• 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.

Dragon Ball: Low 1-C Neutral Space

Status
Not open for further replies.
Astral_Trinity439 said:
Agree with both 5D neutral space. Since hypertimeline is already accepted, don't see any problem with 6D either
Click to expand...
I already told you about this before. I told you that the super timeline also includes the neutral zone, and I said so back then. So why, then, is it not 6D? I do not remember exactly what you said, but the important thing is that at the time you disagreed and said no. Now, when someone else brought it up, you agreed and did not see any problem with it. Just admit it: you simply disagree with me specifically.
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I already told you about this before. I told you that the super timeline also includes the neutral zone, and I said so back then. So why, then, is it not 6D? I do not remember exactly what you said, but the important thing is that at the time you disagreed and said no. Now, when someone else brought it up, you agreed and did not see any problem with it. Just admit it: you simply disagree with me specifically.
Click to expand...
My dude, please for the love of god, stop bringing up irrelevant shit in threads. Please. @Astral_Trinity439 Please ignore it.
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I already told you about this before. I told you that the super timeline also includes the neutral zone, and I said so back then. So why, then, is it not 6D? I do not remember exactly what you said, but the important thing is that at the time you disagreed and said no. Now, when someone else brought it up, you agreed and did not see any problem with it. Just admit it: you simply disagree with me specifically.
Click to expand...
If you keep derailing the thread, I'm taking this to RvR. Enough.
 
I don’t know, but the thread creator also forgot that the Angels and the Daishinkan would possess 6D range via manipulation of the six-dimensional super timeline. Therefore, their profiles would also be updated from 5D to 6D. If Whis can affect a six-dimensional timeline, then I think his power is sufficient to destroy the Neutral Space, given their ability to influence a six-dimensional timeline. At the very least, the Angels would have a 5D rating.

Range: 6D
Upgrade to Low 1-C due to their ability to affect a 6D timeline
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I don’t know, but the thread creator also forgot that the Angels and the Daishinkan would possess 6D range via manipulation of the six-dimensional super timeline. Therefore, their profiles would also be updated from 5D to 6D. If Whis can affect a six-dimensional timeline, then I think his power is sufficient to destroy the Neutral Space, given their ability to influence a six-dimensional timeline. At the very least, the Angels would have a 5D rating.

Range: 6D
Upgrade to Low 1-C due to their ability to affect a 6D timeline
Click to expand...
That is not how it works. No one besides Zeno can affect the timeline. Anyone who can travel across the timeline will have 6D range only, but that doesn't grant them Low 1-C AP. They have shown no evidence of being able to destroy NZ.
 
Vietthai96 said:
Oke, a thread at the end of the first month of new year, i'm dying, literally and metaphorically, anyway

Credit to @Killerdrone123 @ProfectusInfinity and some others

In this thread I would explain why neutral space in Dragon Ball would qualify for Low 1-C but first let me explain to you what does parallelism means

Parallelism

To properly discuss the Neutral Space, we first need to clarify what parallelism entails in a dimensional context.

In geometry, two objects are considered parallel if they can be extended infinitely without ever intersecting. However, this property depends on the dimensional framework they exist within.

In 1-D space, two line segments cannot be parallel if they occupy the same axis; extending them guarantees intersection.

In 2-D space, lines can be parallel because they are displaced along a second axis.

In 3-D space, planes can be parallel only if they are displaced along a third spatial axis.

Generalizing this, entire 4-D spacetimes cannot be truly parallel unless they are displaced along an additional spatial dimension.

Thus, if multiple spacetime continuums exist such that they never intersect or overlap regardless of expansion, they must be embedded within a higher-dimensional axis specifically, a space with at least one additional spatial axis beyond standard spacetime.

The Neutral Space in Dragon Ball

Actually we already have this discussion in my previous thread, and it was accepted, but for a clear explanation in case anyone is confuse, let's get back to it

In Dragon Ball, there exists a construct known as Neutral Space, where the Universe 6 vs Universe 7 tournament took place.



Now, Neutral Space is a construct that contains all 12 Macrocosms of the Dragon Ball multiverse in such a way that these macrocosms do not touch or physically interact with one another. It has also been explicitly referred to as the “space between the universes.”









As seen in the images above, both universes appear to be separated by Neutral Space and are positioned parallel to each other. Furthermore, Goku and the others were literally present within this space when Super Shenron was summoned. This clearly indicates that the universes are not directly connected to one another but are instead separated by Neutral Space. Neutral Space also appears to contain stars and galaxies, suggesting that it functions as a realm or space of its own rather than being a mere void.

https://imgur.com/tPttLT5

https://imgur.com/a/llJ8hp7

In order for Neutral Space to contain these 4-dimensional macrocosms—which are parallel to each other and do not interact regardless of expansion—it would require displacement along a higher-dimensional axis, namely an additional spatial dimension beyond the standard three. This would ensure that no matter how far these macrocosms extend, they would never intersect or overlap.

Additionally, Neutral Space should be at least 2-C or larger in scale, as it is capable of containing 12 separate 4-dimensional macrocosms, each with its own independent time dimension.

Based on tiering logic, this would place Neutral Space at 5-dimensional (5D). However, it would not qualify as Low 1-C, as that would require proof that this higher spatial axis has significant extent. That said, there may be alternative arguments that could establish such significance and potentially justify a Low 1-C tier


Time Axis of Neutral Space

Now, as I explained above, Neutral Space is 5D, with a size of at least 2-C or possibly higher something that is already accepted and mentioned in the cosmology blog of DB.

During the U7 vs U6 tournament arc, Hit is shown using his technique Time-Skip within the Neutral Zone. This technique explicitly allows Hit to move into the future, effectively skipping forward in time. Now some might confuse it with the ability Hit later displayed in his fight with Goku later on but it was stated by Vados that in order for Hit to use his dimensional creating he needs to store time that he skip and it is an ability he learned later on - something that even Hit mentions himself that he wasn't using time skip when he was fighting Goku.The successful use of Time-Skip in Neutral Space demonstrates that this realm does not lack time altogether; rather, it possesses its own temporal framework. Consequently, Neutral Space must have an independent time axis, separate from and not governed by the temporal flow of the twelve macrocosms. Neutral zone having its own independent Time Axis was already accepted in this thread

This independent axis would generate an uncountably infinite number of snapshots of this 5D space, making it significant enough to qualify as Low 1-C. Consequently, the entirety of Neutral Space would scale to Low 1-C.

To summarize, Neutral Space is a realm that contains and separates multiple 4D macrocosms, which establishes it as 5D. Additionally, it has its own independent time axis, resulting in an uncountably infinite set of 5D snapshots. This combination is sufficient to classify Neutral Space as Low 1-C.

Now, as it is already accepted that DB cosmology has a hypertimeline overarching the entire multiverse, the multiverse/Neutral Space would therefore be Low 1-C as a whole. This hypertimeline would generate an uncountably infinite number of snapshots of this Low 1-C structure, effectively making it 6D / 1-C overall.

Scaling

Anyone who affect the timeline will get 1-C rating
  • Zeno, Infinite Zamasu eventually rating, Game characters
  • Arale with her Plot hax
Anyone who travel, cross the timeline will get 1-C range rating
  • Zeno, Angel's haxes and most Major Game's characters
  • Time Ring, Time Machine
Anyone who affect the Neutral Zone will get Low 1-C rating
  • No one
Anyone who travel, cross the Neutral Zone will get Low 1-C range rating
  • Kai with their Kai Kai can get to Zeno's Palace which exists within this Space so they get this rating. Angels too since they have similar capabilities. Super Shenron DBS also get this as well.
  • All characters who scale to 2 GoDs fighting (i.e., everyone who scales to 6 universes). 2 GoDs fighting would cause the destruction of their respective universes, meaning the destruction crosses the Neutral Space between universes.

Vote:

Agree:

Neutral:

Disagree:
Click to expand...

Great job, agree!
 
Azertyhuuh said:
I don’t know, but the thread creator also forgot that the Angels and the Daishinkan would possess 6D range via manipulation of the six-dimensional super timeline. Therefore, their profiles would also be updated from 5D to 6D. If Whis can affect a six-dimensional timeline, then I think his power is sufficient to destroy the Neutral Space, given their ability to influence a six-dimensional timeline. At the very least, the Angels would have a 5D rating.

Range: 6D
Upgrade to Low 1-C due to their ability to affect a 6D timeline
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? You know that hax don’t mean your AP scales right? The wiki has a whole classification for these types of character.


Smurf
In this community it refers to characters that have abilities (notably Hax) that are of a higher dimensional and/or infinite scale than their physical bodies. For example, any characters that are physically between tiers 10-C to High 3-A with abilities that can affect tier 2 or tier 1 characters.
Click to expand...
 
Oh boy... 8D Cell Prime via Continuities being Bulk Spaces holding timelines and then the Super Continuity viewing everything below as fiction

anyways I agree with this, Sonic vs Goku anyone?
 
Shadow7001 said:
What rule is this breaking?
Click to expand...
Well the first one is the fact multiple scans in the OP is trying to push force a conclusion, that goes against currently accepted values, without changing those values, yet still trying to reap the benefits from them.

Like right off the bat, kind of pisses me off too, anyone remember the thread were I argued extensively and the whole collective DB community swore to god that "nuh uh those are just abstractions despite being the ONLY time we literally see the universe, it contradicted the very abstracted globe model!".

If you all agree with this shit, I want you to realize you how badly this effects the actual cosmology of the actual universes itself too, you can't just use scans to get biggatons for one thing when they also downgrade other shit if you're taking it at actual face value.
 
Chariot190 said:
Well the first one is the fact multiple scans in the OP is trying to push force a conclusion, that goes against currently accepted values, without changing those values, yet still trying to reap the benefits from them.

Like right off the bat, kind of pisses me off too, anyone remember the thread were I argued extensively and the whole collective DB community swore to god that "nuh uh those are just abstractions despite being the ONLY time we literally see the universe, it contradicted the very abstracted globe model!".

If you all agree with this shit, I want you to realize you how badly this effects the actual cosmology of the actual universes itself too, you can't just use scans to get biggatons for one thing when they also downgrade other shit if you're taking it at actual face value.
Click to expand...
You're not making up a rule, are you? I've never seen a rule like that anywhere on the wiki.
 
Chariot190 said:
Well the first one is the fact multiple scans in the OP is trying to push force a conclusion, that goes against currently accepted values, without changing those values, yet still trying to reap the benefits from them.

Like right off the bat, kind of pisses me off too, anyone remember the thread were I argued extensively and the whole collective DB community swore to god that "nuh uh those are just abstractions despite being the ONLY time we literally see the universe, it contradicted the very abstracted globe model!".

If you all agree with this shit, I want you to realize you how badly this effects the actual cosmology of the actual universes itself too, you can't just use scans to get biggatons for one thing when they also downgrade other shit if you're taking it at actual face value.
Click to expand...
Those scans are just there for representation though dude, like you can remove them if you like. They're just there to depict the NZ's function for people that don't fully understand how DB cosmology is set up. I don't think it's that big a deal-breaker and certainly not a rule violation of some kind. Neither the globe model nor an orb with a single large galaxy are particularly good representations of it. Like yeah maybe those scans are unnecessary for those who are familiar with DB cosmology, but not everyone here is.
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:
You're not making up a rule, are you? I've never seen a rule like that anywhere on the wiki.
Click to expand...
Tf you mean you've never seen a rule like that? The wiki has to be consistent.
  • Cherry-picking / selective evidence: you use only the parts of evidence that help one claim, while ignoring parts that undermine a diff one (or even undermine the first one).
  • Special pleading: you accept evidence when it supports your point, but go "nuh uh" or some different standard when the same evidence would hurt another point you also want.
  • Inconsistent standards / double standard: you treat the same kind of evidence as "good enough" in one spot, but “not good enough” elsewhere, purely because it would force an unwanted conclusion.
  • Suppressed evidence: you present evidence while leaving out relevant contradictory portions or info that would screw something else you want which would change how it should be interpreted.
  • Confirmation bias: ya'll focus on what confirms what you want and discount what conflicts with it.

All at the same time. You really telling me you haven't been on wiki long enough to know that you're not allowed to cherry pick selective evidence?

Shadow7001 said:
Those scans are just there for representation though dude, like you can remove them if you like. They're just there to depict the NZ's function for people that don't fully understand how DB cosmology is set up. I don't think it's that big a deal-breaker and certainly not a rule violation of some kind. Neither the globe model nor an orb with a single large galaxy are particularly good representations of it. Like yeah maybe those scans are unnecessary for those who are familiar with DB cosmology, but not everyone here is.
Click to expand...
So what you're telling me, is that the OP is deliberately using faulty and misleading evidence?
I would highly suggest to not make this any worse for the OP and no, nowhere in the OP does it state that, and now they're for all to see so I will be tackling exactly the consequences of using them now, why it will have to change accordingly.
And no, those scans are very much important to the suggestion, they're effectively the crux of it. And if you remove them as "not accurate", the vast majority of points here get tossed.
 
Chariot190 said:
Did you legit ong just say that to me?
Yeah ok so chat I don't want to hear complaining when the 500k byte post drops in like two days got it?
Click to expand...
Seriously fix up that stinking attitude. It’s starting to get irritating. If no one will tell you this I will. It’s jarring having to put up with your behaviour, it doesn’t take much to converse in a respectful manner. I seriously don’t know how you’ve gotten away with this consistent acts of deplorable behaviour when addressing said people but it stops now. Frustration or not, tend to your feelings before letting it gets the best of you onsite.
 
Chariot190 said:
So what you're telling me, is that the OP is deliberately using faulty and misleading evidence?
I would highly suggest to not make this any worse for the OP and no, nowhere in the OP does it state that, and now they're for all to see so I will be tackling exactly the consequences of using them now, why it will have to change accordingly.
And no, those scans are very much important to the suggestion, they're effectively the crux of it. And if you remove them as "not accurate", the vast majority of points here get tossed.
Click to expand...
You're making a mountain out of a molehill here my dude. The only important scan here is the one talking about the Neutral Zone being the space between the universes and being a space separate from them too, and it's from a guidebook. The one showing the universes with that little light in the middle is just to show how it might be set up but isn't necessary to the argument itself. Please stop baselessly accusing someone. At worst, if you still think those scans are problematic; well you've pointed that out, just wait for the OP (who's currently asleep) to respond to you if you only want their answer. Assuming bad faith immediately is also against the rules as I'm sure you already, so please refrain.
 
Last edited:
Chariot190 said:
  • Cherry-picking / selective evidence: you use only the parts of evidence that help one claim, while ignoring parts that undermine a diff one (or even undermine the first one).
  • Special pleading: you accept evidence when it supports your point, but go "nuh uh" or some different standard when the same evidence would hurt another point you also want.
  • Inconsistent standards / double standard: you treat the same kind of evidence as "good enough" in one spot, but “not good enough” elsewhere, purely because it would force an unwanted conclusion.
  • Suppressed evidence: you present evidence while leaving out relevant contradictory portions or info that would screw something else you want which would change how it should be interpreted.
  • Confirmation bias: ya'll focus on what confirms what you w
Click to expand...
You’re saying all that, but you're not saying what evidence the OP is ignoring, or what evidence contradicts his thread. As I said before, it's simply a complaint, or well, in this case, a gratuitous assertion fallacy, since the burden of proof rests with you and you're not proving anything.
 
Gamin_Yoon23 said:
Seriously fix up that stinking attitude. It’s starting to get irritating. If no one will tell you this I will. It’s jarring having to put up with your behaviour, it doesn’t take much to converse in a respectful manner. I seriously don’t know how you’ve gotten away with this consistent acts of deplorable behaviour when addressing said people but it stops now. Frustration or not, tend to your feelings before letting it get the best of you.
Click to expand...
Can you stop heating up this crap? This isn't the first post I've seen where you're trying to make Chariot look bad. If you think he did something wrong, go to RVT; otherwise, you're just derailing the thread like always, and if you keep this up, I'll report you myself.
 
AmonInChains said:
Can you stop heating up this crap? This isn't the first post I've seen where you're trying to make Chariot look bad. If you think he did something wrong, go to RVT; otherwise, you're just derailing the thread like always, and if you keep this up, I'll report you myself.
Click to expand...
You can gladly report me then. It’s also odd seeing how I was right to suspect you would be here the second I called it out. You need to stop trying to label me the villain or villainise me for calling out hasty behaviour. We might be different in terms of characteristics and personality but yes, I am the type that will call out aggressive behaviour where it’s deemed unneeded and to be frank I don’t care what you think. His comments reek of aggression whether you like that or not. Just like the time before, actually annotate his comments yourself before you swoop in immediately to act as his knight in shining armour. Won’t be entertaining this further.
 
LordDestroit10K said:
You’re saying all that, but you're not saying what evidence the OP is ignoring, or what evidence contradicts his thread. As I said before, it's simply a complaint, or well, in this case, a gratuitous assertion fallacy, since the burden of proof rests with you and you're not proving anything.
Click to expand...
Wow dude it's almost as if I have to type?
And damn it isn't like I literally actually did.

Various of Op's scans contradict the current universe model the wiki uses. To use those scans is to accept that the universe model we use needs to be changed.
You can not use them as evidence for one thing but ignore the implications of the other.

This was so exceedingly obvious, I'm actually baffled I even have to explain this to you, given I literally already pointed that out.
I even outright mentioned it, so stop selectively reading just to seem like you have a complaint.

Now, instead of yapping as if I'm not going to now write up every single thing that has to ******* change personally solely because of you, stop complaining as if shit doesn't take time. I can, and will, point out the very obvious cherry picking beforehand so people know ahead of time. Whether it takes a day or quite a few, who knows, but I will do so now.
 
Gamin_Yoon23 said:
You need to stop trying to label me the villain or villainise me for calling out hasty behaviour.
Click to expand...
If he did wrong, go to RVT. If you want to ask directly to him, go to his profile. Otherwise, you're derailing, so cut.

Gamin_Yoon23 said:
Just like the time before, actually annotate his comments yourself before you swoop in immediately to act as his knight in shining armour.
Click to expand...
LMAO

Anyway, I don't plan to keep answering this because all it does is push it to have more and more pages.
 
AmonInChains said:
Can you stop heating up this crap? This isn't the first post I've seen where you're trying to make Chariot look bad. If you think he did something wrong, go to RVT; otherwise, you're just derailing the thread like always, and if you keep this up, I'll report you myself.
Click to expand...
Why only one and not both? He's just describing how he behaves, he's not being deceptive.

Besides, you should go somewhere else and stop derailing this thread.
 
Shadow7001 said:
You're making a mountain out of a molehill here my dude. The only important scan here is the one talking about the Neutral Zone being the space between the universes and being a space separate from them too, and it's from a guidebook. The one showing the universes with that little light in the middle is just to show how it might be set up but isn't necessary to the argument itself. Please stop baselessly accusing someone. At worst, if you still think those scans are problematic; well you've pointed that out, just wait for the OP (who's currently asleep) to respond to you if you only want their answer. Assuming bad faith immediately is also against the rules as I'm sure you already, so please refrain.
Click to expand...
I never said bad faith. Assuming I think OP did anything intentionally is an accusation in and of itself of bad faith. The way you're framing the OP would imply such facts though, fortunately, you aren't Op so I'm not sure why you're speaking for them to begin with.
It could be completely accidental. This does not change what it is though, the fact arguments and points rely on it, and a slew of various other facets.

You can call it a molehill, but a molehill still exists does it not?
Faulty evidence and contradictory proof is still faulty and contradictory. And when a major part of it is proving the relation between in scope, and they're literally the only verifiable proof we have. To ignore them completely is to basically hinge the entire thread on a maybe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Iamunanimousinthat
  • Locked
Neutral Space Downgrade: Addressing Claims without Evidence
2
Replies
70
Views
6K
Vietthai96
Vietthai96
Iamunanimousinthat
  • Locked
Neutral Space Downgrade Thread
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
ItzBanee
Revisiting 2-C (12 Universes) Base Sonic, Low 1-C or 2-C (2 Universes)?
Replies
31
Views
2K
AyOgUyS
AyOgUyS
Hypercyber37
  • Locked
6D Dragon ball?
Replies
13
Views
4K
AwkguyDB
AwkguyDB
Vietthai96
  • Locked
Dragon Ball 5D and 6D Extradimensional
2 3
Replies
92
Views
12K
CryptonBestDbFan
CryptonBestDbFan
Back
Top