Kiseki no Shounen

The ending was... sorta soppy. :/

That was stupid.

Am I the only one lost?

Well I just read it 4hours straight at one go and I don't feel lost... Perhaps its cause you read it as it was on-going?

And @acolyte, I can agree with you that Kyoukai Senjou no Horizon sure is confusing. I mostly watch it for the gags and the girls and less for plot lol

Am I the only one lost?

We're all lost

But is this the first time you get lost reading a manga? I still enjoyed it though~

I can't get more lost while enjoying it than watching Kyoukai Senjou no Horizon o.o

"Hello Baby! I Love your Future!"

BEST PICK-UP LINE EVER!!!!

Especially when said in Filipino...

Feels a bit... all over the place?

Agreed, flow from one scene to another isn't seamless, neither are the conversations.

the mp5's max effective range is 200 meters not that many people can shoot that far efficiently but sniping is definitely not a word i would use for that weapon(or an sub gun at all)

p.s. i haven't read a single word of this manga yet so i have no idea what context of the statement is... also the mp5 isn't a rifle but a sub-machine gun

I was reading it, and suddenly :
 
http://vatoto.com/read/_/219798/kiseki-no-shounen_v2_ch15_by_s2scans/12
 
... Since when is an MP5 a precision rifle allowing sniping from a distance ?
DAMNIT I let my past counter-strike years shatter my reading experience >_<

I was reading it, and suddenly :

http://vatoto.com/read/_/219798/kiseki-no-shounen_v2_ch15_by_s2scans/12

... Since when is an MP5 a precision rifle allowing sniping from a distance ?

DAMNIT I let my past counter-strike years shatter my reading experience >_<

She's falling.

Time for her to levitate..

Thanks for the release!! I really love the intrigue!!

Feels a bit... all over the place?

I don't know how I feel about the art style in this...it kind of looks like he traced over a photo of someone's face sometimes.  While its certainly unique, the characters feel kind of dead-looking to me.  I'm not saying its badly drawn, I just prefer more expressive looking stuff I guess.

How interesting. A love story spanning time and space constantly shifting as the time fight shifts. Its actually rather beautiful.

I really love this manga -  good Scifi - great art.   I really prefer realistic art with individual looking characters to the style where many look similar,   and besides from being realistic and naturalistic his art is very recognizable.   The plot is good and engaging.  

Has no one ever heard of the practice of "Suspension of Disbelief"?

It's called : suspension of disbelief.

Edit: Thank you, Sentry, for correcting this senile old fart's mistake!  I consider myself to be among the best proofreaders in the scanlation community, but this proves that NOBODY is perfect!!!

And who would WANT to be perfect, anyway?  According to the Bible, the last perfect person died slowly and painfully while being crucified.  And THIS perverted atheist certainly doesn't want to go out like THAT!!!  I have enough trouble dodging all of those damn lightning bolts that the God that I don't believe in keeps throwing at me for my constant outbursts of blasphemous heresy!!!

He wanted an equation. I gave him an equation. I never said it was a formula, or even if it was true.

 

Well back when Einstein theorised that energy and mass were interchangeable, people call bs on that as well. (have to wonder how many mind was blown back then... and then there was Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which blows even Einstein's mind lol) Anyway, I'm sure 150 years from we would come up with some measurement of our mind that is better than IQ. Heck we can already do brain imaging, so we are able to at least partially translate brain activity into combination of other SI units.

 

Also, I was using a mathematical analogy. And my anology was assuming that we can measure mental activity, not intelligence. Atm, we're not even sure if those 2 are even directly related.

You said something about 'understanding this formula' in your post.

And my point is that we understand so little about intelligence it's bullshit to pretend any understanding to it. Like, yeah, you could measure the current between neurons, the average refractory period of an action potential, the average time between points of criticality in the brain. But right now that doesn't mean much.

A short transition time between points of criticality suggests that ideas come faster to you, too short though and you're having seizures or you're schizophrenic. So you can't say 'Fast=better', or 'More current=awesome' because your intelligence doesn't work that way.

What I'm saying is problematic is that coming up with a metric to measure intelligence without fully understanding what intelligence is, is a lot like Einstein coming out with General Relativity before we have even gotten to particle theory yet. We're a bunch of blind mice poking at an elephant's leg and calling it a pillar, which is the fundamental problem with IQ tests in general.

He wanted an equation. I gave him an equation. I never said it was a formula, or even if it was true.

 

Well back when Einstein theorised that energy and mass were interchangeable, people call bs on that as well. (have to wonder how many mind was blown back then... and then there was Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which blows even Einstein's mind lol) Anyway, I'm sure 150 years from we would come up with some measurement of our mind that is better than IQ. Heck we can already do brain imaging, so we are able to at least partially translate brain activity into combination of other SI units.

 

Also, I was using a mathematical analogy. And my anology was assuming that we can measure mental activity, not intelligence. Atm, we're not even sure if those 2 are even directly related.

function =/= formula

LOL! people getting all technical over a manga.

F=f(w,M,i) is not a formula, it's a description of the output of function f given input parameters w,M, and i.

 

And if you want to start getting technical about it, two of those parameters sound like silly bullshit, to use an example: IQ tests. IQ tests ostensibly are supposed to correlate to the general factor g for the test taker, where g represents their overall mental acuity. The problem is that tests themselves contain or reference cultural memes which the test taker themselves may not be aware of. To use a hyperbolic example, a genius from China who has little knowledge of the English language might score lowly on an IQ test written in English. The only thing they've proven is that an IQ test typically is a decent measure of a students scholastic aptitude in the same region the IQ test is given.

 

Which is a lot like naval gazing at that point in my opinion, and so as a measure of a person's native intelligence it leaves a lot to be desired. Not to mention we still haven't figured out how intelligence works in the first place; to use a physics analogy measuring intelligence at this point without a working understanding of how intelligence behaves is a lot like trying to measure the orbits of the planets without a heliocentric model of our solar system.

He wanted an equation. I gave him an equation. I never said it was a formula, or even if it was true.

Well back when Einstein theorised that energy and mass were interchangeable, people call bs on that as well. (have to wonder how many mind was blown back then... and then there was Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which blows even Einstein's mind lol) Anyway, I'm sure 150 years from we would come up with some measurement of our mind that is better than IQ. Heck we can already do brain imaging, so we are able to at least partially translate brain activity into combination of other SI units.

Also, I was using a mathematical analogy. And my anology was assuming that we can measure mental activity, not intelligence. Atm, we're not even sure if those 2 are even directly related.

F = f(w, M, i)

 

where F is the minimium force exerted by a person to keep himself afloat in an isolated system

w is the person's weight (aka his mental resistance)

M is the person's mental capacity

i is the intensity of his mental current

f is an unknown function

 

Makes sense now? Of course, to understand this formula, one would need to educate himself with a whole lot of concepts, lest to apply it. Otherwise, it wouldn't make any more sense than the equation to energy (e=mc2) does to any lay-person. Heck I'm still baffled by how the entire mathematical proof of e=mc2 can be easily understood by any highschool student, while its implication and application are still a subject of great debate.

F=f(w,M,i) is not a formula, it's a description of the output of function f given input parameters w,M, and i.

And if you want to start getting technical about it, two of those parameters sound like silly bullshit, to use an example: IQ tests. IQ tests ostensibly are supposed to correlate to the general factor g for the test taker, where g represents their overall mental acuity. The problem is that tests themselves contain or reference cultural memes which the test taker themselves may not be aware of. To use a hyperbolic example, a genius from China who has little knowledge of the English language might score lowly on an IQ test written in English. The only thing they've proven is that an IQ test typically is a decent measure of a students scholastic aptitude in the same region the IQ test is given.

Which is a lot like naval gazing at that point in my opinion, and so as a measure of a person's native intelligence it leaves a lot to be desired. Not to mention we still haven't figured out how intelligence works in the first place; to use a physics analogy measuring intelligence at this point without a working understanding of how intelligence behaves is a lot like trying to measure the orbits of the planets without a heliocentric model of our solar system.