Talk:Multiversal singularity

Multiversal hand-wringing.

Personally, I think we may be spazzing out a bit too much about supposed "inconsistencies" in the Multiversal Singularities theory. It's getting to the point where we're editorializing about it in articles, and that I think is the time where we ought to step back and take a deep breath. Being a multiversal singularity obviously doesn't mean that the same events have to occur in every universe, nor that what happens in one universe to a singularity has to affect their presence in all other universes. Certainly Omega Terminus is highly divergent from Vector Sigma, even though it's a singularity. Certainly Primus has been devoured by Unicron in some universes, while he persists in others. So all the hand-wringing over whether The Fallen will wreck this seems a bit overblown to me, and certainly gets a bit too speculative to be included in the articles themselves..--Rosicrucian^Talk 14:03, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

Now that Hasbro's given an answer

Is it okay to put up some fanwank-y analysis anywhere on this wiki (outside of articles), like on this talk page or my user page? Item42 12:46, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

What? --ItsWalky 13:06, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

What I mean is, if some user (like me) can put up some analysis on what this answer meant and what it (along with other related stuff) means and implies, in both real-world and in-story context. I don't think one should put something like that in an article since it is just analysis and speculation. Like a lot of the stuff on Talk:Sari Sumdac. Item42 04:00, 16 March 2010 (EDT)

No. Get a blog or go to a forum. —Interrobang 04:27, 16 March 2010 (EDT)

The One et al

The One's story makes it pretty much necessary that he's a MS. Should we include him on this page, or wait until we get official word? (Hell, Prima's never even been actually confirmed as one of the 13, and we include him without question) Also, what about the Chronarchitect, a member of Primus' pantheon? Kaje 19:37, 12 May 2010 (EDT)

Prima HAS been confirmed as one of the 13, in the Ultimate Guide. --ItsWalky 20:04, 12 May 2010 (EDT)

Reference Request

I know it was established somewhere (FP? or toy bio?) that Unicron and Primus function differently as MSings: Primus existing in all realities at once while Unicron only exists in one at a time and jumps between realities. That should be added here but I can't remember where its from and don't see it refrenced on Unicron's page (which I think it should be) any help on the ref? --ZacWilliam 09:58, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

Balancing Act certainly seems to establish this pretty firmly.--Rosicrucian^Talk 11:32, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

Proof, pudding, etc.

So my rewrite was based on all the evidence I could scrape together by re-reading the source material and Googling for creator commentary. As far as I know I got everything, but it bugs me that nowhere did I find a real starting point for the "multiversal singularity" phrase or its philosophical foundation.

It's like.... the fiction started saying that Unicron was all about dimension-hopping and destroying universes in sequence, but it ignored the inevitable consequence of parallel Unicrons crossing paths. Then Ramjet dropped the "one universe at a time" bomb, which suggested that there weren't ANY Unicrons except the one in the then-current Cybertron universe, which in turn implied that all of them might be somehow the same dude. But the same storyline claimed that Primus does have multiple incarnations, and there are these other dimension-hoppers who may or may not have a similar nature, but none of the dots are connected for the reader, and then there are two Unicrons simultaneously anyway because of the hastily-established end to Universe...

And then suddenly the fans are talking directly to Lee/Hasbro about "multiversal singularities" as though that's an established idea that applies to several characters in a coherent way. Where did that come from? Was the answer to the BC '09 "SG Fallen" question the first time the phrase "multiversal singularity" appeared? All of the Lee/Hasbro stuff is actually limited to The Fallen, so why do we assume anyone but him is an MS?

Basically what I'm getting at here is that I can't find any evidence that MS-hood isn't mostly a giant load of fanwankery. We know from Lee/Hasbro's comments that it applies to The Fallen, but that's it. The rest of what we have is just Primus and Unicron being all ineffable and "beyond," plus a storyline with a handful of ancient dimension-hoppers and some runaway implications. Like I said in the Notes section, we've already got pan-dimensional beings who have somehow stayed immune from the MS business (and I didn't even bring up The One or the Chronarchitect). What makes this certain group of characters so special, and why do we think MS-hood applies to them at all?

- Jackpot 02:42, 11 February 2011 (EST)

No argument here. I would also question how canonical those kind of behind-the-scenes answers to fan questions are if they are never backed up by fiction. Especially now since the behind-the-scenes word is that the new modern continuity, which is supposed to be the continuity going forward, isn't tied to the multiverse at all. - Starfield 13:56, 11 February 2011 (EST)

Solus Prime

Solus Prime's addition confuses me. Doesn't she only exist in a continuity that doesn't have a multiverse? - Starfield 15:49, 12 June 2011 (EDT)

You ought to discuss it here, but largely it seems no one cares. Alientraveller 15:56, 12 June 2011 (EDT)

Sorry. I categorically have no comment on the topic of splitting character pages of those characters who appear to have a version of himself that does not relate to the multiverse. - Starfield 16:10, 12 June 2011 (EDT)

I think it's Hasbro's intent that all the members of the Thirteen are the same across each version of Transformers though, just as Optimus and Megatron lead the Autobots and Decepticons. I myself took the lack of replies indicated an unwillingness to split articles and treat them like the ones that cover a concept across the entire franchise. Alientraveller 16:15, 12 June 2011 (EDT)

Time travel = Trans-Dimensional Travel

The easiest way I can even hope to begin explaining the inconsistencies that are confounding me is that not only can characters like unicron time travel, but there's alternate time lines.

Thus they are using the "time stream" theory. This theory is pretty much synonymous with multiverse theory... 75.84.122.182 09:33, 22 October 2011 (EDT)