zeo

I have no problems with you picking up the story and changing it... It's a cool character and deserves a chance to be written about even if not in the WG universe.

http://io9.com/392903/first-pics-of-cho ... ster-roshi

Well, don't have time to post the whole thing in detail but here are the highlights... Age would have been about 22 when he completed the unit by defeating and assimilating components from the other prototype units. The completed unit would have an enhanced Tri-CM that would contain a temporal singularity that would channel its energy to 12 amplifiers throughout the armor that would replace the 8 temporal field generators. Temporal Field would work with the normal bio-boost power system and increase it to the point that TG would have the strength of 400 men and virtually limitless stamina since he drew energy faster than he uses it up. Temporal energy could be used through head beam to either boost it to 20x normal or channel a focused beam of temporal energy that would manipulate the flow of time for target, meaning he could make them go fast forward or go in reverse or put them into stasis. Pressure Cannon is still 4x but temporal energy can be channeled to the point it produces an Entropy Cannon, basically everything it hits decays instantly to dust/subatomic particles. Mega Smashers are boosted to a full 2x but temporal energy further disrupts target mass and spreads them across the whole of time even as the smasher disintegrates them. So even targets resistant to that level of mega smasher would still get destroyed unless they are also able to resist getting spread across time. Speed, temporal enhancement becomes perminent so he can run up to about 6000 MPH and fly up to 7500 MPH. Hyper Time still present and is enhanced with hyper time perception that allows TG to see into the past and future for up to a minute. In the extreme TG could explore possible time lines to see which choices will work and which won't. Sonic Busters are enhanced by phasing them out of phase with normal time, allowing them to be tuned past an opponent's shield or timing them to appear where TG knows the target will be, freeing him to do something else at the same time. Swords are temporal energy enhanced so they can slice through anything that can't shield against dimensional based attacks. The forward swords can be used to slice time portals into the air that TG can either jump through or use against opponents. Durability: Temporal Phasic Bio-Armor is basically indestructable unless attacked by something that can effect the flow of time such as a Zoalord Black Hole Attack but Temporal Energy allows for regeneration up to 100 times faster than normal and even if the temporal field is penetrated the armor can still withstand up to a Mega Smasher level attack before taking damage. Temporal Energy can be focused into a multiphasic shield similar to the Gigantic's Barrier. Temporal Energy could also be channeled through fists and kicks to effect targets, for example time freezing someone and then switch to swords to finish them off. Or Augmenting the momentum boosters to produce 40x instead of the normal 10x momentum increase per blow. Temporal Field Matrix is enhanced to 6 dimensional fields instead of just 5 and allows TG to freely move through time and parallel time, the only danger is it is fairly easy to get lost in all the possible time lines. And if he changes anything it will only create an alternate time line.

The fight scenes should be especially over the top since the new standard equipment for the G.I. Joe team is a form fitting combat power suit that not only makes them near bullet proof but even the wimpiest of them will be bad ass fighters now. :

Uh, if Dreadnought is 25x with a Matrix... How do you get 200x for Guardian?

Think of it like your car suspension, the armor doesn't have to be right against you. Even a half inch space could add a lot of G's to how much force you can withstand by just slowing down the impact and giving your body more time to absorb the impact. IronMan was always a bit unpractical with the form fitting armor, even the scene where he tested his boots for the first time at 10% and got body slammed into the angled ceiling wall behind him should have killed him. The closest thing to realistic was when he fell through his ceiling wearing the Mark II and had to use an ice pack on his head afterward. The tank hit definitely was unrealistic. It may not have been as powerful as say one of our Ambram Tank shells, which deliver about 19 tons of pure kinetic force. But that kind of impact would liquidate a typical human body by the force alone. So even if it wasn't a direct hit he should have been seriously hurt. But he was just woozy and got right back up, not even brain bruishing. Though the armor may be flexible and could act like a skin and move with the body to act like a body spring/skin. The comic version has features like that anyway. Course IronMan doesn't run, he flies. So he avoids the whole running problem And yes, the nano-material is the wave of the future for body armor. Eventually they should have adaptive armor that can be flexible for movement and instantly harden to absorb impacts and spread the force over the body. It may also be noted the military is working on implants and genetic modifications. Like giving soldiers some of the abilities of animals to handle cold, hold breath longer, regenerate, etc. For implants DARPA got a patent for grafting metal onto bone using a laser method that allows the metal to be bonded to bone without having to heat the metal. So no damage to surrounding tissue. So future soldiers could have metal reinforced bones. Nanites in the blood could also help enhances regeneration and handling of wounds in battle further hardening future soldiers. Not to mention the onboard computers giving HUD and a level of coordination unheard of before... They really got a lot of things planned. P.S.> Frank Dux's kick was just over 72 MPH, but I'm not so sure if that was real or not since he has been investigated and his story doesn't seem 100%. He is a Martial Artist though and the speed is in line with what is possible based on performance of other martial artist. A good kicker for example can kick a soccer ball over 80 MPH and I think the record was something like 132 MPH. Similar to top throwing speed, giving some idea of peak speed a human limb can move, though doing so repeatedly does put a lot of wear and tear and why pro athletes need so many operations.

Sorry, I know I'm probably sounding rude. Don't mean to be but I think you're missing some factors that would negate your concerns. The exo-skeleton is based on the same idea as an insect's, who are also just bags of meat inside an exo-skeleton. The exo-skeleton is being designed to support the wearer. So there are five things you are assuming... 1) That they are ever going to go faster than 45 MPH 2) That the exo-skeleton won't be designed to absorb those impacts. 3) That the human body can't be accelerated to faster than normal speed without banging. 4) That the only way to make a human run faster is to make them move faster. 5) That running motion won't solve the problem because your limbs don't just stop and reverse direction when running. http://www.powerizerz.com/ Is an example of how human leg performance can be improved, add exo-muscular enhancement and a human can run a lot faster but still move limbs at the same rate. Like the difference in speed between a top woman sprinter and a top man sprinter, the legs can move at the same speed but the taller man will run significantly faster because of the longer strides. Never mind humans are capable of kicks up to 75 MPH, using just normal human strength. The exo-skeleton will also not have the wearer just flopping around inside, like a prosthesis the body will be held within like a glove, especially for high speed models. Every impact will be absorbed by the exoskeleton, including any impacts from the wearer, just like running on springs. Also human endurance isn't so frail that we can't take some impacts for at least a short period of time. Cause as of right now no one is planning any exo-armors to run any marathons, the speed boost is only for a quick dash. Just figure the normal strain at running at human speed would be virtually completely removed or nearly so. So how fast would the armor have to go before the wearer experience the same level of strain as normal running on top of that? A human body can produce 4 times the force needed to overcome our body weight, add force of gravity and every step during a run can induce over half a ton of force per running step, which your legs have to absorb. But all this force is spread along the length of your legs and back and comes virtually entirely from hitting the ground. The actual back and forth motion of your legs are free floating and they don't just stop on a dime and reverse. You limbs slow down and then accelerate in the opposite direction. The same would occur with artificially enhanced running, in fact that was in the article when they said they were following nature design and instead of powering the legs throughout the motion they would let it swing freely just like our own legs. Also consider armor technology is designed to spread impacts over as much of the body as possible, so every impact is divided by the surface area it is spread across, further weakening every impact. Add all these factors together and for a short burst at least a human can be made to run very fast, and that's all they really need.

Sure, I'll see about getting it together this weekend.

Well first the Car is bad example because your leg wasn't having force evenly applied to it as would be the case with an exo-skeleton. Second I think you are ignoring the exo-skeleton, they call it a skeleton because it will support the wearer just like our own skeleton supports us and move in synch with us. The only time you should experience impact then would be with a sudden stop. Discussing actual limits, running would not force the limbs to move faster than they normally can unless you are running faster than human reflexes would allow but human reflexes are greater than human speed. This is because our ability to run is limited by our muscle performance and air resistance, the exo-skeleton though would work like an extension of your muscles and thus make it easier to move your limbs and thus easier to over come wind resistance and to run faster. It would be like if your limbs weighed nothing, so moving them would become practically effortless and that in turn would allow you to move them faster. Take how high speed bikes perform just by adding a wind shield to reduce wind resistance for example. Same principle applies for running if you either reduce resistance or increase muscle power. So the strain on the body will simply be one of rate of acceleration and deceleration. Cause this is the present plan to make the armor move with the wearer and not for the wearer. However to go beyond this they can use Direct stimulation of the wearer muscles to over come the reflex limit and keep the limbs in synch with the wearer for even faster speeds. So I don't see a problem with them reaching fairly high speeds. Though I agree bionics would be needed to reach super fast speeds. The only concern then of yours that remains then is one from a sudden stop, which would be the natural problem with moving at high speeds. One possible solution could be simply auto locking the armor so the force of impact is spread evenly across the entire body. The impact absorbing properties of the armor could also come into play to make such sudden stops more survivable. For example crashing through a wall doesn't mean you come to an instant stop so you could survive by just breaking through and reducing your deceleration to survivable levels. The predicted 2020 armor also has auto medical systems to stop bleeding, etc on the spot. So even if hurt it could keep you going until you could get proper medical care.

Hmm, well for one thing they weren't talking about giving the wearer super speed. At least not yet... Right now they are just solving how to get the armor past 6 MPH limit by letting the limbs work more like our natural limbs. We should also clarify what is humanly possible... From http://www.forbes.com/2004/05/14/cx_mh_0514running.html So human limitations isn't so much the limit of speed of our joints but rather how we use those same materials. The Cheetah can go close to 70 MPH for example but it's tendons are the same as ours. It basically breaks down to how efficiently we can run and how much stress is actually channeled into our limbs and joints. A Cheetah for example spread the force of its running across its whole body with its spring like spine design. We may not be similarly designed but the limits of the materials we are made up of are still the same and through technology there are ways to give ourselves similar design efficiency. Like for example lets look at how the exo armors are effecting strength, it is basically amplifying the wearers strength by synching its movement with the wearer's. So the wearer experiences just the strain of say lifting 2 pounds while the armor takes the strain of lifting 200 pounds. The stress on the user's body is thus greatly reduced. Similarly the stresses of running could be reduced, for example reducing effort of the muscles means they won't be pulling and pushing against the bones as hard, making it easier to move faster. The example of the cheetah shows the joints can actually move very fast, so similar speeds should be achievable by humans if we just eliminate the strain that running normally gives us, such as grinding of joints against each other to absorb impacts, etc. Which the armor could also absorb for us and further reduce the strain of running. Add the actual mechanism of running gives us a none speed dependant way to increase our speed by simply increases the distance between each step. Since running basically involves a series of leaps. Like note the fact you have both feet off the ground while running and only take steps to continue pushing yourself forward and maintain the run. So like a kangaroo we could put less effort into every leap and still achieve faster speeds. Add that this all could be further enhanced with implants that can strengthen bones and synch wearers movement to the armor and vice versa, means we should be able to give speeds exceeding 30 MPH with relative ease and may even go up as high as 90 before we actually hit a human speed limit. But then we should have gotten to the flying armor stage of technology

Ironman wasn't using jets, he was using plasma rockets based on his repulsor technology. This is why he could use the gauntlets for both thrust and as a weapon. Remember he also used the same technology for that super missile of his that could take out an entire hillside. Each projectile was propelled by the Repulsor technology. Though in the comic he did use micro-turbines, a series of 7 of them in each boot that all combined thrust at the exhaust port at the bottom of the boot. The fuel being derived from the atmosphere with molecular sieves that extracted oxygen from the air and condensed into liquid oxygen. Scram jets provided the higher speeds and internal fuel reserves provided short space travel capability without resorting an armor specifically designed for space. As for the mobility speed problem, if you look at the standard issue 2020 page (the one not shown on the web site) it was one of the issues they stated they were going to solve soon. Basically they are giving the limbs natural freedom of movement and limiting power to just the actual push and pull movement and then let momentum run its course. This will allow the limbs to break the present 5-6 MPH limit.

Okay, will do, but just to show why I responded as I did... He did say Would you tell me that this doesn't sound like he was stating facts? Virtually every point he made was a standard anti-evolution argument based on the flaws of Darwin's original theory and did not take into account that the theory has been corrected and updated. This in my opinion was not just stating opinion but an attempt to disprove a theory based on outdated facts. Like the jab, which ignores all work scientists have put into research to prove fact from theory.The "Zero Evidence", was the just too much part for me that pushed this beyond any simple misunderstanding. Like the point about the Cambrian Explosion (another example of the specific examples he used), only applied to Darwin's original assertian that evolution was based solely on natural selection, Darwin himself expressed concern about the Cambrian Explosion for just that reason, but this is no longer the case as the modern theory is based on molecular biology and takes into account a variety of factors like environment, etc. Uhm, okay... http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2007/ap...news_11364.html

I'm sure the hundreds of scientists that debate evolution and how it works all the time probably got a good laugh from that depiction. Though it is true there are those who don't want to debate it, this however doesn't change the fact it is debated. It's the reason why we eventually came to the conclusion that Darwin's original theory was wrong but that the concept wasn't. Evidence and debate have over time refined the theory to its present Neo-Darwinian form and is why it is so widely accepted. Even with competing theories like Intelligent Design. but that is more a debate of why and how evolution happens and not a debate on whether evolution happens. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Darwinism

I believe you have responded with a misconception of what I had stated... Specifically I was not focussed on giving proofs, only generalization which is all I thought necessary to get my point across, and I have not made any serious effort here to give the empirical reasons that exist for the dominance of evolution in biology, but rather I was simply focussed mainly upon correcting the error and misconception that saying there is "zero evidence" implied. I could for example have pointed out that even many religious organizations accept evolution. For example, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes evolution as an accepted scientific theory, supported by a great body of evidence (their words, not mine). Faith & Reason Ministries is another Christian organization which accepts modern science, including evolution. In 1984 the Central Conference of American Rabbis adopted a resolution against the inclusion of creationism in school science textbooks. In 1987, the same organization adopted a resolution against the teaching of creationism or other religious dogma in public schools. Really, everyone is free to disagree with the conclusions made from the evidence but to say there is zero evidence is an insult to all the scientists who have worked on it over the last century. You may also think I was sounding too authoritive but it is a fact there is evidence that supports the theory of evolution and I did summarize my post with the statement... The last sentence specifically shows I believe that I was not giving the entire picture (I even said "Basically" before listing the general points,) just a hint of what the picture entaled, as it is one of my beliefs that everyone is fully capable of looking up the details themselves. The point of the post was not to prove Evolution but just prove that there was evidence! I could have for example pointed out that the scientific community as a whole accepts evolution as a fact, the only things in dispute is on the how it works. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gou...and-theory.html I could also make the case that someone emphatically saying there is no evidence is actually acting far more authoritarian and biased than someone pointing out that there is evidence and where you can go look for that evidence. . . Regardless, since you seem to desire clarifications of what I actually meant then I shall endeavor to more properly explain my points to avoid confusion and misinterpretation in the attached document. I would have posted the clarification as a regular post except it would have made this a mega post and only those who desire to understand what I meant need read it to get the more complete answer... Point_by_Point_Clarification.pdf Incidentally, the points I was making was in reference to what the theory of evolution actually states... And I only indicated a basic example of evidence for each part of the theory, which means to properly analyze each you would have to do a lot more than just go to the next step but rather several steps before you saw the validity of each but like I said there's a lot more and like any pile of evidence some will be more convincing than others.

Okay, just for comparison and to get some perspective... I did some math... We know from what was stated in the movie that the 2nd version of the chest Arc device could produce about 12 Gigajoules... 1 joule equals 0.737562149277 ft·lbf (foot-pound force). So 12 Gigajoules = 8850745791.324 ft-lbf. or about 4.4 Megatons of thrust if 100% of it went into propulsion. (Remember this is 60 times the energy produced by the reactors of a modern nuclear Super Carrier, which is used to push those massive ships through the water at up to over 30 knots) Though we can be sure IronMan never put the full power into thrust as that was just a measure of the full power of the Arc device, the original 3 GJ device couldn't even power the Armor for very long. Probably because even though it had a 3GJ rating it probably didn't have enough reactant material to fuel it at that power level for very long, 15 minutes according to the movie since that's about as long as it was able to power the Mark 3 armor in the final battle scene. But this does give us an idea of how much power the armor used, since it used up 3 GJ in just about 15 minutes. While the 2nd device probably had more reactant and worked more efficiently, as well as having 4 times the maximum power output. We can figure out how much thrust Iron did have though since he demonstrates this during the test phase of his armor development, with 1% being sufficient to life his weight and hover and 2.5% for a short wobbly hover flight around his garage. So we can give a base thrust per percentage of power to about 200 pounds of thrust per percent. Meaning Ironman's maximum thrust is about 20,000 pounds, not counting the additional thrust from the palm devices. So when Ironman went super sonic he was using somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000 pounds of thrust, which just happens to be about the thrust capacity of a typical Mark 2 capable jet fighter. Though considering IronMan weighs less than a Jet Fighter by several tons, then he should have been able to go much faster but a human shape isn't that aerodynamic and missiles can go a lot faster than a typical jet fighter. So not so much a suprise that the missile caught up to him, but given more time IronMan could likely outrun it and travel even faster. Anyway, for the 15 minute limit on the 3GJ Arc, means the armor was using at minimum 55 kilojoules of energy per second just for propulsion. But how efficient are the engines? Even with plasma rocket backed engines it would be a fair amount of waste energy. Which could help account for the fact 3 GJ divided by 55 KJ per second translates to ~15 hours instead of 15 minutes, if we view the 3 GJ as total energy instead of just generated energy. But the Reactor could also have been burning out, Jarvis did state it was never intended to power sustained flight. Also it was used to keep Stark alive for months and whatever energy he used to power his first Armor for the escape, so could have had significantly less energy than when he initially built it. Interesting numbers in any case, in case anyone was wondering.

Define feasable? It basically depends on whether you are considering something that would basically be an IronMan or would your definition be something as powerful as the comic book character is? Realistically we are already developing exo-armors that can give a man up to five times their normal strength. Jet Packs for one man flight have been around since the 60's, it's just they don't have the fuel to last very long (about 30-40 seconds at up to 60 MPH). But research is still developing them and recently they figured a simple change of fuel could improve them (new model uses 5 instead of 6 gallon tanks for less weight and can fly for up to 9 minutes at up to 83 MPH for about 11 mile range). Present armor technology would not allow you to survive anything close to what the IronMan armor can but present armor can allow you to withstand small arms fire and new nano technology armor will soon be out to make every soldier practically bullet proof and able to withstand small explosive munitions as well. Also concepts like polarized armor and plasma shields are also slowly becoming a reality. The present Dragonskin body armor for example can withstand a frag grenade at point blank range and repeated hits from even an AK-47 for example and future armor will be even tougher. Repulsors are based on particle beam weapon technology, which really exists. It's just it takes a lot of power to use them but if we could solve the power needs then they could become practical. Just like Rail Guns are appearing on next gen Navy ships and will replace traditional gun powder guns. Which leads to power systems, they are developing better batteries and power generating methods that could revolutionize what we could do on the go. 100 years from now we actually then have an Ironman, with a micro-fusion reactor to power it and finally make the dream a reality. Alternatively though you won't have to wait as long for a flying suit, sky divers are already working on that like the video clip from CNN I already gave. The last issue of Popular Science also has a nice article on the present state of affairs on the research leading towards our own real world IronMan. Get the issue (May) if you really want to see what they think will be standard issue for the military by 2020. And then you could imagine just how close a top of the line tech suite could give us in the not too distant future.

Since strings are basically curved up dimensions they are both infinite and finite at the same time, just like the rest of the universe. So short answer is we don't know, though there are two types of strings that are either basically nailed down with the other dimensions and those that aren't and freely move about (aka Open and Closed), and that it is basically impossible to tell without a proper perspective. Like my beam of light going into a spinning black hole, to the beam it will appear to be going in a straight light. But if we could see the light from outside the space being distorted then we would see that its path is being warped. But since we are part of space/time we can't really look from outside it and thus our perception is trapped within. It's one of the things that are expanded on in Brane Theory that the universe we know exists within a much larger universe, but we can't see it because our perception is trapped within the brane of our universe... See how this is starting to get more complicated? :wink: http://www.mkaku.org/articles/m_theory.php And wiki has fairly decent summaries on string, brane, and relativity... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

You are of course only refering to the original theory as presented by Darwin, because there is a distinction between evolution and Darwinian, like any new theory it had a lot of holes but the theory has been corrected since then. Darwin's original theory was wrong but the concept was not.. So sorry but we do have to clarify that evidence that evolution take place does exist. In addition to seeing beneficial mutations take hold and produce new species, as records of new species appearing indicate, we have evidence of previous species showing a family tree of how different species evolved from a common ancestor. Like termites and coachroaches both evolved from a common ancestor. Something proven through DNA research. Traits like having a specfic DNA that only two different species have would indicate that at some point they had a common ancestor that provided that gene to both branches of evolution. Basically the list of proof goes like this... 1) All living things have a parent/source. Showing lineage... A basic principle of evolution... Thus proving Living creatures must come from other living creatures. 2) Every generation is not the exact clones of their parents... Showing mixing of DNA to constantly provide variation is the norm... 3) Vertebrates and Invertebrates are distinctly different but yet we share DNA in common with both types... 4) Fossil records, etc all indicate the world has been in constant change and the animals of today did not always exist. Yet they share DNA with species of the past. 5) New Species are constantly appearing over time as beneficial mutations take hold and also show DNA pattern that shows they came from a parent species. So it is emphatically wrong to say there is zero evidence. Even in the human race, which hasn't changed much has evidence like two new genes that effect the brain showed up in our DNA history, extracted from old bones, etc. that coincide with major changes in our culture. Like the switch from hunting and gathering to agriculture. There is also evidence that human physical traits change over time like the common average height, etc. We even have evidence of similar species like Neadethals or that pigmy sized race they just discovered not long ago. Showing the human race had branches as well that wouldn't exist unless evolution was truly happening. So you may disagree with the evidence and/or the conclusions from the evidence but you can't deny the existence of the evidence. Especially since there is a lot more than I mentioned if we were going to list all the evidence.

Correction, though I'm sure you just misworded that question, in string theory matter and energy are viewed as the same thing and it's dimensions that are viewed curled up into strings. It's the number of strings that are important in determining what elements could exist within the universe as they allow certain patterns to exists such as what we call matter as they interact with each other and oscilate in certain patterns. Like 26 in the case of a theory with only forces (bosons), but 10 dimensions if there are both forces and matter (bosons and fermions) in the particle spectrum of the theory. Which is why it took so long for them to break it down to just 11 to get the right balance. It's because stringlets are one dimensional, since they curled up and aren't merged together like the 3 dimensions we work with normally. So as they interact with the rest of the universe they only allow for the flow of time of either forward or backwards. So in actuality strings explains why time seems to flow in one direction, and for traditional Relativity time to be explained as part of these interactions and thus why warping of space also alters the flow of time as it effects the interactions of strings within the world sheet view of the universe. It's just that in most cases when People work with string theory they are not dealing with the time aspect as that just adds another layer of complexity to the equation but instead treat time as just a universal given and instead work with how everything else interacts within it. This is why a lot of People who read up on string theory get confused when time gets brought up. But time itself is really also part of the equation and is ultimately represented by one of the extra dimensions proposed in String Theory. Just like Gravity is also represented by one of the strings, in its case it's one dimensional nature means it can either pull or push and just like time our universe has given it a specific direction and thus we have gravity. As you can see this is why they came up with strings to represent forces of nature such as time and gravity and why they seem to have polarity of direction. However, this also breaks down to our concept of time... Since a dimensional view of time still breaks down to seeing time as the ability to move just like the other dimensions gives us direction of movement. Which is why other views of time that it is really just a type of movement, in higher dimensions the next higher dimension then becomes time, etc. So for super time to exist we need a dimension that will encompass all other dimensions... A concept that truly didn't come into its own until Brane theory joined string theory, fixing our assumption that all the extra dimensions curled up into stringlets... It only gets more complicated from there though if you want to know more as even space time as a fundamental comes into question in the true nature of reality.

Hmm, I don't believe they ever clarified what happened to the artificial heart after he got the Extremis. Technically he could have regenerated his own heart, since the Extremis allows him to regenerate whole organs. But it is possible it is still there... The artificial heart was created from Tony's sentient armor when it sacrificed itself to save him, this before Ultron got involved with the remains of the sentient armor. So aside from having tech inside his body that could possibly be hacked by Ultron he's pretty safe. The base layer of his armor is now stored in his body, so he also probably doesn't have to worry about keeping it charged anymore. Though I think the nature of the Extremis means he probably got a regular human heart now.

Very nicely done.

Actually it was very simple, he used a freon canister in his old armor that was used to help regulate the armor temperature and also to help him resist fire, etc. that would otherwise cook him inside his armor. So he'd eject one of the canisters and throw it at his target, it breaks and covers the target in freon and they freeze. Course the modern Ironman can't use that trick anymore since they banned freon Next Question... What were the hip pods/discs originally for?

*bump* No takers? Okay, how about a link showing a video of a man in real life with a flying suit? http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europ ... index.html

Yes, the vector velocity determines the level of time dilation. To the traveler there would appear to be no time dilation, only when the traveler returns to their point of origin and can compare time that the time dilation becomes apparent. Basically the Twin Paradox Both exists and doesn't exist (I suggest avoiding the distinction between General and Special Relativity since its just the difference of when they were introduced since Einstein worked on the theory through his whole life and thus the theory evolved over time). Since for the traveler time flowed normally, the apparent disparity only comes about when you compare two separate time references but Relativity views time like a dimension and thus it is flexible just like the other 3 dimensions. Basically in relativity space flows according to whatever your vector velocity is at any given time. So two idential objects with two different vector velocities would experience time at different rates, even though to them they would appear to be the same. Like the light beam being shot at a spinning black hole example, from the perspective of the light beam it would continue to move in a straight line. It is only from an outside view that the warping of the light beam's path becomes apparent. Though Ryuki is right that there should be a kind of Super Time to account for all the possible time references, at least for our sensitive human brains to accept the concept without a major headache, but Relativity doesn't provide it. However, moving onto String/M Theory and a multi-dimensional view of the Universe (think 11) and it opens up the possibility that one of those extra dimensions would be for the common reference point for universal time, or Super Time as it is sometimes coined. Since these extra dimensions are curled up into stringlets the flexibility and interaction with the other dimensions is limited and thus a time reference from one of them would be closer to a universal constant. Though frankly, science hasn't really defined the true nature of time yet. So there are many debates as to what is time and how does it relate to the rest of reality. If you want to learn more about that, just stock up on asperins and anti-depresants and then feel free to have a go at it. Cause if Relativity seems weird then the theories to explain time will blow your mind :wink:

Hmm, an interesting thought... but doesn't the description from the VDF indicate that it only mimics its victims and that it is its nature to seek out and devour other life forms for the specific purpose of food? Basically, from what I understand about the Guyver Organism give me the impression that Takaya based both the Guyver Organism and Aptom on John Carpenter's The Thing. Since they are both so very similar to that creature. Both having the ability to absorb other life and then mimic them. . . They even both have the ability to regenerate after most of their body had been destroyed. If not for the CM then the Guyver Organism would be practically the same as The Thing... [Nods vigoriously ] Yes, perhaps we should post a general warning that no one ask me to elaborate (Warning, do not under any circumstance trigger the Zeo Armageddan Paradox: An affliction of nerdom that causes its victim to over think everything. In its final stages the victim can be triggered by a simple question and cause an explosion of mega post writing that ultimately will collapse the internet into a quantum singularity that will swallow up the whole planet and end existence as we know it ) No more caffine for me •Okay, back to the debate. . . well lets start by getting rid of that horse versus engine Analogy (engine replaced the horse). I know what you are trying to say so let's just replace it with a better Analogy... Such as an Electric Assist Bicycle, you still ride it like a normal bicycle (thus the original source of energy is still present) but the electric assist motor makes it easier for you to go up hills, etc. - Now with that Analogy you can then make a case of efficiency in a system that uses two sources of energy, which is a valid alternative view. And the Gigantic would seem to support that view as you have indicated. . . •But as to the question of how it would apply to Zoanoids, and whether the Bio-Boost is continuous or not, there are a few problems that I can see... 1) Zoanoids don't have anything like a GCO's, so they don't have a way to increase their efficiency, and as far as we can tell the Bio-Boost Creature also didn't have a GCO. Thus I think it shows they are likely limited to just the Bio-Boost (or something like it, such as Jukai's favored Zero Point Energy theory) factor I have suggested to explain the mass shift. 2) It is likely that Zoanoids don't dedicate as much of their cells to the Bio-Boost system as the Guyver Organism does. A possible indication of this would be the high body density of the organism. The Bio-Boost Creature for example was (according to the Data File in Book 2) 218 cm (~7 Feet 2 Inches) Tall and weighed as much as G1 at 261 kg (575.5 Pounds or 41.1 Stones). Making it denser than any zoanoid by a 2 to 1 ratio (A Broiz for example is 222 cm tall and weighs 139 kg), and thus even if each cell produced the same amount of energy the Guyver Organism would still have at least twice more, if not much more since it is likely zoanoids would produced significantly less. This would also be true with your theory that the system used in zoanoids could be a poor imitation of the Guyver Organism System. 3) An observation that would support the minimum energy to trigger a Bio-Boost and thus suggest a non-continuous Bio-Boost system would be that it apparently took both G1 and the Bio-Boost Creature about 11 hours (clock observation for G1) or more before they regenerated, which would seem to indicate that they needed time before they could have enough energy to use the Bio-Boost system for regeneration. But the significance of this could be further emphasized by the previously mentioned disparity of the rate of regeneration... So any theory seeking to define the Bio-Boost would have to explain this apparent disparity. •These seem to indicate to me that the Bio-Boost is not continous, that it just provides the initial infusion of energy from the Boost Dimension and that the GCO is not being used to provide additional energy on top of the Bio-Boost. As otherwise the rate of regeneration disparity would be the reverse of what I have noted. It can also be noted that the VDF seems to support the idea that most of the energy from the Bio Boost goes into increasing mass, such as the description of the rate of bone and muscle tissue growth being increased, etc. would seem to indicate the Bio-Boost is increasing mass during the activation process. All of which would seem to indicate that the GCO just provides a lower sustainable energy siphon to keep the Guyver at full power between Bio-Boosts. An Analogy would be a recharging battery, would be first charged at full current but then switches to a trickle current once fully charged and the trickle current is used to keep the battery topped out. But if my theory is right then the Guyver can't trigger the Bio-Boost without altering mass and thus is stuck with just the trickle current from the GCO, which would explain why it takes so long to recharge the Mega Smashers and why the rate of regeneration appears slower during normal Unit use but apparently so rapid during a Bio-Boost. •To summarize, I think the reasons Zoanoids can mass shift is because they employ a system similar to the Guyver Bio-Boost but this system needs a minimum amount of energy to trigger and primarily only provides energy for the mass shift required for the transformation. Each zoaform would have a different level of efficiency and thus use of their ability to utilize the Bio-Boost would vary, meaning they wouldn't all draw the same amount of energy from the Bio-Boost. Like comparing a Model T to a modern Hemi, even with both having access to the same fuel... How much fuel gets used and how much power is generated is quite different. Thus limiting their power to the level of sophistication of each zoaform type... All of which explains why zoanoids wouldn't be more powerful, since without turning them into Guyvers they wouldn't have access to all the factors that make the Guyver Bio-Boost system superior. Course I'm assuming that the Creators did have some understanding of the Bio-Boost system, based mainly on the fact the Guyver can do things which the Boost Organism could not. Such as storing itself in the Boost Dimension. And the Relics, Meteors, Gigantic, Teleported Unit Remover, all indicate they had mastered the ability to manipulate and use the Boost Dimension for various purposes. But as you suggested this could explain Archanfel's abilities and level of power. •I also think it can be noted that the Creators were planning to continue the experiment on another planet, so the zoanoids were likely not the final note on the experiment and the Guyver Zero experiment, if it had been successful and not given them the reason to scrap the project, would have meant that all the zoanoids would have been thus equipped and then they would all have been incredibly powerful. •On a separate note, the thing with gravity is all positive energy produces it, so the energy from the siphon itself could produce the gravitational energy. It is also possible that the GCO could be switching between powering the Guyver and Powering the Gravity Energy systems of the Guyver, such as the momentum enhancers and gravity gyros as well as the Pressure Cannon. Regardless of my theory though, you have brought up some good points... I just obviously have some issue with how it would fit everything we know but if you can adjust your theory to account for factors I've mentioned, or find reasons we can dismiss them, then I will have to re-evaluate my theory but right now I'm still leaning towards believing my theory still works to explain all the factors we have discussed or at least that some variation of it, like the Zero Point Energy alternative, should be the case. Though currently I think YoungGuyver might have a better alternative theory to compete with the Bio-Boost based one. Edit: I think the concept of Qi/Chi/Ki is sufficiently complex enough that it would require opening a separate topic for it, since very few westerners actually understand the concept, which is partly why I didn't reply to your Imakarum example. Also it'll take some calculation to figure just how much energy was sent to him since Barcus stated that the Ark had stored about 6 months of Solar energy and all of that was given to Imakarum. Okay, doing the math... let's just say Archanfel made very sure Imakarum would be back to full strength... Assuming of couse the Ark is as efficient at converting solar energy as a plant, we are basically talking around 90%. And the insolation of solar energy in Earth Orbit is about 1366 Watts Per Hour for every square meter. But the Ark's length alone is 51020 meters, the total surface area is immense, so any way you cut it that over a period of 6 months the Ark could have absorbed enough energy to take out an entire state, or small country. Basically the numbers I got ranged from a minimum surface area exposure of several hundred Mega Tons of TNT worth of energy and a peak of 4.15 Giga Tons of Energy if the full surface of the Ark was used for all 6 months. So conservatively speaking we're talking about at least a Giga Ton worth of energy that was all channeled into Imakarum, or basically enough energy to account for about just over 100 pounds of matter. This would seem to support YoungGuyver's theory, at least for the Zoacrystal.