Speculations Superpositions: Nika wasn't a retcon

#1
Do you guys know what superpositions are?

Superposition is a fundamental principle stating that a physical system can exist in a combination of multiple states or outcomes at the same time.

In storytelling, the intersection of a retcon and a superposition centers on the idea of multiple realities existing at the same time before a narrative definitively chooses one path.

In One Piece, when the Nika Fruit was determined, the story decided on a single path.

The confusion is that the idea of a Rubber Fruit already coexists alongside the qualities of Nika. If you consider the superposition, it's not a retcon, it's just the superposition collapsing.

A retcon (retroactive continuity) requires a narrative to break its own rules or explicitly erase its past. If Oda had said, "Luffy never actually had rubber powers, it was a hallucination, he was actually controlling plastic," that would be a retcon, but it's not what happened.
 
#5
Get more views 🤣
Dude thinks having learned a new term immediately turns it into a worthwhile theory about OP.

Even if the premise were true - which it isn't: Nika is a retcon, through and through.
But even if it was true, "The Nika reveal is a supersuposition" can either be met with an "Ok," or with a "No, it's not."

There's no room for debate here.
This is a nothingburger of a thread.
 
Last edited:
#8
Listen to me. Oda has absolutely riddled this story with superpositions and you're naive to think he's not exploiting it.

He makes several open-ended ideas specifically to take advantage of us trying to figure out which one makes sense. It's Schrodinger's manga theory.
 

Goofball_Your_Nika

SII - Sakazuki Incinerate Imu
#11
Dude thinks having learned a new term immediately turns it into a worthwhile theory about OP.

Even if the premise were true - which it isn't: Nika is a retcon, through and through.
But even if it was true, "The Nika reveal is a supersuposition" can either be met with an "Ok," or with a "No, it's not."

There's no room for debate here.
This is a nothingburger of a thread.
Funny how this works. On the one hand, Oda admits Nika was a retcon because he thought shonen had become too serious, and on the other hand, you have Oda angels bending over backwards to claim it wasn't a retcon.
 
#14
If Oda made a retcon, it can be considered malicious trickery.

You guys are failing on Hanlon's Razor. You must assume stupidity/ignorance or even structural stupidity/ignorance before jumping to the conclusion that a retcon has occurred.

I shall not refer to you as peers.
 
#15
I believe you people fail with reading comprehension.

"Forget the guy with the legendary DF whose failure to protect ruined my entire existence. That side of my backstory hasn't been decided yet. Uhm, I mean, that backstory is an example of superposition from Oda-sensei for those who truly know how to read his story, not for the peasants who only check out the drawings."
 
#20
If Oda made a retcon, it can be considered malicious trickery.

You guys are failing on Hanlon's Razor. You must assume stupidity/ignorance or even structural stupidity/ignorance before jumping to the conclusion that a retcon has occurred.

I shall not refer to you as peers.
You’re wasting your time thinking you can have intelligent conversations on here, or nuanced ones without fan bias or Oda is a hackkkk mentality but they eat, breathe, and sleep this shit. This thread would be better at arlongpark. This site is just trolling, shits, and giggles. It’s fun but it’s also kinda like the mindset of teenagers in a video game chatroom.
 
Top