a fictional medium that is about people bending steel, flying and doing other stuff that flips the bird to the law of physics? Can you not see the fallacies in your argument?

You have misunderstood my post. That was just a counterargument to the comment of dernman.

As I stated before, I am aware that there is a fictionale/comic world. However, in my opinion, the elements should be logical and comprehensible also in a fictional world.

Which shows that you misunderstood our posts. Replacing something fake with something also fake really isn't more logical or real. I don't find telekinetically heating something up any more real than storing solar energy and releasing it. I don't find creating a mini wormhole for travel any less real than the suggestions you came up with.

It's fiction so we enjoy the laws of physics they set up for that universe.

#21 Edited by toplel (906 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

However, in my opinion, the elements should be logical and comprehensible also in a fictional world.

Depends on the fictional world. Cape comics are probably among the most batshit insane universes in existence. Their very appeal is people punching the very fabric of space time and juggling planets (exaggerated, I know, but you get the point). This is one universe which is not supposed to be logical. Making it so takes away the appeal.

#22 Edited by RDClip (1129 posts) - - Show Bio

Superman's ship made a wormhole to travel to earth in weeks/months. If you want to read a book where the trip took longer for want of a wormhole, read Power Girl's origin.

#23 Posted by Reactor (2516 posts) - - Show Bio

Anyone else wonder why no other superheroes come under such nonsensical scrutiny as Superman? Seriously, antics over wormhole vs ftl, and the relativity via physics and such? Why are you even reading comics if you want a physics-illustrated class?

#24 Posted by w0nd (3264 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

In many origin stories, Superman's ship travels through a wormhole from Krypton to Earth thus accounting for baby Kal-El staying a baby or not aging that much along with explaining how Kal-El's ship covered the vast distance between Krypton and Earth. There problem solved.

Are they natural or artificial wormholes?

Artificially generated by the ship usually.

Does not sound realistic. The spaceship would produce more energy than a dying star with more than 4 solar masses. What do you think about my point 4: Long journey?

Meh who's to say what kind of technology they have :) not like you can very well go ask them

#25 Posted by Black_Arrow (2904 posts) - - Show Bio

For me they used Supended animation in the baby because of that he didnt starve and he didnt age

#26 Edited by Jake Fury (18389 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm sure in at least a couple of stories he was in suspended animation or something. In the new 52 Supergirl was already a teenager when she left Krypton.

#27 Edited by Wolfrazer (6468 posts) - - Show Bio

Jor-El is all that needs to be said.

#28 Edited by lightsout (1827 posts) - - Show Bio

I was under the impression that the worm-hole has been official for a while. That it was near Krypton (that Jor-El knew this) and it dumped out near earth - not much time passed.

And according to N52, Krypton is 28ly away (since Superman was able to witness it's destruction when he was 28, when the light reached earth).

#29 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@reactor said:

Anyone else wonder why no other superheroes come under such nonsensical scrutiny as Superman? Seriously, antics over wormhole vs ftl, and the relativity via physics and such? Why are you even reading comics if you want a physics-illustrated class?

Oh, no: also Batman, Hulk, Spiderman and Ironman are discussed. Physics-illustrated class? You missed the point. I do not read comics (but I hope that I am not disqualified to express my opinion). One don´t need to be a fan or an expert, to discuss this topic. But I do not understand why fictive worlds should not maintain logical elements. It changes neither the superhero nor the stories. It all remain fictional, but at least explainable and more comprehensible.

#30 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@toplel said:

@zardu said:

However, in my opinion, the elements should be logical and comprehensible also in a fictional world.

Depends on the fictional world. Cape comics are probably among the most batshit insane universes in existence. Their very appeal is people punching the very fabric of space time and juggling planets (exaggerated, I know, but you get the point). This is one universe which is not supposed to be logical. Making it so takes away the appeal.

If Superman waived a wormhole, then no one wants to read the comics? Remember: In the original story, Superman came to Earth in a rocket. No wormhole. He could not even fly. And now everything is going to end, when he travels without a wormhole?

#31 Edited by toplel (906 posts) - - Show Bio

If you're calling the creation of wormholes illogical, you should do the same with every detail of the story. You can't choose to apply the laws on things you wish and leave others alone. Besides, even changing it to your preferred alternative doesn't really affect the story; its mostly inconsequential. Doing so would make someone else question why they didn't use wormholes.

#32 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@toplel said:

If you're calling the creation of wormholes illogical, you should do the same with every detail of the story. You can't choose to apply the laws on things you wish and leave others alone. Besides, even changing it to your preferred alternative doesn't really affect the story; its mostly inconsequential. Doing so would make someone else question why they didn't use wormholes.

Watch this:

#33 Posted by toplel (906 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu: They're attempting to explain his powers with science, mostly physics (at least in the first 10 minutes I watched). None of it actually works. There are a lot of 'ifs'; assumptions made to be able to explain his powers with actual science. Its akin to the 'spherical cow' model. Don't take it too seriously.

#34 Edited by MatteoPG (1927 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

#35 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@matteopg said:

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

"it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out." Just my opinion.

#36 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@toplel said:

@zardu: They're attempting to explain his powers with science, mostly physics (at least in the first 10 minutes I watched). None of it actually works. There are a lot of 'ifs'; assumptions made to be able to explain his powers with actual science. Its akin to the 'spherical cow' model. Don't take it too seriously.

I do not take it too seriously. A few things sound plausible, others not. But I find it interesting that there are possible explanations.

#37 Edited by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

This Zardu guy is always picking random problems of his choosing with Superman whether it's his origin, his costume or his powers. Nothing new here as per usual in that regard.

#38 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

This Zardu guy is always picking random problems of his choosing with Superman whether it's his origin, his costume or his powers. Nothing new here as per usual in that regard.

Well, it´s a forum.

I just want to talk objectively about certain topics with other users. I'm interested in the topic of alien space travel and super powers. My intent is not to denigrate Superman or other Superheroes. It's fun to change or improve things (even if it is only for myself). That´s all.

#39 Posted by MatteoPG (1927 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

"it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out." Just my opinion.

Why are you quoting me? "Initial rules it set out" means that kryptonian technology defies a lot of our knowledge of physics, and the story stays true to that. I don't see how you quoting my rebuttal of your position constitues a rebuttal.

#40 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@matteopg said:

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

"it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out." Just my opinion.

Why are you quoting me? "Initial rules it set out" means that kryptonian technology defies a lot of our knowledge of physics, and the story stays true to that. I don't see how you quoting my rebuttal of your position constitues a rebuttal.

I was referring to my own argument:

"But realism does not mean that everything has to work in reality. Science fiction is the main factor for good superhero stories. The main thing is that the science fiction elements are logical, logical in the fictional world."

If the rules it set out do not even work in the comic, then you have to make changes. This is also the reason why Superman's origin story was constantly changed: Rocket/Spaceship, Speed of light/Wormholes ect.

#41 Posted by MatteoPG (1927 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

"it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out." Just my opinion.

Why are you quoting me? "Initial rules it set out" means that kryptonian technology defies a lot of our knowledge of physics, and the story stays true to that. I don't see how you quoting my rebuttal of your position constitues a rebuttal.

I was referring to my own argument:

"But realism does not mean that everything has to work in reality. Science fiction is the main factor for good superhero stories. The main thing is that the science fiction elements are logical, logical in the fictional world."

If the rules it set out do not even work in the comic, then you have to make changes. This is also the reason why Superman's origin story was constantly changed: Rocket/Spaceship, Speed of light/Wormholes ect.

Ok, then let's try this again. What do you think is self-contradictory or inconsistent about the Superman origin story?

#42 Posted by Lvenger (19256 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

This Zardu guy is always picking random problems of his choosing with Superman whether it's his origin, his costume or his powers. Nothing new here as per usual in that regard.

Well, it´s a forum.

I just want to talk objectively about certain topics with other users. I'm interested in the topic of alien space travel and super powers. My intent is not to denigrate Superman or other Superheroes. It's fun to change or improve things (even if it is only for myself). That´s all.

When you consistently make threads like this, it gives you a certain reputation and appearance. Given that you try and make sense of fictional events that contradict realistic laws of physics, you look at the notion of comic books too seriously when they're far from serious about physical laws at all.

#43 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@zardu said:

@lvenger said:

This Zardu guy is always picking random problems of his choosing with Superman whether it's his origin, his costume or his powers. Nothing new here as per usual in that regard.

Well, it´s a forum.

I just want to talk objectively about certain topics with other users. I'm interested in the topic of alien space travel and super powers. My intent is not to denigrate Superman or other Superheroes. It's fun to change or improve things (even if it is only for myself). That´s all.

When you consistently make threads like this, it gives you a certain reputation and appearance. Given that you try and make sense of fictional events that contradict realistic laws of physics, you look at the notion of comic books too seriously when they're far from serious about physical laws at all.

Not at all: Everything adapts to the time and the current state of knowledge. In the first comic book edition, Superman came to Earth in a rocket. Then with a spaceship, first it flew with the speed of light, then through a wormhole. All of these changes are the result of trying to make things more believable and understandable.

The point is not to make something 100% scientifically explainable, that would be nonsense. My concern is about combining science and fiction together. One can invent energies, universes, and much more. The main thing is that it sounds comprehensible. Example: Iron Man accelerated in a fraction of a second to supersonic speed. The G-forces do not affect him. This is illogical. But if he had an energy in his suit that protects him from the G-forces, it would be logical and comprehensible, although there is no such energie. This is science fiction.

#44 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@matteopg said:

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

I don't get your argument... yes, a story should be logical, in the sense that it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out. Superman's alien origin is there to say "you can't explain with today's standard how stuff like this is done". A fictional story doesn't need to make sense with the real world, but only itside itself.

It's like saying that Thor couldn't cast thunder because it's not like there are always clouds with the sufficient potential around. That is magic, or better, very weird technology. And kryptonian technology was so advanced that we can't fathom its possibilities.

I don't see the problem. And it's not like explaining the logic would ruin the story for me because I'm a poor blind comic book fan. It's just that you could apply this reasoning to every fictional universe and it would be equally pointless.

"it should maintain an internal consintency with the initial rules it set out." Just my opinion.

Why are you quoting me? "Initial rules it set out" means that kryptonian technology defies a lot of our knowledge of physics, and the story stays true to that. I don't see how you quoting my rebuttal of your position constitues a rebuttal.

I was referring to my own argument:

"But realism does not mean that everything has to work in reality. Science fiction is the main factor for good superhero stories. The main thing is that the science fiction elements are logical, logical in the fictional world."

If the rules it set out do not even work in the comic, then you have to make changes. This is also the reason why Superman's origin story was constantly changed: Rocket/Spaceship, Speed of light/Wormholes ect.

Ok, then let's try this again. What do you think is self-contradictory or inconsistent about the Superman origin story?

Absolutely nothing. I wrote about weaknesses, not contradictions.

#45 Posted by MatteoPG (1927 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu: Yes, but you just called them weaknesses, while actually treating them like they are flaws. A flaw in a story is only that if it lacks internal logic or a place in the plot.

Also, you were the one who argued the "improbability" of forming a wormhole, not me. I was just pointing out that you can't just decide that it constitutes a weak point if it sticks to the logic of the story. You're just going back on what you said.

#46 Posted by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@matteopg said:

@zardu: Yes, but you just called them weaknesses, while actually treating them like they are flaws. A flaw in a story is only that if it lacks internal logic or a place in the plot.

Also, you were the one who argued the "improbability" of forming a wormhole, not me. I was just pointing out that you can't just decide that it constitutes a weak point if it sticks to the logic of the story. You're just going back on what you said.

There are always things that sound good in the comics, but not even convince in the fictional world. We know that they are kid stuff, colorful suits and big words. But one ignores it because one like to read comics. And that's fine. However, I am someone who would also like to have a certain level of comprehensibility and logic in the fictional world of comics; comic-science-fiction, so to speak. Whether fantasy like "The Lord of the Rings" or superheroes in comic books: The elements of each story must be coherent and logically, they have to work; and above all, they have to convince in both worlds (fiction and reality).

For me a spaceship that has an advanced alien drive and travels long through space is more convincing than a spaceship traveling at the multible speed of light or forming an artificial wormhole.

#47 Posted by WIshIWasSuperman (1351 posts) - - Show Bio

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

@zardu: Yes, but you just called them weaknesses, while actually treating them like they are flaws. A flaw in a story is only that if it lacks internal logic or a place in the plot.

Also, you were the one who argued the "improbability" of forming a wormhole, not me. I was just pointing out that you can't just decide that it constitutes a weak point if it sticks to the logic of the story. You're just going back on what you said.

There are always things that sound good in the comics, but not even convince in the fictional world. We know that they are kid stuff, colorful suits and big words. But one ignores it because one like to read comics. And that's fine. However, I am someone who would also like to have a certain level of comprehensibility and logic in the fictional world of comics; comic-science-fiction, so to speak. Whether fantasy like "The Lord of the Rings" or superheroes in comic books: The elements of each story must be coherent and logically, they have to work; and above all, they have to convince in both worlds (fiction and reality).

For me a spaceship that has an advanced alien drive and travels long through space is more convincing than a spaceship traveling at the multible speed of light or forming an artificial wormhole.

But that right there is your problem. It's your own opinion, and while you've said you want to discuss it objectively, you're holding to your own opinion, vehemently disregarding others. For some people it's perfectly plausible within the reality of comic books for an artificial wormhole to be created by the ship as a means of transportation. For you, you're saying it's not - if I understand you correctly - because of the amount of energy expulsion required to do so. However within the realm of Superman comics, we have things like Phantom drives and the like, so it's still perfectly plausible within the story that the energy required to create a wormhole has been mastered, especially by an advanced alien race such as the Kryptonians. In fact if you were a reader (you said in an earlier post that you're not) you would learn that Kryptonian's were considered the single most technologically advanced species in the universe when Krypton was destroyed. As such why is it outside your own internal logic rules then for a wormhole or any other means not sounding "realistic"? You're own example of Iron Man fits this exact same definition - that the energy that doesn't exist in the real world DOES exist within the comic book - so therefore it is perfectly "realistic" within the confines of the story.

The problem here isn't in Superman's origin story, it's in your own bias. You have an opinion - which is fine - but you're applying that opinion as factual - which it isn't. It's only in your opinion that a wormhole isn't "realistic", because you just prefer a different explanation. There is no problem with the explanation of a wormhole within the confines of the story, and the majority of fans happily accept it. If you want to go back to the ORIGINAL story, well do this with almost any character and you'll find all sorts of scientific problems - because especially in 1938 science wasn't even a consideration, let alone understood at all by comic book writers. Since that time things have changed - pick up the New 52 Superman stories and you may be surprised to see they've given this a lot of thought.

Also you've gotten his age incorrect I might add - it's generally accepted/presented that he was an infant (, so max 2 years) when he was put aboard the ship - in some stories he aged, in others he didn't, in fact the ship is often referred to as a "birthing matrix" suggesting that he was young enough to require it for complete care similar to a newborn. Secondly Proxima Centauri is actually over 4 light years away - not 2.4 (although I realise this might have just been a typo).

#48 Posted by RideASpaceCowboy (523 posts) - - Show Bio

In the post-Crisis origin penned by John Byrne it was no an infant Kal-El but rather his "birthing matrix" which was rocketed to Earth. It's possible that the birthing matrix placed the fetus in a state of suspended animation while the rocket traveled at near-light speeds over the course of millenia or even longer.

#49 Edited by Eternal19 (2076 posts) - - Show Bio

who cares its a comic book. you are the first person that I've heard complain about this

#50 Edited by Zardu (345 posts) - - Show Bio

@wishiwassuperman said:

@zardu said:

@matteopg said:

@zardu: Yes, but you just called them weaknesses, while actually treating them like they are flaws. A flaw in a story is only that if it lacks internal logic or a place in the plot.

Also, you were the one who argued the "improbability" of forming a wormhole, not me. I was just pointing out that you can't just decide that it constitutes a weak point if it sticks to the logic of the story. You're just going back on what you said.

There are always things that sound good in the comics, but not even convince in the fictional world. We know that they are kid stuff, colorful suits and big words. But one ignores it because one like to read comics. And that's fine. However, I am someone who would also like to have a certain level of comprehensibility and logic in the fictional world of comics; comic-science-fiction, so to speak. Whether fantasy like "The Lord of the Rings" or superheroes in comic books: The elements of each story must be coherent and logically, they have to work; and above all, they have to convince in both worlds (fiction and reality).

For me a spaceship that has an advanced alien drive and travels long through space is more convincing than a spaceship traveling at the multible speed of light or forming an artificial wormhole.

But that right there is your problem. It's your own opinion, and while you've said you want to discuss it objectively, you're holding to your own opinion, vehemently disregarding others.

I do not disregards the opinions of others. I have my own opinion and explain my point. Moreover, I explain why some things are not comprehensible. Here is an excerpt from my text of this thread:

To clarify one thing: I am well aware that this is a comic. It's not about to stir things up or to make Superman implausible. In comic books everything is possible; suspension of disbelief, etc.

In the next section I explain what the reason of my topic is:

However, it´s never wrong to do some things more believable or realistic. Sometimes realism helps to be able to better identify with the comic book character or it helps to make the told story more interesting. But realism does not mean that everything has to work in reality. Science fiction is the main factor for good superhero stories. The main thing is that the science fiction elements are believable or logical in the fictional world.

I respect and appreciate different opinions. However, what I do not like is when I will only be accepted if I have the same opinion as the others. Different opinions are no reason for disrespect.

For some people it's perfectly plausible within the reality of comic books for an artificial wormhole to be created by the ship as a means of transportation. For you, you're saying it's not - if I understand you correctly - because of the amount of energy expulsion required to do so. However within the realm of Superman comics, we have things like Phantom drives and the like, so it's still perfectly plausible within the story that the energy required to create a wormhole has been mastered, especially by an advanced alien race such as the Kryptonians. In fact if you were a reader (you said in an earlier post that you're not) you would learn that Kryptonian's were considered the single most technologically advanced species in the universe when Krypton was destroyed. As such why is it outside your own internal logic rules then for a wormhole or any other means not sounding "realistic"? You're own example of Iron Man fits this exact same definition - that the energy that doesn't exist in the real world DOES exist within the comic book - so therefore it is perfectly "realistic" within the confines of the story.

A wormhole is the merger of two black holes. A black hole is an astronomical object whose gravitaion is so strong that it sucks everything into itself; nothing can escape, not even light. According to the wormhole theory, two black holes have to meet and the ends must be connected. The problem is: when the spaceship formed a black hole, it is sucked into the hole and is either purely destroyed or captured. The spacecraft would have first to create the second hole near the Earth and the first hole near Krypton. The first hole would be on target faster than the spaceship, and in addition, the holes would be so large that they can meet within 50 light years. Both holes suck inward. How can the spaceship leave the other hole?

The problem here isn't in Superman's origin story, it's in your own bias. You have an opinion - which is fine - but you're applying that opinion as factual - which it isn't. It's only in your opinion that a wormhole isn't "realistic", because you just prefer a different explanation. There is no problem with the explanation of a wormhole within the confines of the story, and the majority of fans happily accept it. If you want to go back to the ORIGINAL story, well do this with almost any character and you'll find all sorts of scientific problems - because especially in 1938 science wasn't even a consideration, let alone understood at all by comic book writers. Since that time things have changed - pick up the New 52 Superman stories and you may be surprised to see they've given this a lot of thought.

If my view of things leads to nothing, then what about the comic book authors? Why was Superman's origin story so many times changed? The authors have the same intentions as me.

Also you've gotten his age incorrect I might add - it's generally accepted/presented that he was an infant (, so max 2 years) when he was put aboard the ship - in some stories he aged, in others he didn't, in fact the ship is often referred to as a "birthing matrix" suggesting that he was young enough to require it for complete care similar to a newborn. Secondly Proxima Centauri is actually over 4 light years away - not 2.4 (although I realise this might have just been a typo).

Why the nano suit of Superman? Why the birthing matrix? The reason for this changes lies in the attempt to make things more comprehensible/believable. The difference between the comic book authors and me is: comic book authors may change.

Thanks for the light years correction. Yes, it was a typo:

Above distance: 2.4 light years

Below travel time: 4.2 years