|
Post by nekosenshi on Dec 4, 2006 15:27:04 GMT -5
Us on Earth all have a Sun Sign. For instance, Usagi is a Cancer, because the Moon rules the sign Cancer. The Starlights aren't from our galaxy, right? Then how can they have Sun Signs when our Sun isn't in their galaxy?
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 5, 2006 4:28:59 GMT -5
What exactly do you mean with astrological signs? Can you show us some pictures of these signs?
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Barron on Dec 11, 2006 22:57:57 GMT -5
In amine they give you atrological signs because it give the character more substance.
|
|
|
Post by nekosenshi on Dec 15, 2006 13:14:44 GMT -5
Their signs are: Seiya: Leo Taiki: Gemini Yaten: Aquarius
But if they weren't born on in our galaxy they wouldn't have Sun Signs.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 15, 2006 16:45:22 GMT -5
Question is: are Leo, Gemini and Aquarius sun signs, or are they distinct systems in space that could be recognizable from various points, not just the solar system?
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on Dec 15, 2006 23:39:42 GMT -5
lol, I always wondered that myself.
I guess it would depend on the distance of the Kinmoku system from Earth. If it's relatively close (like, about the disance of Alpha Centauri) the constellations would be approximately the same, although that still doesn't explain how they'd have the same zodiac. If it's way on the other side of the galaxy... *shrug* No idea. Maybe Kinmoku has its own equivalent zodiac.
Even then, this still does not explain how they have birthdays in Earth-based days. Maybe they just made those up?
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 16, 2006 11:58:24 GMT -5
Heh, who's sayin they have birthdays on Earth-based days? I've never seen it in the anime.
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on Dec 16, 2006 23:06:20 GMT -5
I think they may have said them somewhere in the manga (written in Minako's notebook, maybe?) and I know the materials collection lists them.
According to kurozuki.com, the Materials Collection says... Seiya: Born 7/30 (same birthday as Schwarzenegger), Leo. Taiki: Born 5/30 (same birthday as Dante), Gemini Yaten: Born 2/8 (same as James Dean), Aquarius
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 17, 2006 5:22:23 GMT -5
Hmmz, that's kind of strange, giving birthdays to aliens.
|
|
|
Post by nekosenshi on Dec 17, 2006 16:21:52 GMT -5
Yeah, giving them birthdays doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 18, 2006 5:50:13 GMT -5
*shrugs* Giving them birthdays that should be earth-only doesn't make sense (unless the months are universal, or by some enormously random selection Kinmoku has a similar kind of star system and 12 months in a year and gave them similar names).
Then again, this is a kid's show that we're talking about. Would a 10 year old girl care if they're aliens with earth birthdays?
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on Dec 18, 2006 9:03:41 GMT -5
lol, good point
I think either their birthdays are assumed just like their names, or the whole birthday thing was just one of those ideas Naoko later dropped. (I still can't remember if it's mentioned in canon or not...)
Slightly off topic, I think one of them should have been a Taurus! It's the only sign that no senshi has! Mamoru was already Leo and Haruka was already an Aquarius. Taurus is Yume's sign, and now I don't have any senshi who's the same as me... *sniffle* T_T Maybe Kakyuu is a Taurus...
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 18, 2006 14:32:03 GMT -5
Actually now that I think about it, perhaps astrological signs make more sense than I thought. Ever seen Stargate? They use the zodiac to pinpoint their destination. Much like 3D coordinates. However, that would mean that the destination point 'knows' where it is as well (how else could you return, otherwise?). There are many points in the galaxy where a single sign looks the same. I think Kinmoku is positioned somewhere where quite a few of our signs are similar.
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on Dec 19, 2006 0:51:11 GMT -5
I suppose that could work. But even if the constellations were there, they wouldn't necessarily be in their zodiac. If they're using a solar zodiac like the one used by Takeuchi, their sun would have to follow roughly the same path through the constellations, which seems extremely unlikely to me given the number of variables involved there. *shrug* then again I am no astrophysicist. Maybe it's more likely than I think @_@
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Dec 19, 2006 3:14:53 GMT -5
Heh, it's not the sun that revolves through the zodiac, it's the earth. Anywayz, they don't have to revolve through the same zodiac, but a similar one can easily be established. Or they could see a few of the ones that we see too (stars are visible over great distances, after all).
|
|