- 10,258
- 6,750
Ian Flynn has absolutely no authority on this matters as the cancelling of the Bumblekast shows.
-
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.
1-B Archie Sonic? A Total No-Brane-er! (Cosmology and AP Upgrade)
- Status
- 1,170
- 967
He said this confidently back in 2022, before the recent mess, and I'm sure the word of the writer of the comics and episodes of the show are more important than some powerscalers who fail to provide an actual reason
- 14,116
- 5,625
Enough with the derailing please
- 1,170
- 967
Ok 
- 10,258
- 6,750
Drop the passive agressive tone. Ian only wrote for one episode of the show. You whine about powerscalers while acting just as bad as them.
- 2,914
- 1,638
- Thread starter
- #46
Brane cosmology circomvents that issue.
By the way, the people who take issue with me claiming that string theory is canon in Sonic Boom don't seem to have accounted for the fact that the success of Eggman's black hole generator stems from his research on string theory. So if you're gonna disagree, don't use the "We don't have sufficient evidence that Eggman's statement confirm string theory for the verse", because I already adressed it. If the verse didn't canonically operate on string theory, Eggman's research would have either been useless or his machine would have failed, but we literally see him bring up string theory as he's working on the machine and when explaining why it works after its success.
Thank you for answering my question. As said before, I disagree with point 1, but the rest clears the air. I could've done without the insult though. Please try to be more civil in the future.Ok so...
- Random mentions of it aren't enough for the verse's cosmology actually having it, as there must be more solid proof of the verse using so. Gravity Falls and TTGL are that high right because of the fact that they make multiple hints to said theory actually being a thing in their cosmologies as you can see in their cosmology explanations.
- The evidence you use for the verse following branes is incomplete.
NGL that Wikipedia video is incomplete.
What you see as parallel pieces of paper are the lower-dimensional membranes that are within the higher-dimensional realm and connected through "bulks", where said membranes are infinitely thin in said realm.
I'd really suggest you to read this for better understanding on the matter, as just basing yourself on a single Wikipedia video without bothering to check yourself how the theory works is foolish and isn't a good impression at all.
For people who didn't read what I linked, in short how a 5D brane is compared to 4D membranes is this:
As you can see, in both cases the 4D branes (which you can think of as your average Universal+ space-time continuum) are infinitely thin pieces of paper within the 5D realm, which you can think here as Low Complex Multiversal due to it having actual superiority over said infinitely small membranes.
In fact, Gravity Falls and Gurren Lagann have both some visual evidence of being somehow similar to this model at least:
You see the difference? These examples are textbook showings of the Bulk Cosmology, yours instead is this:
Branes do not work like that, they're not perpendicular universes that pass through other ones perpendicularly, they're higher-dimensional universes that envelop the lower-dimensional ones within themselves as infinitely thin membranes.
Branes also aren't automatically 11D. Gurren Lagann is because the evidence makes it extra clear that the Bulk is 11-Dimensional, hence why it's High 1-C. Gravity Falls also follows it, but is merely Low 1-C, possibly 1-Bfor nowbecause of these extra dimensions not having really solid proofs of being superior to the lower ones, as by default they're just strings, aka 1-D lines that take higher-dimensional angles up to 11-D (or more depending on the model used).
TLDR: OP saw 2 random things online and instantly jumped to making an upgrade without bothering to look deep in why other verses qualify for it.
I don't think string theory by itself counts for anything tiering wise, if my research on the forum is anything to go by, but yeah.
That's not what I've heard from staff on the topic, but if that's true, then wouldn't that mean I only need to prove string theory is canon in order for my upgrade to be valid?
- 10,258
- 6,750
Changing to disagree based on Strym's reasoning as well. Sorry, Pepto. It was a good try, tho.
- 19,280
- 11,978
It does work like that unfortunately.
You don't get 1-A off merely mentioning Platonism, you don't get High 1-C from randomly mentioning Strings, and you don't get Low 1-A off just mentioning Mathematical Structures.
The verse has to elaborate on these theories rather than just mentioning them without giving further context, something that TTGL and GF both did.
- 7,730
- 9,208
- 267
- 113
Well first String theory just says Strings are 1D so I don't see its relevance here. Besides String theory would also directly contradict Brane theory in of itself mainly due to Supergravity. I don't see sonic losing to like a 4D electron anyways.
That Brane theory Wikipedia page is heavily wrong. Um for one why would the Occams razor be to assume those planes are 4D and the bulk around them is 5D for the imagur? Cause if we going by the Wikipedia page um for sake I will use a analogy you have those planes be 4D right 4D minkowski spacetime planes then the bulk is 5D so you don't get 1-B unless I am missing something. And if you don't believe me Heres is a "quick" explanation of a actual science paper behind 5D brane theory. and .
(Of course this is not the actual work i couldn't be bothered to refined them but its close enough to what the standards are it should be fine for this CRT)
I feel you just run into a Association fallacy with this. So i have to disagree unless theres more proof that the zones in archie actually are running off the theory.
- 2,914
- 1,638
- Thread starter
- #53
As soon as Strym answers this question, I'll close the thread.
- 19,280
- 11,978
No scans = No answer.
- 408
- 185
I disagree
- 525
- 76
Agreed
Sebas-S.P-san
He/Him- 339
- 272
Massively disagree FRA
For the reasons explained above Previously.
For the reasons explained above Previously.
- 2,979
- 1,983
- 2,445
- 985
What'd you revive this for??
- 2,979
- 1,983
To screw with you. Heh!
- Status
Similar threads
