• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

All Purpose Dragon Ball Thread

RinneItachi said:
That's just how this community has always been. Tbh powerscalers are commonly a lot nicer than what the old standard was. People throwing around the r word and slurs all the time, telling people to self-terminate was a regular. Not on this site particularly but just the old forums and such. I was around during the Google+ era of powerscaling communities. I was a SeththeProgrammer subscriber when he was at a meagre 1.7k subs, before his voice reveal and WAY before the whole "nice guy" act he eventually put up. I been around lol.
Click to expand...
Holy shit this brings back memories
I remember how the old days were
Serlock_Holmes said:
I started from there.Think it was called the lounge moviecodec.That was before coming to narutoforums and here.
Click to expand...
I lurked there
GodOfThunder said:
Rainero
Click to expand...
Been awhile since I heard that name
 
For any of you interested in tier 1 stuff, I went back to the original hypertimeline Dragon Ball thread and found this comment from Ultima.
For the record, I agree with DontTalk's explanation from up above. Even in the past thread addressing this, and in multiple conversations about this subject, I made a very explicit distinction between an overarching flow of time which holds 4-dimensional spacetimes as infinitesimal cross-sections of itself and a spacetime which just has a larger hypervolume.

For contrast, DontTalk's construction ultimately involved the positions of each universe in 5-dimensional space being represented by a discrete set with a countable number of elements, namely {1, 2, 3, 4, 5... 12}, which, when taken as an element of the cartesian product representing an n-dimensional object, would have a size of size of 0 in the fifth dimension, since, as explained in here, constructing higher-dimensional objects requires cartesian products between continuous sets, which have uncountably-many elements instead. Hence why it could also be rotated into an identical construction where those universes were laid out on the fourth axis instead.
Click to expand...
You know how I explained on the staff discussion thread that hypertimelines are only Low 1-C if the lesser timelines are stated to have their own time dimension/time axis? I think the agreement was that we should wait until there's a guidebook statement for the Macrocosms or their space-times having their own time dimensions/axes before we reattempt Low 1-C. However, based on this comment from Ultima, if we were to prove that the Neutral Zone was significantly 5-D, then the hypertimeline would automatically be Low 1-C (basically a 2 in 1 upgrade). This is since the reason why hypertimelines aren't automatically Low 1-C in the first place is because you can model a cosmology like that in a way that doesn't use 2 time dimensions; this is done by making the space between timelines 4-D, multiverse 3-D, and applying a single time axis over everything (which would allow the universes to be 2-C, mind you). However, if the 5th dimension were significant, you couldn't form a rotation like that and the overarching timeline would automatically be an additional time dimension. Just something to keep in mind.
 
Mr.Cinos15 said:
Ok can someone give a brief rundown of what the 5-D timeline stuff is about and it's purpose?
Click to expand...
Well the premise was that the timelines in DB operate on a higher time axis from the lower spacetimes, spanning 4D objects instead of 3D objects. With there being proof that the spacetimes in DB make their own separate time, hence, being on a separate axis. The pendulum room, since every macrocosms should have one, it's not the source of temporality for the entire multiverse, which would contradict everything.
 
Serlock_Holmes said:
It says dimensionally transcendent?
Click to expand...
...And? Do we have further context as to what that entails. Is there anything showcasing them treating the universe as infinitesimal or insignificant in scope to that degree?

Tiers don't happen cause of just mentioning "transcendent" in a sentence.
 
Planck69 said:
...And? Do we have further context as to what that entails. Is there anything showcasing them treating the universe as infinitesimal or insignificant in scope to that degree?

Tiers don't happen cause of just mentioning "transcendent" in a sentence.
Click to expand...
So you are saying because they haven't explicitly shown it that this statement can be thrown away. I mean dimensionally transcendental is pretty clear. Transcending on it's own isn't a good word but dimensionally transcendent is another thing entirely.
 
Serlock_Holmes said:
So you are saying because they haven't explicitly shown it that this statement can be thrown away. I mean dimensionally transcendental is pretty clear. Transcending on it's own isn't a good word but dimensionally transcendent is another thing entirely.
Click to expand...
Yes? We don't just give tiers to statements without further context unless they're very self-explanatory. Say, "He destroyed all of space and time!", "The Realm sprawled out to infinity!", etc.

"Dimensionally transcendent" can mean anything from merely being from another dimension in the sense of separate space-times, being Tier 1 or even being intangible or formless.

But eh, try your luck if you feel strongly enough about it.
 
Planck69 said:
Yes? We don't just give tiers to statements without further context unless they're very self-explanatory. Say, "He destroyed all of space and time!", "The Realm sprawled out to infinity!", etc.

"Dimensionally transcendent" can mean anything from merely being from another dimension in the sense of separate space-times, being Tier 1 or even being intangible or formless.

But eh, try your luck if you feel strongly enough about it.
Click to expand...
Eh I already got one downvote from you. Only one more is needed so I ain't standing on a good ground to do it. Thanks for at least preemptively sparing me from doing the task though.
 
Planck69 said:
Yes? We don't just give tiers to statements without further context unless they're very self-explanatory. Say, "He destroyed all of space and time!", "The Realm sprawled out to infinity!", etc.

"Dimensionally transcendent" can mean anything from merely being from another dimension in the sense of separate space-times, being Tier 1 or even being intangible or formless.

But eh, try your luck if you feel strongly enough about it.
Click to expand...
I was trying to explain this too DBZ Fans on Battle Wiki Reddit,💀
 
DeusExMachine001 said:
I was trying to explain this too DBZ Fans on Battle Wiki Reddit,💀
Click to expand...
Well, different people have different standards. There is nothing wrong with taking things at face value, within reason of course, but that's just not in line with this site's standards for better or for worse.

A piece of fiction isn't going to go out of its way to make sure it meets our exact requirements for things like this, so it's up to us to create a fair yet thorough set of standards to define this stuff.
 
XXBenShapiroXx said:
Well, different people have different standards. There is nothing wrong with taking things at face value, within reason of course, but that's just not in line with this site's standards for better or for worse.

A piece of fiction isn't going to go out of its way to make sure it meets our exact requirements for things like this, so it's up to us to create a fair yet thorough set of standards to define
Click to expand...

Yes, sir..
 
I still think it’s bs that Goku hasn’t mastered SSJ3 when I know he has the power to do so. If Trunks can master SSJ2 then why tf can Goku nor Vegeta do that? they too busy relying more on the godly ki rather then their roots. If they actually took the time to master the other forms like SSJ then SSJ2 and SSJ3 would be strong af that I’m sure it would be good for them to wear down the final boss of the arc then enter their more powerful forms

Like this drives me insane and let’s not forget the fact their old training methods for their base forms don’t even work anymore so now they actually need to find ways to even make themselves base form stronger via ki training
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alternate Universe: Haxgon Ball Z
Replies
0
Views
330
ALEPHGOAT
Killerdrone123
  • Locked
Quick GT Goku addition
Replies
24
Views
3K
Vietthai96
Vietthai96
FoxySonicMaster108
Dragon Ball Z: Anime and Movies being one thing?
Replies
2
Views
902
JustANormalPerson01
JustANormalPerson01
The_Impress
Our Own Dragon Ball Saga (Round 1): Goku vs. Stegron (Marvel) (7-0-0; Grace and Ended)
Replies
25
Views
3K
The_Impress
The_Impress
M3X_2.0
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Z Multiplier Removal
2 3 4
Replies
144
Views
22K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
Back
Top