Talk:Gravitational manipulation

Ability Naming Conventions
The following sources are used for determining evolved human ability names, in order:
1. Canon Sources	Episodes
2. Near-canon Sources	Webisodes, Graphic Novels, iStories, Heroes Evolutions
3. Secondary Sources	Episode commentary, Interviews, Heroes: Survival
4. Common names for abilities	Names from other works
5. Descriptions of abilities	Descriptions
6. Possessor's name	If no non-speculative description is possible
Note: The highlighted row represents the level of the source used to determine gravitational manipulation's name.
Source/Explanation
"Gravitational manipulation" is the ability name listed in Stephen Canfield's assignment tracker profile.

Fourth dimension

In terms of dimensional alteration, there isn't such thing as a single collective "fourth dimension". It is unknown if fourth dimensions exist, but if they did, mathematically it would exist as a value on a coordinate plane. For instance, let's say the center of our universe exists at a (0,0,0) point in the space diagram. Well, if we accept that fourth dimensions exist, then we could call the coordinate (0,0,0,0) instead. That last point could be theoretically any value, ranging from -infinity to infinity. This allows an actually infinite number of universes by our perception, just like how three dimensions allow an infinite number of universes to two-dimensional objects.

If the vortexes work by dimensional travel, then it's possible that entering one of these vortexes transports you to a location whose fourth coordinate is different from that of our universe. Therefore, the multi-verse theory and dimensional transport theory can actually be the same thing.

(note: much of this is speculation derived from inferences after reading "Flatland", a novel that for all it's brilliance, does not delve deeply into fourth dimensions. If someone with greater knowledge of the subject could check this, that would be good) --Bulzeeb 14:43, October 14, 2008

• We don't know if it's a different fourth dimension or a different dimension altogether, but the writers did say the pull is dimensional. As to the fourth and other dimensions, I recommend you read Sphereland. It's a sequel to Flatland, but it's by a different author.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
• Actually the forth dimension is time. -Lөvөl 03:37, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Yes, time is normally considered the fourth dimension, but dimensions don't have to be ordered that way. If you are hypothesizing multiple spatial dimensions like in string theory, then it's easier to consider time the first dimension and everything thereafter another spatial dimension. In this case, I believe Bulzeeb was referring to a fourth spatial dimension.--MiamiVolts (talk) 04:02, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • I think the thing of it is there are several different meanings of the word 'dimension.' My guess, considering that they never really get that deep into the science of anything in this show, is they are probably temporal or theoretically spatial). As a side note, group theory already denotes well more than 3 dimensions, though this is somewhat misleading since it really (and very basically) describes the 3 'normal' spatial dimensions (x,y,z), but for each individual atom. Stevehim 14:38, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

Black holes

I removed the notes comment that the vortexes are black holes. From the story so far, it is not said whether or not that is true. They could also be wormholes (such as the ones from Sliders) or something altogether different.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

• Actually, in the eclipse part 1 claire says that the last time she was at canefeild's house she and HRG almost got sucked into a black hole. I know she may not actually know that it is but is it not more cannon than the name we have just now? --mc_hammark 18:08, 30 August 2009 (EDT)

Plurality

ACDC is right that one of the plurals of vortex is vortices. However, vortexes is also correct (see here). Personally, I don't care which we choose as long as we are consistent.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:57, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

• They called them "vortexes" in the episode, right? If so I think that's what people may expect to see. (Admin 15:59, 14 October 2008 (EDT))
  • I agree, I personally prefer "vortexes". Either is correct. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:08, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Yeah, we can add "vortexes" as a redirect and a note, or we can change the description back and add a note/redirect for "vortices". I'd like to read more opinions on this.--MiamiVolts (talk) 16:11, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Canonicity

So we've gone from a canon name of "vortex creation" to a near-canon name of "gravitational manipulation". Was that a mistake? Are we now assuming all assignment tracker entries are canon because some appeared on the show? Assignment tracker entries top graphic novels in canonicity, but not the show itself, unless we are making that assumption.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:51, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

• We did the same for Enhanced strength - I think it's OK in this case because his power wasn't specifically named in the show, but was described. "He can create vortexes" isn't the same as saying "He has the ability of Vortex creation."--Riddler 20:56, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
• I don't think it was a mistake, I think it may be an ambiguity in the naming convention we may need to fix. "Vortex creation" wasn't a canon name, it was a name we made up based on canon words. A canon name is when someone explicitly names or shows the name of the ability on the show. Whatever the case even a near-canon name would trump a description based on canonical words. (Admin 20:58, 14 October 2008 (EDT))
  • I actually hadn't realised that vortex creation was a top-level name until after I'd created it. My only argument against the change back was that Sandra described the ability but didn't name it, but the assignment tracker gave it a definite name. The file in Sandra's hand could have (I know, speculation) said his power was gravitational manipulation while describing it as creating vortecies (or vortexes, who knows). Therequiembellishere 20:58, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Sorry, that conflicted twice so I repeat a bit. As a side note for Admin, which may be moved to the appropriate talk page, did the show ever specifically say "Elle has the power of lightning"? I know the Assignment Tracker map did say she had electric manipulation. Therequiembellishere 21:00, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
      • Incredible catch. Notes: Elle Bishop is an evolved human agent with the ability to generate electricity. - Should we discuss this at Lightning?--Riddler 21:03, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
        • Re-watch Four Months Ago.... There was apparently a reference to "lightning" in that episode that probably trumps it. I don't have the episode handy so I can't confirm it myself. (Admin 21:05, 14 October 2008 (EDT))
        • Peter has called it "lightning" in an episode and a GN. The difference here is there was no canon name given to this ability, but there was a name given on a near-canon source. The canon source always trumps the non-canon source. The difference is where the name comes from, in which case an interpretation of words versus an actual name.--Bob (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Ah, I appreciate the clarification, Admin. Thanks, I'll remove the rename tag.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:03, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
• Ryan and I discussed this issue on Help talk:Naming conventions if anyone's interested. --Bob (talk) 21:09, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
• So are we in agreement that it should be Vortex Creation? --Darmenos 22:36, October 14, 2008
  • No, not at all. We're actually saying that it should stay "gravitational manipulation".--Bob (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Yes, gravitational manipulation was the direction we'd swayed. Therequiembellishere 22:49, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
      • More than swayed. We use the information that is given to us. The Company explicitly named the power "gravitational manipulation" in the assignment tracker profile. That's the most explicit information we've gotten, and we should go with it. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:50, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
      • ... Okay! Gravitational manipulation is good. I'll just be going now... <_< >_> ~~ Darmenos 22:04, 14 October 2008
        • Sorry.... Didn't mean to sound like I was jumping at you. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:06, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
          • Eugh. Though I agree we should stick with the name they've used, "gravitational manipulation" is just clunky. It implies he could like...make chairs float away or people stick to the ground. --Matchu 23:30, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
            • Agree on the eugh, agree on the sticking with it, and agree on the floating chairs. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:34, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
              • I agree as well. That name brings images of Levitation to my mind instead of black holes/vortexes/vortices--Aburu 23:37, 14 October 2008 (EDT)
            • It's possible he could make chairs float away by creating a vortex above the roof, and make people stick to the ground by creating a vortex in the ground. We don't know that for sure. Regardless, I sympathize with the collective "Eugh" but I'm happy we didn't have to settle on something like "the drunken monkey's kiss". ;) (if you don't get that last part, don't worry... it's kind of an inside joke :))--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:45, 14 October 2008 (EDT)

Agreed. It's a very hard ability to classify. Still, it's human nature. Therequiembellishere 00:26, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

• Since when did Stephen manipulate and control gravity? That would mean he would be able to alter the gravity of all matter, for example, he'd alter the gravity of a person to make them weigh several tons or alter it go their as light as a feather. It makes no sense! It needs to be changed. The correction name convention would be Vortex, Matter obliteration or Obliteration--ACDC1989 04:05, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • "Matter obliteration" doesn't make anymore sense, since that'd imply he can just reduce a character to atoms or something. Plus, from a purely scientific standpoint, it's impossible. Matter can't be created nor destroyed/obliterated --Matchu 04:07, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• It does make perfect sense. Yes i am aware of Matter not being destroyed very well indeed. Matter can't be created? Have you ever heard of the Big Bang by any chance? I meant obliteration in terms of obscuring or concealing - the change of shape and gravity in which the specific property has. Stephen obviously has that ability. Gravity has nothing to do with it thus the name for his ability is incorrect. --ACDC1989 04:16, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• It's kind of a weird coincidence, but black holes do destroy matter (or as near as makes no difference). Black holes are 1D; most matter in our universe is 3D. When a 3D object is sucked into a 1D black hole, the rules of our universe just go flying out the window.--D and d 123 18:44, 29 November 2009 (EST)
  • In which case he's changing the physics of the property, so "matter" is incorrect. --Matchu 04:19, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• Matchu do you know what the basic element in science is? Matter. Even Stephen Hawking stated that black holes evaporate, which states the changing of matter. Whether in Physics, Biology, Chemistry or Mathematics. Matter is everywhere hence a major part of it. If a human were to go through a black hole the 'pull' would be so great it would disintergate you into a particle smaller than a light particle. You would be instantly crushed and then you will never be seen again because nothing and not even light can escape a black hole. Thus matter would be obscured and concealed. Scientists would argue that one would change in terms of the property of matter. The term gravitational manipulation is wrong because that would mean Stephen has mastery over all forms of gravity. --ACDC1989 04:25, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • "Correct" or "incorrect", the term we will be using for Canfield's power is "gravitational manipulation". Besides the fact that it does make sense (if he creates a black hole, that has everything to do with gravity), it's the name given to us. Heroes Wiki is primarily a site that catalogs and archives the world of Heroes, not a site that makes scientific conjectures or debates the laws of science, or even of science fiction. If the world of Heroes calls the power "gravitational manipulation", so do we. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 04:30, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • That's not what would happen. First you'd be "stretched" and torn apart (a process know as spaghettification, yes it's a real word) into elementary particles. What happens at the singularity is unknown. That's, of course, providing you fall into a Schwarzschild. Oh and on an offshoot, things do escape black holes; that's how we know they're there. Anyway, this random science aside is pointless, the article shouldn't be changed because we have a near-canon source on it (the tracker).--Matchu 04:33, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• If nothing could escape a black hole, then technically the entire Universe would have been completely destroyed when the first black hole formed.--D and d 123 18:44, 29 November 2009 (EST)
• Ok kk, Ryan and Matchu. I'd like to state something though. If his ability was gravitational manipulation he would manipulate and control all forms of gravity. Theoretically he the could change the weight of objects, fly, or form forcefields. Does that mean we are chaining 'Freezing' and 'Pyrokinesis' to temperature manipulation because that has everything to do with temperature. Or what about "Flight" - can we change that to gravitational manipulation as well? What about regeneration? How about blood or cell manipulation?--ACDC1989 04:39, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • I made a similar point about the name myself before under the comment of something like "eugh it's really clunky". Yeah the name sucks, but it isn't related to what the ability can do per se, it's what we've got off the assignment tracker so we have a duty to stick to what is canon in our articles. --Matchu 04:40, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • If anybody doesn't like it, tell the writers--Joe Pokaski and Aron Coleite are always very willing to answer fan questions and respond to comments in their "Behind the Eclipse" Q&A sessions. But even if the name is a bit broad (which it is), it still works. It would be absolutely impossible to create a name for an ability that deftly describes all the limits and attributes of the ability--that's why we have an entire page (sometimes two or three!) dedicated to describing and explaining the ability. Nobody is saying that Canfield can manipulate all gravity or that he floats or anything like that--he manipulates gravity in a very unique way. That doesn't mean that other power names should be changed (heck, who knows how Nathan flies--maybe he uses the Earth's magnetic fields, or maybe he just farts a whole lot to get airborne), it just means that the writing staff were kind enough to give us the name they decided upon for Canfield's ability, and we should be grateful that we have so much information about the power! Perfect, no. A true gift? Definitely. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• Lol hey Ryan. I do agree with you completely. Thanks again:) --ACDC1989 04:54, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • No problem. It's always fun trying to make sense out of the nonsensical, eh? I mean, really, I think that's why debates over ability names get so heated sometimes--we're trying to assign real-world logic and knowledge to something that is clearly from the world of fantasy. It's not a bad thing, it just leads to debates and disagreements. I think one of the best things that the creative staff ever did was to create the assignment tracker profiles and give us access to them. Thank you, Hana Gitelman! -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 04:59, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Just to let you know, there's no way that he actually creates black holes. Wormholes, maybe, but not black holes. Based on the one that almost sucked in Clair, HRG, and Sylar, the pull of the "black hole" is far weaker than it should be. Were it an actual black hole, there's no possible way that Noah, as an un-powered human, could have kept himself from being sucked in. It just isn't possible. They could be Wormholes, they could be Vortexes(Vorteces), but they are NOT black holes. ~~ Darmenos 22:24, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

Name

Should we really use the assignment tracker name when it makes no sense? 'cause this is the most inaccurate name yet-he doesn't manipulate gravity, he creates vortexes. I can't even begin to fathom how the name would describe his ability in any way. --Golden Monkey 09:37, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

• Like Ryan said above, ask the writers for their opinion on why they called it "gravitational manipulation". I must say i don't agree with the name either because it hasn't got a thing to do with gravity. But let's wait for the writers answer. --Futurepeter 09:56, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • I don't see why it "makes no sense" and "hasn't got a thing to do with gravity". A black hole forms because the gravity of that space is so strong that it actually sucks everything, even light, into that space. By increasing the gravity in one spot, one can create a vortex. Theoretically, something called white hole also exists. It is where things sucked in by black holes get ejected back out. This fits perfectly from what we know about this ability - how a hole sucks everything in and why it is described as a "dimension pull". Even if it makes no sense, we still have to follow the policy, because the policy helps us name ability without speculations. Chrisyu357 09:59, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Electric manipulation allows you to create, direct, and otherwise play with electricity in a near-infinite number of ways. Stephen's ability only does one thing: create vortexes. If he had gravitational manipulation, he should be able to manipulate gravity (like making something extremely heavy or light, or making someone start falling upwards/sideways). Naming this ability "gravitational manipulation" makes about as much sense as saying that technopathy is electric manipulation: there's one point in common (electricity), but they couldn't be more different.--D and d 123 15:26, 27 November 2009 (EST)
      
    • What Chris said. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 10:46, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • The difference, though, is that a black hole has mass (a LOT of mass), and won't just spontaeously disappear. If a black hole decays, it releases a nasty burst of radiation in the process. There isn't really any such thing as a "white hole", to my knowledge. The description of him creating openings to other dimensions actually makes a lot more sense. --Ted C 14:48, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• I'm in favor of Vortex creation on this one; it's the term used in show to describe the ability. Even if he is somehow manipulating gravity to do it, there's no indication that he can do anything but create vortexes, so it's still a more accurate description of the ability. --Ted C 14:30, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Also "gravitational manipulation" is a @%#$! mouthful. --Ted C 14:45, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • But the assignment tracker explicitly lists his ability as "gravitational manipulation" (more than once!) or some variant of that name...Unless we have a canon source that explicitly lists the name differently (Meredith reading a file that may or may not have said the name, and certainly didn't list his ability as "he can create vortexes"), we really won't be changing the name. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
• but don't you guys think that "Gravitational Manipulation" is a name more reserved for a power like Levitation--Anthony Gooch 16:45, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • For Ted C. Therequiembellishere 17:30, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Digression: I notice from that article that the entire concept of white holes is now considered pretty doubtful, since the existing theory for them would violate conservation of matter/energy. --Ted C 10:47, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Please see Help talk:Naming conventions#Hierarchy redux and afterward read Help talk:Naming conventions#2nd reason for continued discussion as to what is a canon source. I think it would be good to see some other opinions on the matter. PS: It was corrected that it was Sandra that read his file, and the files they were reading did not look anything like assignment tracker entries.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:38, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
  • Anyway, the name gravitational manipulation is confirmed by the staff of Heroes. You can't change it because you say "Hey, it doesn't make sense - it has some scientific inaccuracies!" or "Hey, it sounded bad, let's change the name!" The name is confirm, whether you like it or not. I don't like the fact that Dumbledore is actually gay, but I still accept it because J. K. Rowling said so and it's a fact. Chrisyu357 05:58, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
    • If the Heroes staff made a character who could, say, shoot lightning from his fingers, but decided his ability should be called "Gooberization", would you support using that term for that character's ability?--D and d 123 18:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)
    • The question isn't so much what the staff have confirmed, but whether we prefer to use the "in show" term or a "show extension" term. I'm content with gravity manipulation, even thought I would prefer an in-show term. I'm thinking it might be worthwhile to put a bold references to vortex creation on this page, so someone searching based on the on-air terminology would hit it. --Ted C 10:47, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
      • I'd like to note that the name gravitational manipulation isn't confirmed by the staff, but by an anonymous writer, who may or may not be part of the main staff. Something you might also note is that the term on the picture in the assignment tracker entry is "gravitational field manipulation". Did the word field get dropped off because it wouldn't fit in the box?--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:23, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
• In all true fans' lives, there comes a time where the producers make a decision so mind-bogglingly nonsensical, that you have to wonder if there was some sort of gas leak in their building on the day they came up with it. This is one of those.--D and d 123 18:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)
  • This ability name makes perfect sense. Gravity is really the curvature of space-time, so it's not so far-fetched (for science fiction, that is) to imagine that, by manipulating gravity, space-time can be altered, creating vortices. Additionally, "gravitational vacuum" is a term that actually exists (see gravitational vacuum star which is similar to a black hole). Can we please, as a society, move on?--Referos 20:13, 30 November 2009 (EST)
• One of the beautiful things about all art is that, once, made, it only partly belongs to its creator. Once let out into the world, a TV show or comic book or painting belongs almost as much to the people who watch it/read it/look at it as to the man who made/drew/painted.--D and d 123 18:49, 29 November 2009 (EST)

Hmm

I can't seem to access Stephen's tracker assignment, so I'm just wondering where anyone got the name from. It's not that I don't believe anyone's credibility, I just find it weird that I can't access Stephen's tracker profile to actually see the name of his ability.

Are we sure the name is official? Because if I can't access it, it could mean they aren't done with it. --Dman dustin 01:27, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

• Nevermind I must've done it wrong--Dman dustin 01:30, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

Assignment Tracker - Canfield vs. Elle

So hang on, if I'm seeing this correctly... we're using an absurd phrase like "gravitational manipulation" because it comes from the Assignment Tracker, even though it was described in the show proper as something different, yet we're also calling Elle's power something ridiculous like "lightning" because it was mentioned on the show, instead of the ability to "generate electricity" as stated in the Assignment Tracker map? Which way are we going with these, because the status quo is a double-standard. Ricard Desi 15:10, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

• Check out the discussion here. Basically it's talking about preference given to near-cannon explicit names (e.g. "This person's ability is ____") versus names we put together (which is the key element) based on canonical descriptions. Gravitational manipulation was explicitly named in the assignment tracker and was only described in the show. (Admin 15:31, 23 October 2008 (EDT))
  • I guess my confusion is that "Rationale A" was used for Canfield, and then the exact opposite of "Rationale A" was used for Elle. Ricard Desi 02:09, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
    • For Elle, we were explicitly given the terminology "lightning" for her ability in the show, which trumps the assignment tracker. For Stephen (I don't like referring to him by last name), we were only given a description of what he does in the show, so it is being argued that the explicit name in the assignment tracker should trump that. See the discussion on the page Admin referred to for the arguments for and against that policy.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
      • Basicaly, if Elle got her own assignment tracker which said her power was "electrical generation" then we would change the power name. --Piemanmoo 03:56, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
        • Read again, Piemanmoo. It doesn't matter now what the online assignment tracker says or would say for Elle cause the ability's name was explicitly given in the show.--MiamiVolts (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2008 (EDT)

Rename: Gyrokinesis

I read somewhere that Gyrokinesis was the ability to manipulate gravity. So, shouldn't this article be called this?.--Biohazard (talk) 19:56, 30 December 2008 (GMT)

Not according to the naming conventions, the name we use has been explicitly used in the assignment tracker. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 15:03, 30 December 2008 (EST)

I'm sorry

I'm sorry for bringing up names again, but gravitational manipulation doesn't really make sense to me. It would make the ability sound like it is used to change the pressure of gravity when all he really does is create a black hole. And it's not really manipulation because he's not manipulating anything. It's probably not a good idea to change the name, so I won't offer suggestions. I just want to know if anybody else notices this. Thanks. --Spexile 20:26, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

• I'm not sure what the pressure of gravity is...but Stephen definitely creates gravitational vacuums (see his Assignment Tracker profile). After all, a black hole is really just a region of space in which the gravitational field is so powerful that nothing, including light, can escape its pull (see Wikipedia). And if Stephen is manipulating gravity, it's certainly reasonable that he's manipulating it to the point that he can create a region of space with a very powerful gravitational field. But as for the name, you're right, it won't change, since it was explicitly given to us in Stephen's Assignment Tracker profile. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

Kills himself?

In the image where Stephen drags himself into his own vortex it's written that he kills himself. That uncorrect information cause it's unkown whats happing to someone who get's in a vortex, so can i edit that?--Yoshi n1 17:35, 14 November 2009 (EST)

• I'd say so. --mc_hammark 17:37, 14 November 2009 (EST)
  • Actually, his Assignment Tracker profile says that even though his exact disposition remains unknown, he is presumed dead. We can say that he killed himself, which is essentially what he did. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2009 (EST)