Honkai Impact | Major Downgrade From Low 1-A

[Telomera]

Yogiri was shit because there was nothing backing it, in contrast, HI3 seems to at least lean toward the real definition

Not really. There's no actual context behind the "absolute infinite" statements besides Otto's own shit-talking which got proven wrong literal seconds later. Edit: Well, that and the numerous pieces of context that show that Otto's power was still limited and that the tree is transfinite and its scale can be described with the concept of transfinite numbers. But that of course proves my point.

 

[Weaver261]

First of all, Otto's statements are not reliable whatsoever. At the same time he spoke of his own power, he himself said that using the power of the Herrscher of the Void would not be able to kill him and proceeds to IMMEDIATELY get killed by it.

I think you're over simplifying the process here to make the disagreement side looks unconvincing. That's not a good thing to do. The fight between Otto vs Kiana and Durandal is not that simple. It's not like evil boss vs good guys. Otto needed to get defeated, he wanted that. Only then he will be able to save kallen.
Herrscher of void will not be able to kill. That statement is not wrong in normal sense because void power output can't kill him in infinite state. But when Kiana reverse the link of imaginary tree to Otto, otto became finite. In that instance, Otto is not absolute infinity anymore hence got defeated.

Also "Infinite in transfinite sense" is clearly pointing absolute infinity.
It's not saying imaginary tree in transfinite but it's saying Imaginary tree is still infinity even in transfinite scale which is transfinite sets.

 

[DrakerX]

That is stupid, by that logic you can make high boundless because "there is no reason to NOT believe that there is a way to completely suprass negative theology and we just aren't unable to compherend it with our limited monkey brain, or just haven't discovered yet"
PD: Also ultima said that using trascending logic as a way to pull more tier out of someone arses is a good way to derail things into utter inane "omnistavance suggsverse" level of nonsense, which I agree with him (for once).

Please, don't put in my mouth words I never said. Did I talked about Boundless? No. I am not even talking about 1-A. The point is that if you try to argue real life logic ("you can't surpass absolute infinity") in a fictional setting were the real life logic doesn't apply by the very rules established by the setting, then the argument is flawed to begin with. Please, don't use analogies that have nothing to do with what I am saying only to call my arguments stupid, I don't like when people do that. I wont reply to other comments regarding this.

But from what I've discussed with him, it's also evident that there is still a problem with interpreting this as Cantor's "absolute infinity" in the first place. First of all, the phrasing of "绝对的无限" is different from what is actually used to refer to Cantor's "absolute infinity" in Chinese. Thus, the meaning of this phrase does not necessarily strictly denote Cantor's conception of "absolute infinity" but must instead be understood with context. By itself, "绝对的无限" does in fact somewhat imply Cantor's meaning of "absolute infinity," but this implication is overridden by context suggesting otherwise.

You say that it doesn't necessarily mean absolute infinity by Cantor, yet immediately after say that it does imply it, you are kind of contradicting yourself here. Plus, the statement of absolute infinity is highly supported by the context as well and everything brought up later by you doesn't really disprove that they aren't talking about the Absolute Infinity.

Here, Otto's power after connecting with the Imaginary Tree is said to be something that is still limited, only being "nearly infinite" with him not even being able to unleash all of it as an individual. Additionally, Otto was described as only being "close" to godhood, being nothing but a slave of the Imaginary Tree, further indicating that Otto's power still had limits. This strongly goes against the idea that his power was truly "absolutely infinite" in the sense that Cantor meant, as "absolute infinity" would have no limits whatsoever.

False God Otto's power is infinite and there is no denying that. It's literally a plot point in the game that it is infinite, otherwise the Imaginary renormalization, that turn Infinity into finite, wouldn't have worked in the first place. So saying that it is "nearly infinite" as evidence is wrong and contradicted not only by numerous other statements, but also the story itself, which makes any statement correlated to it incredibly iffy. And using that to prove that it is a different level of Infinity that is not absolute infinity is also not correct, since it would still be Infinite regardless. And the fact that he was still a slave of the Imaginary Tree would at most means that he downscales from absolute infinity that the Tree rappresents. I don't see this points standing on themselves, in my opinion.

Whatever, I will go to sleep now. I will reply to other arguments tomorrow.

 

[Telomera]

I think you're over simplifying the process here to make the disagreement side looks unconvincing. That's not a good thing to do. The fight between Otto vs Kiana and Durandal is not that simple. It's not like evil boss vs good guys. Otto needed to get defeated, he wanted that. Only then he will be able to save kallen.
Herrscher of void will not be able to kill. That statement is not wrong in normal sense because void power output can't kill him in infinite state. But when Kiana reverse the link of imaginary tree to Otto, otto became finite. In that instance, Otto is not absolute infinity anymore hence got defeated.

Stop twisting his words, dude. I directly quote "You... cannot kill me... The power that cannot be renormalized is absolutely infinite... Merely relying on the Herrscher of the Void... You cannot do it!"

He was clearly saying that relying on the Herrscher of the Void powers wouldn't be enough to kill him (which was obviously wrong). No amount of mental gymnastics will get around that. The fact of the matter is that he was talking shit out of his ass and sandwiched a statement about absolute infinity in there. Even if he knew it was wrong, that doesn't change the fact that what he said was wrong.

Also "Infinite in transfinite sense" is clearly pointing absolute infinity.

Lol no

 

[Livinmeme]

Please, don't put in my mouth words I never said. Did I talked about Boundless? No. I am not even talking about 1-A. The point is that if you try to argue real life logic ("you can't surpass absolute infinity") in a fictional setting were the real life logic doesn't apply by the very rules established by the setting, then the argument is flawed to begin with. Please, don't use analogies that have nothing to do with what I am saying only to call my arguments stupid, I don't like when people do that. I wont reply to other comments regarding this.

What kind of..What???? Do you even know what I was talking about? Read what I said, at the very least three times

 

[Telomera]

You say that it doesn't necessarily mean absolute infinity by Cantor, yet immediately after say that it does imply it, you are kind of contradicting yourself here. Plus, the statement of absolute infinity is highly supported by the context as well and everything brought up later by you doesn't really disprove that they aren't talking about the Absolute Infinity.

I said that the statement SOMEWHAT implies it when taken in a vacuum. With context, it absolutely does not imply that. This is especially considering that the real definition of absolute infinity is apophatic, beyond mathematics entirely, and equivalent to the capital-G Christian God. Saying that Otto or even the imaginary tree fits that definition is completely indefensible and ridiculous. There is no real definition of "absolute infinity" that is at all applicable to Otto or the Imaginary Tree.

And the fact that he was still a slave of the Imaginary Tree would at most means that he downscales from absolute infinity that the Tree rappresents. I don't see this points standing on themselves, in my opinion.

The issue here is that Otto's own power was stated to be absolutely infinite, not just the tree as a whole. If that "absolute infinite" power is quantitatively (or even qualitatively, considering what absolute infinity actually means) lesser than literally anything else, that throws a wrench into your interpretation of "absolute infinity."

 

[PedjaTarzan]

That's just a stupid argument. That doesn't say anything about what 绝对的无限 strictly means, especially considering the fact that quotation marks (which Google search can't accurately deal with) imply a less strict/literal meaning. We still have to consider context.

The only thing citated there is "absolute" which just adds in addition to meaning of absolute infinty... whatever

First of all, Otto's statements are not reliable whatsoever. At the same time he spoke of his own power, he himself said that using the power of the Herrscher of the Void would not be able to kill him and proceeds to IMMEDIATELY get killed by it.

He is pretty much alive even after that i do not know where did you get that from.

Second of all, you also have to consider that there are multiple levels of infinity. Nagamitsu saying what she did indicates that Otto's power was limited and was thus not absolutely infinite, even if you do think that it was transfinite. This is further supported by the fact that he was only "close" to godhood and "nothing but a slave of the imaginary tree." And again, Nagamitsu points out the fact that Otto can't actually unleash all of his power (a limit to his power), something that is never actually contradicted.

Well duh, he obviously never had the actual Absolute Infinite power from the Imaginary Tree, that is why i already adressed this before and said that hey Strictly downscale from it. That is also why no one in the verse surpassed the Tree, therefore not surpassing Absolute Infinity at all, he only took a part of it. Which would still be enough for him to have Low 1-A ap since hes obviously taking a power directly from the Tree itself. (obv if we cant magically now downscale from a low 1-A slop, then the entire 1-A mfs taking powers from 1-A being to be 1-A in ap is also ******* wrong then no?)

Btw, Nagamitsu doesn't really correct herself, it's just that the context of her talking about the infinite and finite is that the infinite and finite are simply infinite and finite "in our eyes." It may or may not be the case that Otto's power was still transfinite, but that it was "not really infinite" in the sense of still having limits.

And as for Prometheus, she's just being hyperbolic. She even calls Otto "all-powerful" which is obviously not meant to be taken literally.

Villians cant be hyped up in big 2025... no this is litteraly all crap, Nagamitsu gets directly contradicter as the Otto himself who explicitly said he Transcended Reality and Herrschers upon getting the imaginary tree's "absolute infinite power". Everything he meant is has to be taken literally, otherwise the entire plotline over this fight is useless, and every statement of him being beyond herrschers is useless might as well say entire chapter is pointless using this logic no?

Are you talking about Kalpas or what? That just causes all of the contradictions I pointed out in the first place. There are many people who scale to imaginary spaces but proceed to have their power quantitatively exceeded.

As i said before, the only imaginary space I believe should be Ottos space, Even then its just said to be a "sign" of absolute infinity. So no they are not getting absolute infinity surpasssed by this, not at all

One thing I haven't brought up is the fact that Cantor also defined absolute infinity as being apophatic and beyond mathematical comprehension, equivalent to capital-G God. That entirely ruins any scaling for Honkai, so you guys obviously would not want to use that definition at all. Instead, I know you guys want to define "absolute infinity" as V or something along those lines.

Not when no one surpasses it, nor is ever said to be above absolute infinity, and what is it that we define absolute infinity as V? come on explain it

The issue here is that nobody actually defines "absolute infinity" as V. It's a made up definition. When you redefine "absolute infinity" as V, you're just making up your own definition and inserting it into the text to justify bad scaling. Either we use a real definition, or we use no definition at all and consider it to be a buzzword akin to Yogiri's "ultimate ensemble."

Yogiri and his ultimate enseble has nothing to do with this? you are just nitpicking random stuff to try and invalidate something clearly represented as the absolute power and hirearchy of the verse. i dont need to repeat 300 times that if Imaginary Tree isnt surpassed, then the Absolute Infinty cannot be surpassed either.
The entire point of that thing otto used to hype himself up is because the Tree itself gave him that kind of power, and even still he was just a part of it. not that he had entire absolute infinity for himself.

 

[PedjaTarzan]

Not really. There's no actual context behind the "absolute infinite" statements besides Otto's own shit-talking which got proven wrong literal seconds later. Edit: Well, that and the numerous pieces of context that show that Otto's power was still limited and that the tree is transfinite and its scale can be described with the concept of transfinite numbers. But that of course proves my point.

proves nothing lol, ur yet to prove anyone even surpasses absolute infinity, or to prove that ottos power is somehow hyperbolic slop, none of this

Stop twisting his words, dude. I directly quote "You... cannot kill me... The power that cannot be renormalized is absolutely infinite... Merely relying on the Herrscher of the Void... You cannot do it!"

He was clearly saying that relying on the Herrscher of the Void powers wouldn't be enough to kill him (which was obviously wrong). No amount of mental gymnastics will get around that. The fact of the matter is that he was talking shit out of his ass and sandwiched a statement about absolute infinity in there. Even if he knew it was wrong, that doesn't change the fact that what he said was wrong.

Ah right, villians cannot hype themselfs up, i guess only Cartoons allow the villians to say shit like "Im Immortal i cant die" and proceed to lose.
When others have it? absolutely wrong.

Lol no

I said that the statement SOMEWHAT implies it when taken in a vacuum. With context, it absolutely does not imply that. This is especially considering that the real definition of absolute infinity is apophatic, beyond mathematics entirely, and equivalent to the capital-G Christian God. Saying that Otto or even the imaginary tree fits that definition is completely indefensible and ridiculous. There is no real definition of "absolute infinity" that is at all applicable to Otto or the Imaginary Tree.

For Imaginary Tree there obviously is, it is an structure far superior to anyone in the verse, even when you get the supposed absolute infinite power, ur still just a part/slave of imaginary tree. even when otto used his unrenormalized power he was only ever able to make timelines where kallen is alive.

The issue here is that Otto's own power was stated to be absolutely infinite, not just the tree as a whole. If that "absolute infinite" power is quantitatively (or even qualitatively, considering what absolute infinity actually means) lesser than literally anything else, that throws a wrench into your interpretation of "absolute infinity."

Well these things in fiction happen all the time, even with Qualitative scaling, where character simply just downscale from an qualitative power, which logically also cannot happen, idk why are you so focused on how something functions in reality when even things that are logically impossible to have a quantitative inferority to it (taking 1-A power from an 1-A being or him giving you part of his power), if these were to be cases i doubt any werse who has more than 1 outerverse-high outerverse+ character would even be able to be tiered there.

 

[Weaver261]

Ah right, villians cannot hype themselfs up, i guess only Cartoons allow the villians to say shit like "Im Immortal i cant die" and proceed to lose.

Imagine taking the words one to one when the villain himself wanted to get defeated. The whole plan is to get defeated with HoV imaginary renormalization. He already knew he can be defeated with that. He only said they can't defeat him to anger them, to draw out more potential to defeat him.
Bro is making Otto looks like one dimensional evil villain lol xD

 

[PedjaTarzan]

Imagine taking the words one to one when the villain himself wanted to get defeated. The whole plan is to get defeated with HoV imaginary renormalization. He already knew he can be defeated with that. He only said they can't defeat him to anger them, to draw out more potential to defeat him.
Bro is making Otto looks like one dimensional evil villain lol xD

no you dont understand, it is strictly prohibited to non cartoonish villains to hype themself up. Even when the said villian is defeated trough unconventional means rather than just raw force. its also banned to have the actual villian who achieved shit that others who just gave speculations about it to be more reliable. i thinks the most reliable person here is actually just Liliya at this point.

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

They shouldn't be physically low 1-A, in my opinion.

Only their hax is Low 1-A.

Low 1-A Kebin (physically) getting whacked by a moon-level attack is funny ngl.

 

[PedjaTarzan]

They shouldn't be physically low 1-A, in my opinion.

Only their hax is Low 1-A.

Low 1-A Kebin (physically) getting whacked by a moon-level attack is funny ngl.

can you please show this?

 

[DrakerX]

I said that the statement SOMEWHAT implies it when taken in a vacuum. With context, it absolutely does not imply that. This is especially considering that the real definition of absolute infinity is apophatic, beyond mathematics entirely, and equivalent to the capital-G Christian God. Saying that Otto or even the imaginary tree fits that definition is completely indefensible and ridiculous. There is no real definition of "absolute infinity" that is at all applicable to Otto or the Imaginary Tree.

And why would that be? Because your whole argument to say that it is impossible is because in a fictional setting someone can't be stronger then absolute infinity, which is a completely insane take to me. Not only that, but your whole argument relies on the fact that the Herrscher of the Void defeated him and that would prove that he is not absolute infinity, when the whole point is that he did it with the Imaginary renormalization, an hax that turn Infinity into finite, and most of all he knew very well that it would happen and wanted to be defeated like that in the first place! It was the whole point of his plan, so him saying that HoV couldn't defeat him is all a play, it is straight up confirmed in the cutscenes immediately after his defeat that he was just acting.
Literally, his power is compared to the Herrscher of Finality, the Top Tier of the verse, which makes all of his statements about his transcending Herrschers consistent.

The issue here is that Otto's own power was stated to be absolutely infinite, not just the tree as a whole. If that "absolute infinite" power is quantitatively (or even qualitatively, considering what absolute infinity actually means) lesser than literally anything else, that throws a wrench into your interpretation of "absolute infinity."

So, according to you, you can't upscale from absolute infinity, you can't downscale from absolute infinity... And yet we have several characters that have scaling chain that brings them higher then that. Because absolute infinity is basically the baseline of Low 1-A, and yet the wiki accepts that characters can be stronger then baseline Low 1-A... I really don't understand your point. Low 1-A isn't Tier 0, nor is it 1-A where major anti-feats can discard the rating. There is no limit to the quantitative trascendence that can happen, nothing of the sort is ever mentioned in our own standards, even Shiroiyo pointed this out to you earlier and you completely ignored it. The only upper limit that exist is Tier 0, that's it, there is no rule or mention that you can't be stronger then Low 1-A, otherwise the entire rating is discarded. If you want to argue that quantitative trascendence has a limit and Low 1-A can't be upscaled from, then either bring up a standard that actually straight up mention it or make a CRT to change our standards, because that's not how it currently works at all.

 

[SweetDao]

said that the statement SOMEWHAT implies it when taken in a vacuum. With context, it absolutely does not imply that. This is especially considering that the real definition of absolute infinity is apophatic, beyond mathematics entirely, and equivalent to the capital-G Christian God.

Actually, reading the essay Wikipedia uses... Cantor considered the Set of all alephs (the class of all alephs numbers, basically) as absolutely infinite, something similar to V...

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

can you please show this?

My highest estimate (energy-wise) with Kevin's fight against HotE during the previous era and the current era moon fight.

Comparing Kevin's platform and the moon during the final fight in chapter 35.

Which could be destroyed by Kiana's final slash before transporting both of them into the Cocoon.

 

[PedjaTarzan]

My highest estimate (energy-wise) with Kevin's fight against HotE during the previous era and the current era moon fight.

Comparing Kevin's platform and the moon during the final fight in chapter 35.

Which could be destroyed by Kiana's final slash before transporting both of them into the Cocoon.

So ur assuming that Kianas final slash that killed kevin was just 5-C or what?

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

So ur assuming that Kianas final slash that killed kevin was just 5-C or what?

Physically, yes. Hax wise? Maybe Low 1-A via Honkai bullshit.

 

[SODAKU]

Physically, yes. Hax wise? Maybe Low 1-A via Honkai bullshit.

You know i thought it was common knowledge that AP≠DC, i would wager it was repeated more than 10000 times on this forum but i guess it will never be enough

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

You know i thought it was common knowledge that AP≠DC, i would wager it was repeated more than 10000 times on this forum but i guess it will never be enough

My point in that post is that physical AP /=/ hax, not DC.

Their only showing of Low 1-A feat is literally hax, there is no direct proof that it extends to their physical capabilities.

 

[VericulumVenatrix]

Disagree with the downgrade.

 

[Reiner04]

Before I give my input. I would like supporters to discuss between themselves and decide on appropriate counterarguement, a detailed one, and post it. Then I will tag other staffs so they give their opinion regarding it, me included.

 

[Vietthai96]

Ayo wtf?, using scaling chain A is stronger than B to disprove a rating, especially higher infinity tiers such as Low 1-A is worst argument i ever see. I completely disagree with this kind of reasoning

 

[Reiner04]

Ayo wtf?, using scaling chain A is stronger than B to disprove a rating, especially higher infinity tiers such as Low 1-A is worst argument i ever see. I completely disagree with this kind of reasoning

Hmmm... not quite in raw power. Absolute infinity has many versions, and theoretically, one version can surpass another. There is a version that is close to the Von Neumann Universe and another that cannot be surpassed, theoretically, in quantitative manner. However, if any one of these versions is true for the verse, making the others false, it would and should still be in the same category as the unsurpassable version, I think. Since it is absolute infinity, being quantitatively beyond it would be kind of... self-defeat, even if taken from context of the verse in "mathematical sense" (which we take here ig). Being above in skill or combat or shit is different thing. But I was told that no one scales above absolute infinity and everyone downscales. So I will wait for response and counter arguments. I am still neutral.

 

[Mizuki67]

I also literally have no idea how they manage to pull off tier 0

 

[VoidGoji]

Tier 0 is one thing and completely unrelated to the thread.
Thing is, there is also "beyond dimensions" statement, which supports the Absolute Infinity

 

[henryzx900ruly]

The Honkai verse (including Yog-Sothoth's Outer God key from GGZ) got downgraded from 1-A to Low 1-A recently, and I plan to get the profiles downgraded even further (to 12D or 11D for now). The justifications for Low 1-A can be found here, although the R>F statements are no longer taken as valid, only being interpreted as analogical descriptions of higher-dimensional superiority instead. Anyways, it’s probably best to get the biggest “evidence” for Low 1-A out of the way from the get-go: absolute infinity in Honkai. As the argument goes, Low 1-A is the Von Neumann universe, absolute infinity scales to or above the Von Neumann universe, and False God Otto scales to absolute infinity. Therefore, everyone who scales to or above False God Otto scales to Low 1-A. [EDIT: My argument doesn't necessarily rely on surpassing Otto himself, but quantitatively surpassing absolute infinities in general. Flamescion Kiana destroyed Otto's imaginary space, and Kalpas had the power to destroy an imaginary space, imaginary spaces being said to be absolutely infinite. Yet, the power of Flamescion Kiana and Kalpas, respectively, are both quantitatively surpassed. Even if you assert that nobody scales above Otto himself, there are still cases where people quantitatively surpass so-called "absolutely infinite" levels of power.] Simple, right? Not so fast. The whole point of “absolute infinity” is to be the pinnacle of all quantities, standing above any other quantity. The issue here is that many characters in Honkai such as Kiana, Kevin and Elysia have quantitatively exceeded this level of power ("slightly" exceeding someone's non-qualitative power is absolutely quantitative, and qualitative superiority in Honkai has already been rejected anyways). That’s obviously self-defeating and entirely disproves the notion that False God Otto actually had absolute infinite power. If there is an absolute infinite, it must by definition stand above all other quantities entirely. If something were to quantitatively exceed the absolute infinite, that just proves that it wasn’t actually absolutely infinite to begin with.

Another thing of note is that Otto’s claims about his power being absolutely infinite aren’t even particularly credible to begin with. As pointed out in his profile, he claimed to have transcended Herrschers, becoming a god even in comparison to them. Yet, the Herrschers were obviously able to defeat him, matching and even exceeding his power. My point here is that he’s full of shit and we shouldn’t scale Honkai to low outer based off of one statement he made that’s contradicted within the verse anyways or based off of a statement that doesn't even say that Otto's power is absolutely infinite in the first place, just a "sign" of the absolute infinite, whatever that means.

[on top of this, I've already discussed this topic with Ultima on discord and he agrees with this downgrade, so he might be able to provide further arguments about "absolute infinity" and why it isn't even a coherent quantitative concept in the first place]


Now that that's out of the way, let's examine the other justifications given for Honkai's Low 1-A scaling. It has been pointed out that in the Honkai series, it is mentioned that in terms of transfinite numbers, the Honkai on Earth is "around the lowest cardinal number and far from seeing the Imaginary Tree that's also infinite in scale in a transfinite sense." The scaling that has been derived from this is the idea that the Imaginary Tree scales to "transfinite layers of transcendence," and is thus High 1-B or even Low 1-A. However, this scan doesn't say any of that. All that it says is that the Imaginary Tree as a whole is on a higher level of infinity than the Earth, and that's just Low 2-C. There is no mention of the Imaginary tree supposedly being an infinite number of transfinite levels above Earth, nor is there any mention of any higher transfinite hierarchies that the Imaginary Tree scales to at all.

And here’s one of the other main justifications: Project Stigma. It’s claimed that scans about Project Stigma prove that there’s an infinite hierarchy of layered stories in the Honkai cosmology, each transcending the last. But this simply isn’t the case, and it’s clear to anyone who puts their biases aside and actually reads the text. Narratives are described as conceptual things that shape the world. Project Stigma is a narrative meant to control all other narratives. But that’s about it. There are a few mentions of fiction, but the essential elements of an upwards R>F-like hierarchy are never shown here. There is mention of humans creating civilization from fiction, but there is no mention of things viewing baseline reality as fiction, transcending it as something that is more real. In fact, many of these narratives simply exist parallel to each other, with the only major quantitative difference being their complexity (unless you really want to argue that the implication is that there’s a higher dimensional difference between a resort hotel and a cave dwelling in Honkai). Even Project Stigma was only meant to “govern” all other stories rather than dimensionally transcend them. At best, you can make a 2-layered downward R>F hierarchy here: baseline reality and fiction below it. But that obviously doesn’t scale anywhere.

So what do we make of this? Well, the only valid scaling left that we have here is to 12D. Or 11D? But yeah, no Low 1-A or even High 1-B.

Agree:
Disagree:
Neutral:

this is like the worst debunk ive ever seen in my life holy hell.
Because so many people before me have already addressed a lot of things ill just talk about one part

"Now that that's out of the way, let's examine the other justifications given for Honkai's Low 1-A scaling. It has been pointed out that in the Honkai series, it is mentioned that in terms of transfinite numbers, the Honkai on Earth is "around the lowest cardinal number and far from seeing the Imaginary Tree that's also infinite in scale in a transfinite sense." The scaling that has been derived from this is the idea that the Imaginary Tree scales to "transfinite layers of transcendence," and is thus High 1-B or even Low 1-A. However, this scan doesn't say any of that. All that it says is that the Imaginary Tree as a whole is on a higher level of infinity than the Earth, and that's just Low 2-C. There is no mention of the Imaginary tree supposedly being an infinite number of transfinite levels above Earth, nor is there any mention of any higher transfinite hierarchies that the Imaginary Tree scales to at all."

The Lowest Cardinal Number (IE: Alpeh-One), would far be beyond the reaches of 11D or 12D due to the fact that the description of high hyper reads "Characters or objects who can significantly affect, create and/or destroy infinite-dimensional space. Characters who can meddle with spaces with uncountably infinite or above dimensions should have a "+" modifier in their Attack Potency section (High Hyperverse level+)."

Anything that exists beyond base countable infinity (aka a countably infinite amount of vectors) would already be high 1-B+. and for them to use the word "transfinite" only furthers this conclusion because then we KNOW their talking about set theory. So no it would be impossible for it to be "Low 2-C" as mentioned.

"[on top of this, I've already discussed this topic with Ultima on discord and he agrees with this downgrade, so he might be able to provide further arguments about "absolute infinity" and why it isn't even a coherent quantitative concept in the first place]"I would like to see proof of this conversation.

 

[Telomera]

Actually, reading the essay Wikipedia uses... Cantor considered the Set of all alephs (the class of all alephs numbers, basically) as absolutely infinite, something similar to V...

They may seem similar at first glance, but they are absolutely incomparable. First of all, it's absolutely nonsensical to equate sets with classes. Classes were literally made with the intent to avoid the limitations of sets.

Second of all, you're operating under a false understanding of what Cantor believed numbers to be. He didn't treat numbers as quantitative extensions of strength like in our tiering system does below 1-A, but rather treated them in a Platonic sense and viewed numbers as representing reality itself, including the very relationships and processes that govern both the external and mental world. These numbers encompass both "quantitative superiority" and "qualitative superiority."

Thirdly, you're equating a mathematical object with something that is fundamentally beyond mathematics. Cantor viewed the "set of all alephs" as something that could not be considered a mathematical object at all (unlike V) due to the Burali-Forti paradox. Instead, he viewed the Absolute as an absolute unity in which everything is, which contains everything; a metaphysical entity without determination whatsoever in the Hegelian sense; completely unincreasable (unlike Low 1-A which is treated as increasable on our Tiering System); unable to be conceived as an abstract or mathematical magnitude, number, or order type; and beyond the intellect's ability to define, determine, or distinguish due to the Absolute's sheer immensity.

Whereas V is a mathematical object that corresponds to Low 1-A, the Absolute Infinite as put forward by Cantor is a metaphysical entity beyond mathematics entirely that is more along the lines of Tier 0. It is completely incompatible with Otto's power or even the Imaginary Tree.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

No one defines absolute infinity in that way. It's ridiculous to make up definitions out of thin air just to defend a verse's scaling.

This is a claim. I would like a justification for this.

 

[Telomera]

Hmmm... not quite in raw power. Absolute infinity has many versions, and theoretically, one version can surpass another. There is a version that is close to the Von Neumann Universe and another that cannot be surpassed, theoretically, in quantitative manner. However, if any one of these versions is true for the verse, making the others false, it would and should still be in the same category as the unsurpassable version, I think. Since it is absolute infinity, being quantitatively beyond it would be kind of... self-defeat, even if taken from context of the verse in "mathematical sense" (which we take here ig). Being above in skill or combat or shit is different thing. But I was told that no one scales above absolute infinity and everyone downscales. So I will wait for response and counter arguments. I am still neutral.

No, there are pretty much only two versions of "absolute infinity" that could possibly apply here: "absolute infinity" as put forward by Cantor (which I already explained why it's not applicable here whatsoever) and "absolute infinity" as put forward by Spinoza (which I'm not too knowledgeable on but it's absolutely not Low 1-A). There is no "Low 1-A absolute infinity," that's a completely made-up definition invented solely for scaling.

Since neither of these definitions apply, we either have to treat 绝对的无限 as literally meaning "'infinite' in some way that is absolute" (which is not necessarily Low 1-A) or just as a buzzword that Honkai made up whos real definition we don't know.

And another thing that's notable is that as mentioned earlier, the way 绝对的无限 is phrased is quite different from how the philosophical Absolute infinity is usually expressed in Chinese (that being "绝对无限"). Additionally, in the original scan, there are quotation marks placed around 无限 (infinity), which implies that 无限 is either a proper noun/name or metaphorical language rather than a strict philosophical term as that is what quotation marks in Chinese are often used for

 

[Telomera]

This is a claim. I would like a justification for this.

Placing the burden of proof on me to justify a negative claim is crazy. Let me put it another way: you guys have to justify defining Absolute Infinity as Low 1-A

 

[henryzx900ruly]

Placing the burden of proof on me to justify a negative claim is crazy. Let me put it another way: you guys have to justify defining Absolute Infinity as Low 1-A

Seems like one doesn't know the Order of conversationals.

 

[SweetDao]

They may seem similar at first glance, but they are absolutely incomparable. First of all, it's absolutely nonsensical to equate sets with classes. Classes were literally made with the intent to avoid the limitations of sets.

That's...exactly what I said. The Set of all aleph or heck, the set of all sets are, in themselves, not set themselves. Hence why V and other Proper Classes are too big to possess a cardinality.

He didn't treat numbers as quantitative extensions of strength like in our tiering system does below 1-A, but rather treated them in a Platonic sense and viewed numbers as representing reality itself, including the very relationships and processes that govern both the external and mental world. These numbers encompass both "quantitative superiority" and "qualitative superiority."

You do know that you're arguing for any aleph being qualitatively and quantitatively superior right? Also he wasn't wrong, technically.

Instead, he viewed the Absolute as an absolute unity in which everything is, which contains everything;

Author of the essay literally mention the set-theoretic universe come on...

unable to be conceived as an abstract or mathematical magnitude, number, or order type; and beyond the intellect's ability to define, determine, or distinguish due to the Absolute's sheer immensity.

This is literally what he explains in the essay tho. There is a difference with a "completed infinity", like aleph 1 for exemple, and the proper class of all aleph that can't be seen as "completed" hence why he considered it (among other classes, like the ordinals one) as absolutely infinite. He doesn't consider them as mathematical objects because it's not possible to fathom them that way, yet, he himself consider them as "improper" which is his way of saying Absolute Infinite basically.

That you want to argue that God from Cantor's perspective can't be surpassed is fine, but as I told you from the start, there is a difference between "God" and simply the idea of absolute infinity. Second one is more common than anything since it applies to any proper class at the very least.

 

[SweetDao]

I'll reiterate what I said before, but you would be better off arguing anything "but" Low 1-A rating for Absolute Infinity. I'm sure there must be some anti feat somewhere that would be more damning than arguing semantics.

 

[Telomera]

That's...exactly what I said. The Set of all aleph or heck, the set of all sets are, in themselves, not set themselves. Hence why V and other Proper Classes are too big to possess a cardinality.

You're ignoring the fact that Cantor didn't even view the "set of all alephs" as a mathematical object to begin with, whereas V and other proper classes are in fact mathematical objects.

You do know that you're arguing for any aleph being qualitatively and quantitatively superior right?

No, I'm arguing that alephs as CANTOR specifically viewed them are qualitative as well as quantitative.

Author of the essay literally mention the set-theoretic universe come on...

Irrelevant

That you want to argue that God from Cantor's perspective can't be surpassed is fine, but as I told you from the start, there is a difference between "God" and simply the idea of absolute infinity. Second one is more common than anything since it applies to any proper class at the very least.

Cantor made no such distinction. Please justify the claim that there is a "mathematical absolute infinity [specifically referring to V]" as well as a "God Absolute Infinity" and that it would apply in this case

 

[Telomera]

I'll reiterate what I said before, but you would be better off arguing anything "but" Low 1-A rating for Absolute Infinity. I'm sure there must be some anti feat somewhere that would be more damning than arguing semantics.

I'm arguing that Absolute Infinity is tier 0 and is thus completely incompatible with being Otto's power level. Plus, I already showed earlier that there were limits to Otto's power.

 

[SweetDao]

You're ignoring the fact that Cantor didn't even view the "set of all alephs" as a mathematical object to begin with, whereas V and other proper classes are in fact mathematical objects.

He didn't see ANY improper infinite as mathematical objects. That includes any proper classes and V. They are defined by the fact they are above cardinality and "size" as a whole.

No, I'm arguing that alephs as CANTOR specifically viewed them are qualitative as well as quantitative.

So... Why would it be the case in Honkai? Why should we take Cantor's PoV rather than what is inside the verse?

Irrelevant

He explains that Cantor literally saw V as not a mathematical object man...

Cantor made no such distinction

Because, unless you want to think that Cantor is brain-damaged, it's quite obvious that he didn't see the set of all aleph as literally "God". However, it's obvious that in saw IN the set of all alephs (and all improper infinities) some properties that were shared by God. (Shared here as in, it looks like X has properties of God but in truth it isn't God, just in case I explained myself badly), Reflection principle and all, you know it.

Please justify the claim that there is a "mathematical absolute infinity [specifically referring to V]" as well as a "God Absolute Infinity" and that it would apply in this case

I mean, the class of ordinals is absolutely infinite, the class of all alephs is absolutely infinite, V was, to some extent, given the same treatment, unless you want to tell me "actually it's all God" it's rather self-evident. Honkai would take the case of it simply acting as a class (if again, the feat is legit, that much I don't know and don't care much, but for the record, I find the whole "infinite even from a transfinite perspective" or whatever it was kinda shit) rather than acting as "God".

 

[DrakerX]

I'm arguing that Absolute Infinity is tier 0 and is thus completely incompatible with being Otto's power level. Plus, I already showed earlier that there were limits to Otto's power.

You are putting much more meaning to it, but the actual definition is quite more simple: "It can be thought of as a number that is bigger than any other conceivable or inconceivable quantity, either finite or transfinite" It even has a mathematical symbol, which is Ω.
Literally, in that same Wikipedia page there are text from Cantor that give it the actual mathematical definition: "Now I envisage the system of all [ordinal] numbers and denote it Ω". And this is Low 1-A, not Tier 0 or anything that you are arguing about from other essay that are just interpretations. The fact that he linked it with God and associated with bigger philosophical concept doesn't mean that that is the proper mathematical definition.
Now, can you actually provide a factual link to anywhere in our standards where it puts a cap at the level of strenght that can be achieve quantitatively? Because what you are arguing, as I said before, is not mentioned anywhere in our own Tiering System. The only cap in strenght placed by the Tiering System is for Tier 0, and that's it, trying to apply another cap to the quantitative trascendence would require a change to our standards. Our previous Tiering System that relied on math had Absolute Infinity at High 1-A at best, and obviously Tier 0 is superior to that, so we did indeed accept that something can be stronger then AI, and there is no mention of this being changed in the current standards. And in fact, the very definition of 1-A is that "No matter how strong you get, without a qualitative trascendence you cannot reach 1-A", something that would not make sense if our standards already put a limit of strenght at the baseline of Low 1-A.
So, once again, if you can link to where our standards mention a cap for the strenght for Low 1-A or anywhere outside of Tier 0 it would be useful to actually move the discussion further.

 

[Telomera]

He didn't see ANY improper infinite as mathematical objects. That includes any proper classes and V. They are defined by the fact they are above cardinality and "size" as a whole.

V is not an "improper infinite" nor did Cantor ever even talk about proper classes or V. You need to stop falsely equating V with what Cantor considered to be the set of all alephs. That's the problem here, you're using circular reasoning. "Absolute Infinity is just V because he viewed V to be Absolute Infinity."

So... Why would it be the case in Honkai? Why should we take Cantor's PoV rather than what is inside the verse?

When did I ever claim it was? I only claimed that that's how CANTOR viewed alephs, not how anyone else views alephs. Stop putting words into my mouth.

But if you really do think that Cantor's PoV doesn't apply to Honkai Impact, then you'd have to discard his conception of the Absolute Infinite and define it as something else. What do you suggest we define "Absolute Infinity" as instead? I think it would be best to either define it as "infinity that is absolute in some sense" (which is not Low 1-A) or as a made-up buzzword who's meaning we don't know (also not Low 1-A).

He explains that Cantor literally saw V as not a mathematical object man...

No he didn't. Cantor never even talked about V. That was quite literally after his time. He died before any formulation of V was ever published.

Because, unless you want to think that Cantor is brain-damaged, it's quite obvious that he didn't see the set of all aleph as literally "God". However, it's obvious that in saw IN the set of all alephs (and all improper infinities) some properties that were shared by God. (Shared here as in, it looks like X has properties of God but in truth it isn't God, just in case I explained myself badly), Reflection principle and all, you know it.

That's just an argument from incredulity, and it doesn't even hold up as that. Remember that Cantor viewed alephs and numbers in general as representing reality itself and the processes and relationships that govern it. Since Cantor viewed God to be a unity that contained everything in which everything exists, it would make sense for Cantor to think of God as the "set" of all "alephs" (although he understood those terms in a FAR different way than you or I intuitively would).

I mean, the class of ordinals is absolutely infinite, the class of all alephs is absolutely infinite

No it's not. You're just using circular logic at this point. I'm asking you to PROVE that the class of ordinals would be considered to be absolutely infinite by Cantor, not to beg the question and simply parrot your conclusion over and over again.

 

[Telomera]

You are putting much more meaning to it, but the actual definition is quite more simple: "It can be thought of as a number that is bigger than any other conceivable or inconceivable quantity, either finite or transfinite"

You can use Wikipedia to find sources, but this definition in particular is just wrong. Cantor himself proved that such a "number" could not exist.

Now, can you actually provide a factual link to anywhere in our standards where it puts a cap at the level of strenght that can be achieve quantitatively?

There is no such cap. But there's the issue. You're trying to apply a concept that goes directly against our standards. In our standards, a "number that is bigger than any other conceivable or inconceivable quantity, either finite or transfinite" simply cannot exist. It's inapplicable.

The issue here is that you're trying to scale Honkai to a nonsensical, incoherent concept that contradicts our standards. It's not Low 1-A, it's completely incompatible with either our tiering system or logic in general.

So tell me, since the definition you gave is incorrect and inapplicable, how else do you think "absolute infinity" should be defined? Clearly we shouldn't use Cantor's definition either. The only way we could reasonably interpret "absolute infinity" is either as a buzzword who's meaning we don't know or as "infinite in a way that's somehow absolute" (which is not enough for Low 1-A).

 

[Furina003]

Physically, yes. Hax wise? Maybe Low 1-A via Honkai bullshit.

My point in that post is that physical AP /=/ hax, not DC.

Their only showing of Low 1-A feat is literally hax, there is no direct proof that it extends to their physical capabilities.

attack potential ≠ dc, Ap≠hax, but that doesn't mean it's just stuck at the moon level, you can't assume that the attack that killed Kevin was only at the level of the moon physically, but it must be understood case by case not just seen at a glance, if your mind set is like this, many fictions will be derived, even Goku fighting on a planet did not destroy the planet.