Transcending 1-A+ isn't High 1-A?

[Okstrike]

I always thought that the tiering system was clear and cut when it came to this and that qualitatively transcending an infinite hierarchy of qualitatively transcending levels would qualify as meta-QS/High 1-A, but than i was told that it isn’t enough for High 1-A and that explicit transcendence over the entire “framework” of qualitative transcendence needs to be shown for High 1-A

To be more specific, would holding the entire an infinite hierarchy of QS layers as nothing more than an infinitesimal illusion without substance be High 1-A, or is it just a higher degree of 1-A+?

 

[SuperNova55555]

1-A+ is just infinite layers of 1-A. But it also includes Aleph-1 layers and above etc. etc. so you can just be higher into 1-A+

As for your other question, if you qualitatively transcend the genera of 1-A and non-1-A (i.e, they are undifferentiated into nothingness in regards to you) then that’s High 1-A. A 1-A+ structure here is generally unrelated.

 

[Okstrike]

1-A+ is just infinite layers of 1-A. But it also includes Aleph-1 layers and above etc. etc. so you can just be higher into 1-A+

Okay i understand, transcending 1-A+ would be just a higher degree of the same tier unless sated otherwise

As for your other question, if you qualitatively transcend the genera of 1-A and non-1-A (i.e, they are undifferentiated into nothingness in regards to you) then that’s High 1-A. A 1-A+ structure here is generally unrelated.

To be sure, if 1-A and non-1-A are both the same "nothingness" in comparison to you than you would be High 1-A? right?

 

[SuperNova55555]

To be sure, if 1-A and non-1-A are both the same "nothingness" in comparison to you than you would be High 1-A? right?

Basically. The main reasoning is undifferentiation.

As in, if a 1-A layer adds literally 0 to the non-1-A structure in comparison to you, then it cannot be said that another 1-A layer would add any more than 0. As such all additions of 1-A are functionally “nothingness” to you (as 0+0+0…=0), so you must be High 1-A.

 

[Okstrike]

As in, if a 1-A layer adds literally 0 to the non-1-A structure in comparison to you, then it cannot be said that another 1-A layer would add any more than 0. As such all additions of 1-A are functionally “nothingness” to you (as 0+0+0…=0), so you must be High 1-A.

But isn't just what 1 layer above 1-A is since it transcends 1-A in the same vein that 1-A transcends the rest of the system?

The relation would be something like this unless i’m missing something:

Non 1-A = nothing to 1-A, 1-A = nothing to 1-A + 1. So 1-A + non 1-A = nothing to 1-A + 1.

if that's not the case than the verse i'm scaling would be infinite an meta-quality chain into high 1-A, that is unless i'm missing something

 

[SuperNova55555]

But isn't just what 1 layer above 1-A is since it transcends 1-A in the same vein that 1-A transcends the rest of the system?

The relation would be something like this unless i’m missing something:

Non 1-A = nothing to 1-A, 1-A = nothing to 1-A + 1. So 1-A + non 1-A = nothing to 1-A + 1.

if that's not the case than the verse i'm scaling would me infinite an meta-quality chain into high 1-A, that is unless i'm missing something

What you’re mentioning is a bit of a problem with the tiering system as even Ultima himself agrees that non-1-A isn’t “wholly non-existent”. The best way to explain this is that to someone who is 1 layer into 1-A, non-1-A would be “more non-existent” than baseline 1-A. But to High 1-A, all layers are “equally non-existent” in the same way that all dimensions are equally non-existent to 1-A

 

[Okstrike]

Okay thanks for now, i'm busy rn but i'll be back later if i have another question

 

[Okstrike]

What you’re mentioning is a bit of a problem with the tiering system as even Ultima himself agrees that non-1-A isn’t “wholly non-existent”. The best way to explain this is that to someone who is 1 layer into 1-A, non-1-A would be “more non-existent” than baseline 1-A. But to High 1-A, all layers are “equally non-existent” in the same way that all dimensions are equally non-existent to 1-A

But than how is 1-A completely superior qualitatively if non 1-A isn't "non-existent" in comparison? shouldn't inaccessible cardinals or larger sets also be 1-A if it wasn't? considering how the only reason they weren't to begin with is since smaller sets have permutations that lead to them

 

[SuperNova55555]

But than how is 1-A completely superior qualitatively if non 1-A isn't "non-existent" in comparison? shouldn't inaccessible cardinals or larger sets also be 1-A if it wasn't? considering how the only reason they weren't to begin with is since smaller sets have permutations that lead to them

This is why PSW is the superior wiki

Well, as long as the lower qualities’ “additions” can never amount to something of the higher quality then 1-A is satisfied, like how space can never amount to the universal of space or how the objects of thought (ideas; dreams) can never amount to anything real even though they aren’t “truly non-existent”

Keep in mind though that with every tier there are some “logical leeways” to account for the absurdity of fiction

 

[Okstrike]

This is why PSW is the superior wiki

Well, as long as the lower qualities’ “additions” can never amount to something of the higher quality then 1-A is satisfied, like how space can never amount to the universal of space or how the objects of thought (ideas; dreams) can never amount to anything real even though they aren’t “truly non-existent”

Keep in mind though that with every tier there are some “logical leeways” to account for the absurdity of fiction

Fate circle jerk wiki is nothing to VSBW

But lower cardinals don't really amount to anything compared to an inaccessible cardinal, it can't be reached or constructed from lower cardinals at all, even with replacements, it's in the name, they meet every requirement for 1-A but lower states being completely non-existent in comparison

I'm honestly more confused than before posting the thread

 

[SuperNova55555]

But lower cardinals don't really amount to anything compared to an inaccessible cardinal, it can't be reached or constructed from lower cardinals at all, even with replacements, it's in the name, they meet every requirement for 1-A but lower states being completely non-existent in comparison

Lower cardinals aren’t undifferentiated within the Inaccessible Cardinal. They still exist within them as sets with implicitly different sizes. It’s the opposite for 1-A things, who don’t even contain the lower tiers as subsets within themselves

 

[SuperNova55555]

For example, the concept of space isn’t itself composed of any space. Whereas something like an Inaccessible Cardinal has parts within itself that are composed of space

 

[Okstrike]

But like... how does that make it superior to an inaccessible? sure 1-A isn't made up of lower sates but it doesn't surpass them entirely either, both the inaccessible and 1-A realm would surpass lower states to the same extent, even though the 1-A doesn't hold these lower sates as a part of it acording to you

For example, the concept of space isn’t itself composed of any space. Whereas something like an Inaccessible Cardinal has parts within itself that are composed of space

I hate nitpicking, but any cardinal above aleph one is too large to exist physical and is purely a mathematical abstraction, at that level, it only exits because we say it does

 

[SuperNova55555]

But like... how does that make it superior to an inaccessible? sure 1-A isn't made up of lower sates but it doesn't surpass them entirely either, both the inaccessible and 1-A realm would surpass lower states to the same extent, even though the 1-A doesn't hold these lower sates as a part of it acording to you

Again, the issue is in the quality of things. After all, it can’t be that the Inaccessible Cardinal of a 1-A place is bigger than the Inaccessible Cardinal of a non-1-A place, ye? Yet, we know the latter is contingent on the former and is functionally non-existent to it.

I hate nitpicking, but any cardinal above aleph one is too large to exist physical and is purely a mathematical abstraction, at that level, it only exits because we say it does

I know