Sailor Moon AP Upgrade: Low 1-C

[Iamunanimousinthat]

As I said earlier, that scan most likely just means that the Tau dimension is a different space-time. The mention of "distance" here would be difficult to define or fully understand, especially since there is no clear mention of a larger container space that holds both. A container space would be a major addition to the cosmology, so it would need clear and strong evidence to support it.

Good thing the scan i used in my argument, calls the distance spacetime.

No, this is just incorrect. Why are you not addressing what I said when I challenged this interpretation? You should understand that this is very close to being false information.

Prove it.

 

[Killerdrone123]

Once again, your simplest logic is to ignore the scans that says there is distance between them.

No my simple logic here is that it's just a different space-time, that's all. You're saying that because it's called a "distant region of space-time" that this must mean that it's contained in some kind of super-space structure that separates them (which you're claiming is the main space-time doing it AFAIK), and I'm telling you that not only is this wholly unsupported and a massive reach but also the only two scans you're using to base this on are both gross misinterpretations. I'm really getting tired of this "take everything I saw at face value, don't scrutinize, don't question". This is not how any CRT works.

The scan says mercury established a new time axis and they moved to a world not like anything in the 3D dimensional world. Qaws has already agreed that mercury's dimension is 5D but just lacks significant size. (which is already accepted in the cosmology blog). We have been debating about whether the spacetime that holds everything is significant 5D.

Oh no. No. That's not what happened here. We need to take a step back. Let me quote Qawsedf here:

To be honest I'm not seeing it. Mercury's world being an insignificant pocket dimension that's within spacetime doesn't make Space-Time significant 4D.

Nowhere here does he refer to Mercury's Space being 5D, significant or insignificant (even if you say that the 4D was a typo on his part and he meant 5D, that still wouldn't mean that Mercury's space is 5D here).

Either you misunderstood him or you're just genuinely confused about what to argue anymore. The problem here is that none of the container spaces or "dimensions" that you say exist here (which, as I said, they don't) have any significant nor notable size. Additionally, you didn't counter what I said about it anyway

The corridor literally exists between times and hosts all the spacetimes. The universes are not your standard universes, they have their own unique structure in sailor moon. Everything in the entire series goes against what you are saying. Your only course of action is to ignore what has been written on paper.

This logic was already rejected before, and you are aware of that. The corridor is not some kind of bulk-space or higher structure. It is simply a space that connects them, like a hallway connecting different rooms. That does not mean the hallway literally contains those rooms in the sense you are suggesting.

This was already explained to you earlier. Simply repeating what is written without addressing the interpretation is not enough. What matters is how the evidence is analyzed and understood.

If you disagree with this interpretation, you should explain why your interpretation is more accurate and provide clear reasoning. Since you are proposing the claim, the responsibility is on you to show that your interpretation is correct and better supported.

You have yet to provide any scans or evidence that supports your conjecture.

That is my position. Please provide any scans or other evidence that support your claim that there is a massive super-space which contains these realms and connects them causally.

If such a structure truly exists, there should be clear and direct evidence showing it. Since this is a significant claim, it requires strong and unambiguous support.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Nowhere here does he refer to Mercury's Space being 5D, significant or insignificant (even if you say that the 4D was a typo on his part and he meant 5D, that still wouldn't mean that Mercury's space is 5D here).

Either you misunderstood him or you're just genuinely confused about what to argue anymore. The problem here is that none of the container spaces or "dimensions" that you say exist here (which, as I said, they don't) have any significant nor notable size. Additionally, you didn't counter what I said about it anyway

HE said it here:

I guess being pedantic aside, the qualifiers for Low 1-C are ultimately the following:

• Are there four spatial dimensions
• Is the Fourth dimension geometrically of notable size
• Is time applied to this space in a way to get an uncountable infinite number of temporal snapshots

For the thread, I see that 1 and 3 are proven. There's probably a fourth spatial axis, and time is applied to it, but you have not shown that this super-space is of notable size to qualify for Low 1-C.

This logic was already rejected before, and you are aware of that. The corridor is not some kind of bulk-space or higher structure. It is simply a space that connects them, like a hallway connecting different rooms. That does not mean the hallway literally contains those rooms in the sense you are suggesting.

This was already explained to you earlier. Simply repeating what is written without addressing the interpretation is not enough. What matters is how the evidence is analyzed and understood.

If you disagree with this interpretation, you should explain why your interpretation is more accurate and provide clear reasoning. Since you are proposing the claim, the responsibility is on you to show that your interpretation is correct and better supported.
That is my position. Please provide any scans or other evidence that support your claim that there is a massive super-space which contains these realms and connects them causally.

If such a structure truly exists, there should be clear and direct evidence showing it. Since this is a significant claim, it requires strong and unambiguous support.

This is my last time responding to you. You have not provided any evidence or scans to back up your claims. I will repeat one last time: The story says, the past and future have different time, space, and dimension. The story also says that there are rifts between the time periods. You need to prove the past and future have the same time and space, and that they are not separated. Good luck.

 

[Killerdrone123]

So while I was going through the Sailor Moon cosmology blog, I noticed something peculiar that I would like to bring attention to. There is a particular scan which I believe the OP is using to argue that the Mercury World is some kind of higher dimension with a higher space-time axis. The scan in question is this one.



So I found this scan very suspicious so I decided to cross check it and as I suspected



On many websites I checked the term "Layers of time" was not used. Instead, it simply said "crossing through time." I thought it might be present in the raws, so I decided to check the raw version myself



And no, it uses the same term as the English translations I mentioned above. It says "crossing through time," not "layers of time." This means that the scan using "layers of time" is most likely incorrect or altered. I tried searching for it, and the only place I could find that version was on the cosmology blog itself.

This makes me question whether the scans used in the cosmology blog and by the OP are actually correct or reliable. The specific phrase "layers of time" does not appear anywhere, neither in the original raws nor in the English translations from multiple sources. Instead, they all consistently use the phrase "crossing through time," which has a different meaning.

Because of this, the version that includes "layers of time" seems questionable and may not be an accurate representation of the original material. If such an important phrase cannot be found in the raws or standard translations, it raises serious doubts about the accuracy and authenticity of the scans being used to support the OP here

HE said it here:

Right, now please read his later messages

This is my last time responding to you. You have not provided any evidence or scans to back up your claims. I will repeat one last time: The story says, the past and future have different time, space, and dimension. The story also says that there are rifts between the time periods. You need to prove the past and future have the same time and space, and that they are not separated. Good luck.

And I will repeat as many times as it's necessary. The story does NOT say this. Your original scan calling them different time and space, is just talking about Sailor Moon and Neo-Queen Serenity being in the same place, at the same time. It doesn't mean that they otherwise exist in separate space-times/timelines given that we know that the SM timeline is literally just a single, linear timeline that has numerous instances of being affected by the Grandfather paradox. The rifts point is downright irrelevant, not sure why that's there. I don't need to "prove" it, the story already does. You're the one trying to "prove" with only two scans which seems misinterpreted

 

[HenshinIntervention]

So while I was going through the Sailor Moon cosmology blog, I noticed something peculiar that I would like to bring attention to. There is a particular scan which I believe the OP is using to argue that the Mercury World is some kind of higher dimension with a higher space-time axis. The scan in question is this one.



So I found this scan very suspicious so I decided to cross check it and as I suspected



On many websites I checked, such as mangabuddy, *********, and mangafire, the term "Layers of time" was not used. Instead, it simply said "crossing through time." I thought it might be present in the raws, so I decided to check the raw version myself



And no, it uses the same term as the English translations I mentioned above. It says "crossing through time," not "layers of time." This means that the scan using "layers of time" is most likely incorrect or altered. I tried searching for it, and the only place I could find that version was on the cosmology blog itself.

This makes me question whether the scans used in the cosmology blog and by the OP are actually correct or reliable. The specific phrase "layers of time" does not appear anywhere, neither in the original raws nor in the English translations from multiple sources. Instead, they all consistently use the phrase "crossing through time," which has a different meaning.

Because of this, the version that includes "layers of time" seems questionable and may not be an accurate representation of the original material. If such an important phrase cannot be found in the raws or standard translations, it raises serious doubts about the accuracy and authenticity of the scans being used to support the OP here

You're also using a scan the OP has not used ANYWHERE in the original post in an attempt to discredit other, unrelated scans and argumentation. It's best to not be dishonest and keep with the presented evidence, not bring up irrelevant ones.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

And I will repeat as many times as it's necessary. The story does NOT say this. Your original scan calling them different time and space, is just talking about Sailor Moon and Neo-Queen Serenity being in the same place, at the same time. It doesn't mean that they otherwise exist in separate space-times/timelines given that we know that the SM timeline is literally just a single, linear timeline that has numerous instances of being affected by the Grandfather paradox. The rifts point is downright irrelevant, not sure why that's there. I don't need to "prove" it, the story already does. You're the one trying to "prove" with only two scans which seems misinterpreted

How can you say that the rifts separating the time periods is irrelevant to the argument that the time periods are separated?

Again, no evidence. No scans. Just vibes.

 

[Killerdrone123]

You're also using a scan the OP has not used ANYWHERE in the original post in an attempt to discredit other, unrelated scans and argumentation. It's best to not be dishonest and keep with the presented evidence, not bring up irrelevant ones.

So let me get this straight. There is a scan present in the accepted cosmology blog that appears to be fake or forged, and instead of addressing that issue or providing a verifiable source for where it originated, you are choosing to call me dishonest.

Don’t you think this seriously calls into question the credibility of the SM supporters’ position?As they might deliberately let this scan slide in the blog without cross checking the source or it's credibility

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

So let me get this straight. There is a scan present in the accepted cosmology blog that appears to be fake or forged, and instead of addressing that issue or providing a verifiable source for where it originated, you are choosing to call me dishonest.

Don’t you think this seriously calls into question the credibility of the SM supporters’ position?As they might deliberately let this scan slide in the blog without cross checking the source or it's credibility

If you think we're using a fake scan, go report it. Stop derailing the thread with scan i did not use at all.

 

[Killerdrone123]

How does a space existing beyond space and time have a temporal element to it?

I guess being pedantic aside, the qualifiers for Low 1-C are ultimately the following:

• Are there four spatial dimensions
• Is the Fourth dimension geometrically of notable size
• Is time applied to this space in a way to get an uncountable infinite number of temporal snapshots

For the thread, I see that 1 and 3 are proven. There's probably a fourth spatial axis, and time is applied to it, but you have not shown that this super-space is of notable size to qualify for Low 1-C.

Actually, it's not even that it has four spatial axes. You see, Mercury uses a "time axis" (that she allegedly establishes) to leave their normal 3-dimensional world to go to this other space. Now OP thinks that this implies that Mercury went to a world with 4 spatial axes. Not only is this flawed on its own because merely "going beyond their 3-dimensional reality" doesn't necessarily imply entering a higher dimensional one, but that even if we grant this; the argument is still flawed. As I said earlier, she used a time axis to go to it, which itself would work as this "fourth dimension" instead of any spatial dimension. If anything, it just means she used the "fourth dimension" (the time axis) to go beyond their normal 3-dimensional reality, which doesn't leave any room for her dimension to have any extra-spatial axis. The reason I saw this is due to the time-axis part and the fact that "transcendence/going beyond" doesn't always (or even most of the time) refer to literal dimensional transcendence

I think the Mercury dimension just ends up being a 3D + 1T construct

Like this statement from MGQ sums it all up

Like what makes more sense? Changing time and causing time paradoxes by going to completely different space-times or doing it by doing actions within the same timeline?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Edit: Like what makes more sense? Changing time and causing time paradoxes by going to completely different space-times or doing it by doing actions within the same timeline?

Since Killer wants to bring this up, I'll address you directly, so you can respond directly if you so choose too.

It's not about what makes more sense. It's about what is accurate and on paper. The series does say that the past and future have different time, space, and dimension. But at the time you wrote this sentence, I had not included more supporting evidence:

Time periods in Sailor Moon are explicitly stated to be have rifts between them, meaning they are not one continuous 4D structure.
The past is also stated to be physically located on the other side of spacetime.

So time periods in Sailor Moon: have separate time, space, dimensions. Are physically separated. Have distinct separate locations within spacetime.

 

[Mbpoops]

.



Time periods in Sailor Moon are explicitly stated to be have rifts between them, meaning they are not one continuous 4D structure.
The past is also stated to be physically located on the other side of spacetime.

Could you show the raws for these?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Could you show the raws for these?

Give me one moment!

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

I disagree with the update

 

[TiltedFN]

Since Killer wants to bring this up, I'll address you directly, so you can respond directly if you so choose too.

It's not about what makes more sense. It's about what is accurate and on paper. The series does say that the past and future have different time, space, and dimension. But at the time you wrote this sentence, I had not included more supporting evidence:

No, it doesn't. It just says that the same person can't exist in the same time and place for too long because they'll fade away. This is literally a classic grandfather's paradox and the most slamdunk evidence of a single, continuous timeline. How do you dance around this?

Time periods in Sailor Moon are explicitly stated to be have rifts between them, meaning they are not one continuous 4D structure.

Having rifts in space-time is not evidence that its time periods are "different space-times/timelines" on their own. Also the "rift" here is likely just being referred to the Corridor of Time since it's often called that. Nevertheless, this is a moot point.

The past is also stated to be physically located on the other side of spacetime.

So time periods in Sailor Moon: have separate time, space, dimensions. Are physically separated. Have distinct separate locations within spacetime.

You do understand that this just works against you right? First of all, it doesn't mention that it is explicitly, physically located on the other side of the space-time. Secondly, even if it did, it's just explained by this character having immeasurable speed that literally allows them to physically travel across the timeline (didn't she send shockwaves rippling across it too?) This doesn't prove that they're separate space-times either. Only shoots your argument in the foot.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

No, it doesn't. It just says that the same person can't exist in the same time and place for too long because they'll fade away. This is literally a classic grandfather's paradox and the most slamdunk evidence of a single, continuous timeline. How do you dance around this?

Let me use an analogy to help.

Person A and Person B cannot live in the same house. If person A leaves the house and goes to another house, are those two houses the same house?
Person A and Person B cannot drive the same car at the same time. If Person A leaves the car and goes to drive another car, are those two cars the same car?
Person A and Person B cannot eat the same cake. If person A stops eating the cake and starts eating a new cake, are the two cakes the same cake?

Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same time. If person A leaves the time and goes to another time, are those two times the same time?
Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same space. If Person A leaves teh space and goes to anotehr space, are those two spaces the same space?
Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same dimension. If Person A leaves the dimension and goes to another dimension, are those two dimensions the same dimension?

Having rifts in space-time is not evidence that its time periods are "different space-times/timelines" on their own. Also the "rift" here is likely just being referred to the Corridor of Time since it's often called that. Nevertheless, this is a moot point.

It says rift between times. If there is a rift between two things, then the two things are separate do I really have to explain this?

If there is a gap between two desks, then that means the desks are not together and therefore separate.

You do understand that this just works against you right? First of all, it doesn't mention that it is explicitly, physically located on the other side of the space-time. Secondly, even if it did, it's just explained by this character having immeasurable speed that literally allows them to physically travel across the timeline (didn't she send shockwaves rippling across it too?) This doesn't prove that they're separate space-times either. Only shoots your argument in the foot.

If I said I am going to the house on the other side of the street, does that mean the house is on the same side street as me? It obviously means there is some distance or gap between location a and location b, which is the whole point. You bringing up immeasurable speed is a non-sequitur.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Could you show the raws for these?

時間と時間の狭間にある冥土の扉の美しい孤独な番人

"The beautiful, solitary guardian of the gate to the underworld, dwelling in the space between time and time"



そう…この胸の痛みは時空の彼方の皆の痛みなの!!

"Yes... this pain in my chest is the pain of everyone far beyond time and space!!"

彼方 can be translated as beyond or across or the other side

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I'm done for today. I'll just wait for Qaws to respond and any other mods.

 

[ProfectusInfinity]

そう…この胸の痛みは時空の彼方の皆の痛みなの!!

"Yes... this pain in my chest is the pain of everyone far beyond time and space!!"

彼方 can be translated as beyond or across.

"Yes... this pain in my chest is the pain of everyone far across time and space!!"

How does this help your argument when this interpretation would be valid within a single space-time?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

"Yes... this pain in my chest is the pain of everyone far across time and space!!"

How does this help your argument when this interpretation would be valid within a single space-time?

because of all the other evidence that says the time periods are separated . Your argument only works if they remove all context and pretend nothing else exists

And if we use beyond, then your argument falls apart because the past is beyond the space and time of the future, which also fits in with all the context and evidence. So yeah. I'm in really good shape here.

 

[Nissa_Ushiromiya]

Based on the updates i'm reading, i'm forced to withdraw my vote. However, i hope there will be updates on a possible realistic 5D.

 

[TiltedFN]

Let me use an analogy to help.

Person A and Person B cannot live in the same house. If person A leaves the house and goes to another house, are those two houses the same house?
Person A and Person B cannot drive the same car at the same time. If Person A leaves the car and goes to drive another car, are those two cars the same car?
Person A and Person B cannot eat the same cake. If person A stops eating the cake and starts eating a new cake, are the two cakes the same cake?

Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same time. If person A leaves the time and goes to another time, are those two times the same time?
Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same space. If Person A leaves teh space and goes to anotehr space, are those two spaces the same space?
Person A and Person B cannot exist in the same dimension. If Person A leaves the dimension and goes to another dimension, are those two dimensions the same dimension?

Well no, this is a pointless analogy because you're already presupposing that there's another "house" or another "car". It also doesn't work because it lacks the element of temporal progression. Existing in the same space at the same time is entirely different to what you're describing here. They can't exist in the same time period, because it causes the grandfather's paradox. How did you interpret this to mean that the time periods must be separate space-times?

It says rift between times. If there is a rift between two things, then the two things are separate do I really have to explain this?

If there is a gap between two desks, then that means the desks are not together and therefore separate.

That's just a feature of the Space-Time Corridor. It's used to access different time periods. That still doesn't change the fact that the timeline is literally a single, linear temporal axis

If I said I am going to the house on the other side of the street, does that mean the house is on the same side street as me? It obviously means there is some distance or gap between location a and location b, which is the whole point. You bringing up immeasurable speed is a non-sequitur.

Another irrelevant analogy here. To a character with immeasurable speed, time quite literally is no different than crossing a "street", so going to a place on the "other side of the street" is literally still talking about the same street. If you wanted to talk about a different street, you'd say; a different street, or another street which is precisely the evidence missing from your argument, calling them explicitly different space-times.

I'll also post these scans that outright imply that the "history" or the timeline here is literally just one single timeline that is outright implied to get affected by changes either in the present or the past, even implying that Sailor Moon would "one day see that same future" because her time period literally leads into that future.


I'm sorry to say, but it can't get more clear than this.
So many scans have been provided to you going against your argument and supporting ours.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Well no, this is a pointless analogy because you're already presupposing that there's another "house" or another "car". It also doesn't work because it lacks the element of temporal progression. Existing in the same space at the same time is entirely different to what you're describing here. They can't exist in the same time period, because it causes the grandfather's paradox. How did you interpret this to mean that the time periods must be separate space-times?

One last comment. I am tired of seeing this grandfather's paradox repeated over and over again. It doesn't apply here.

Grandfather's paradox is about going back into time and shooting your grandfather before he met your grandmother. It's a causality issue. It doesn't apply here. Sailor Moon was fading out of existence (before her upgrade) by simply existing in the same time as her future self. That's not a grandfather paradox.

Why would traveling to the future, cause you to be erased? That doesn't affect your causality if you are the one who came to future. How does usagi being in the future prevent her from being born in the past. BE FOR REAL.

Yall are just throwing everything but the kitchen sink and not even using scans.

Also, considering my argument is that there is over arching history despite the past, future, and present being physically separated with gaps helps my argument even more that there is a hypertimeline. Thank you. I'll add it.

 

[TiltedFN]

One last comment. I am tired of seeing this grandfather's paradox repeated over and over again. It doesn't apply here.

Grandfather's paradox is about going back into time and shooting your grandfather before he met your grandmother. It's a causality issue. It doesn't apply here. Sailor Moon was fading out of existence (before her upgrade) by simply existing in the same time as her future self. That's not a grandfather paradox.

You understand that fiction takes creative liberties with this right? Going to the past to kill your past self will also achieve a similar result, aka, interacting with a version of you from a different period of time. The point isn't whether the exact paradox is being replicated, the point here is to show that the timeline is literally structured in a way that causes these paradoxes. This is only possible in a single, linear timeline and you don't have enough evidence for a hypertimeline.

Why would traveling to the future, cause you to be erased? That doesn't affect your causality if you are the one who came to future. How does usagi being in the future prevent her from being born in the past. BE FOR REAL.

That's just a plot device. Yeah it doesn't make sense, she's just interacting, nor killing herself or anyone; but the point still stands, the same concept is being applied. There's also the issue of Kamen getting erased causing his daughter to also be erased in another time period. Again, a blatant recreation of the grandfather's paradox possible only if the timeline is a single, linear structure. If you want this to be a hypertimeline, prove that the cast could return to a version of that timeline where neither are erased without resetting the timeline. Go ahead.

Yall are just throwing everything but the kitchen sink and not even using scans.

And you've thrown the whole universe at it and gotten nowhere.

Also, considering my argument is that there is over arching history despite the past, future, and present being physically separated with gaps helps my argument even more that there is a hypertimeline. Thank you. I'll add it.

Good luck proving that lmfao, when all of this is much more easily explained by just having a single, linear timeline. Why would we accept your extremely liberal and charitable interpretation when everything you've said here is achieved by a singular timeline?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Good luck proving that lmfao, when all of this is much more easily explained by just having a single, linear timeline. Why would we accept your extremely liberal and charitable interpretation when everything you've said here is achieved by a singular timeline?

There are literally TWO different future dimensions. TWO. How can there be single linear timeline, if there are MULTIPLE future dimensions.

 

[TiltedFN]

There are literally TWO different future dimensions.

There isn't. You have yet to prove that.

TWO. How can there be single linear timeline, if there are MULTIPLE future dimensions.

Maybe because there's only a single linear timeline? Along with everything that you use for "evidence" being achievable by a single timeline lmao.
There aren't multiple future dimensions as we've gone over already.
All the scans that have been sent by multiple people make it painfully clear that past, present, and future aren't separate dimensions.
Tough luck. I don't know to tell you dude. There's just not enough evidence.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

There isn't. You have yet to prove that.

Maybe because there's only a single linear timeline? Along with everything that you use for "evidence" being achievable by a single timeline lmao.
There aren't multiple future dimensions as we've gone over already.
All the scans that have been sent by multiple people make it painfully clear that past, present, and future aren't separate dimensions.
Tough luck. I don't know to tell you dude. There's just not enough evidence.

And the Japanese uses Jigen, the same kanji that King Endymion uses to say that a person can't exist in the same space, time, and dimension. Gonna love to hear you backtrack and come up with another "grandfather paradox" for this one.

It's very clear you didn't read the OP and are just saying things for the sake of saying things.

 

[TiltedFN]

And the Japanese uses Jigen, the same kanji that King Endymion uses to say that a person can't exist in the same space, time, and dimension.

Again, you've been told multiple times that there is nuance when using that term and it's not as linear as you're making it out to be.
You still demonstrably haven't proven that different time periods aren't different dimensions.
At this point there are dozens of scans that tell you you're just wrong. You don't have anything to back you up.
Context matters more than anything.
And using the context we have been given, the arguments become flimsy at best.

Gonna love to hear you backtrack and come up with another "grandfather paradox" for this one.

You also completely ignored what I said earlier.
The grandfather paradox stuff is just an example of these timelines clearly operating off of certain rules that can still function with but a single timeline.
It can all work without them being different dimensions, especially when so many scans outright tell us.
It's not backtracking, it's just saying it for how it is based on the examples that I've provided.
When you don't have a point, you just go back to the kanji and says it HAS to mean this or that; then you'll ignore everything else.


You haven't proven anything is separate. It refers to 1 timeline and that means there is not a hypertimeline.
Your argument has nothing to stand on whatsoever.
You haven't proven this container space exist.
You haven't proven anything is higher dimensional.
You haven't proven anything you've needed to argue hypertimelines.
Do you not understand that if you can't solidly prove that the past, present, and future are separate dimensions, this entire argument just crumbles?

It's very clear you didn't read the OP and are just saying things for the sake of saying things.

I mean you can keep saying that if you want.
It won't actually change the quality of the arguments that have been presented by you and the supporters.
That scan you posted is also non canon so why do you think that helps your case at all?
It would of been better for you not to bring it up at all if we're being real. Well I guess the main point was kanji slop but it still doesn't help lol.
Regardless, besides arguing kanji slop, there's still nothing here that helps you.
All you've done is given half-assed low effort responses and then continue to complain that we are arguing in bad faith when it's really the opposite.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Again, you've been told multiple times that there is nuance when using that term and it's not as linear as you're making it out to be.
You still demonstrably haven't proven that different time periods aren't different dimensions.
At this point there are dozens of scans that tell you you're just wrong. You don't have anything to back you up.
Context matters more than anything.
And using the context we have been given, the arguments become flimsy at best.

You also completely ignored what I said earlier.
The grandfather paradox stuff is just an example of these timelines clearly operating off of certain rules that can still function with but a single timeline.
It can all work without them being different dimensions, especially when so many scans outright tell us.
It's not backtracking, it's just saying it for how it is based on the examples that I've provided.
When you don't have a point, you just go back to the kanji and says it HAS to mean this or that; then you'll ignore everything else.


You haven't proven anything is separate. It refers to 1 timeline and that means there is not a hypertimeline.
Your argument has nothing to stand on whatsoever.
You haven't proven this container space exist.
You haven't proven anything is higher dimensional.
You haven't proven anything you've needed to argue hypertimelines.
Do you not understand that if you can't solidly prove that the past, present, and future are separate dimensions, this entire argument just crumbles?

I mean you can keep saying that if you want.
It won't actually change the quality of the arguments that have been presented by you and the supporters.
That scan you posted is also non canon so why do you think that helps your case at all?
It would of been better for you not to bring it up at all if we're being real. Well I guess the main point was kanji slop but it still doesn't help lol.
Regardless, besides arguing kanji slop, there's still nothing here that helps you.
All you've done is given half-assed low effort responses and then continue to complain that we are arguing in bad faith when it's really the opposite.

Dude just admit you were factually wrong.

 

[TiltedFN]

Dude just admit you were factually wrong.

Atp we can just wait for staff since you've clearly given up.

 

[UnoRebaixadO]

Hmm, for now I think Qawsedf and Tilted opinions make more sense.

 

[Reiner04]

Alr i am done reading;

I don't find the higher dimensional arguments convincing based on the scans provided. Terms like 'super-dimension' or 'beyond space-time' don't inherently grant anything. our standards regarding higher dimensions are just that strict.

Regarding the 'Hypertimeline', the explanation provided is quite confusing. Claiming that every point in time is a separate space-time continuum requires a massive and strong evidences that simply isn't present here. "Can't exist in the same time and space" likely just refers to different points in time. "Dimensions" term thrown around way too loosely in fiction, in this context, it seems to refer to the future as a different 'world', the way they percieve it, rather than a distinct space-time as whole. So yeah, gotta disagree here.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Claiming that every point in time is a separate space-time continuum requires a massive and strong evidences that simply isn't present here

Where did I claim that?

 

[Reiner04]

Where did I claim that?

Here?

During the second arc, the future is described as being a different space and time from the past, as well as a different dimension.

Or if u meant as in "only" future and present or past or any forms of different sections of the timeline, requirement would still be same.

 

[TiltedFN]

Where did I claim that?

You're claiming the past, present, and future are separate dimensions in order to try and prove a hypertimeline.
We've already proven that it's flimsy at best. It's just a normal timeline.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I don't find the higher dimensional arguments convincing based on the scans provided. Terms like 'super-dimension' or 'beyond space-time' don't inherently grant anything. our standards regarding higher dimensions are just that strict.

That's not really the crux of the argument. The main argument is that the space was described as being beyond the three dimensional world and required the creation of a new time axis.

Or if u meant as in "only" future and present or past or any forms of different sections of the timeline, requirement would still be same.

What specific requirement am I missing? I am generally asking because I am confused by conflicting things in your message. You say that futures and present are just different "worlds", but then you say that they aren't distinct spacetimes. Are you saying they are all apart of the same continuous timeline? If so, then that would be contradicted by this scan that says these time words, have rifts between them. What more is missing for them to be regarded as different sections of the timeline?

 

[TiltedFN]

That's not really the crux of the argument. The main argument is that the space was described as being beyond the three dimensional world and required the creation of a new time axis.

It quite literally is tho. You're using the term "super-dimensional" and extrapolating it to mean there has to be a 4th spatial axis.
It's already been explained to you time and time again that it doesn't have to be that way for it to work.
The time axis here just means it's what they used to go to this world.

What specific requirement am I missing?

How about everything?
You haven't given sufficient proof of there being some kind of 4th axis.
There are a ton of scans that debunk your claim of the past, present, and future being separate dimension.
Even if this world had a 4th spatial axis (it doesn't) you'd need to prove it's significant which you verbatim stated you can't do.
That is the entire purpose in which you tried to go with the other interpretation of the past, present, and future.
But like we said, it's just a classic case of a grandfather's paradox that sailor moon uses.

I am generally asking because I am confused by conflicting things in your message. You say that futures and present are just different "worlds", but then you say that they aren't distinct spacetimes. Are you saying they are all apart of the same continuous timeline? If so, then that would be contradicted by this scan that says these time words, have rifts between them. What more is missing for them to be regarded as different sections of the timeline?

The existence of "rifts" don't prove they are distinct spacetimes Iam.
Do I have to post the same scans again and again for you to finally acknowledge that they prove it's one singular timeline? Where is your evidence?
It can just refer to the corridor. It doesn't have to be anything more than that.


I quoted Killers comment again since you never actually replied to that, but it's a pretty major point yeah?
I mean come on. Even single pieces of "evidence" being taken away results in this whole argument crumbling.

Actually, it's not even that it has four spatial axes. You see, Mercury uses a "time axis" (that she allegedly establishes) to leave their normal 3-dimensional world to go to this other space. Now OP thinks that this implies that Mercury went to a world with 4 spatial axes. Not only is this flawed on its own because merely "going beyond their 3-dimensional reality" doesn't necessarily imply entering a higher dimensional one, but that even if we grant this; the argument is still flawed. As I said earlier, she used a time axis to go to it, which itself would work as this "fourth dimension" instead of any spatial dimension. If anything, it just means she used the "fourth dimension" (the time axis) to go beyond their normal 3-dimensional reality, which doesn't leave any room for her dimension to have any extra-spatial axis. The reason I saw this is due to the time-axis part and the fact that "transcendence/going beyond" doesn't always (or even most of the time) refer to literal dimensional transcendence

I think the Mercury dimension just ends up being a 3D + 1T construct

Like this statement from MGQ sums it all up

 

[Vietthai96]

And the Japanese uses Jigen, the same kanji that King Endymion uses to say that a person can't exist in the same space, time, and dimension. Gonna love to hear you backtrack and come up with another "grandfather paradox" for this one.

While Reiner and others already said how ambiguous the term space, dimension is. Still, would you mind posting the original japanese scans?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

While Reiner and others already said how ambiguous the term space, dimension is. Still, would you mind posting the original japanese scans?

 

[Killerdrone123]

That's not really the crux of the argument. The main argument is that the space was described as being beyond the three dimensional world and required the creation of a new time axis.

Right, and as mentioned before, this argument has already been addressed and rejected multiple times. I also explained the issues with it earlier. The use of “transcendence” here does not necessarily imply literal dimensional transcendence; it can simply refer to going beyond their three-dimensional world into another separate space. Likewise, the “extra-spatial dimension” that you think Mercury implicitly refers to here could just be the time-axis itself, which is also considered a fourth dimension and is what she uses to move between worlds. When viewed in that context, the statement does not conclusively support the interpretation that the dimension is spatial in nature.

 

[Hellformer]

Right, and as mentioned before, this argument has already been addressed and rejected multiple times. I also explained the issues with it earlier. The use of “transcendence” here does not necessarily imply literal dimensional transcendence; it can simply refer to going beyond their three-dimensional world into another separate space. Likewise, the “extra-spatial dimension” attributed to Mercury could just as reasonably refer to the time axis itself, which is also considered a fourth dimension and is what she uses to move between worlds. When viewed in that context, the statement does not conclusively support the interpretation that the dimension is spatial in nature.

How is time a spatial dimension? Just asking