Eh??
None of this matters because.... The author can use whatever word he likes for in verse terms. Marvel for example, has the 5th dimension and 6th dimension as 1-A stuff iirc (if not higher)
The thing is, no matter how many times it's called "4th Dimension" or "alternate dimension", if it's overlapping with the lower 3D space, it's not a higher
orthongal axis. Much like with time dimensions, we require higher spatial dimensions to be orthogonal. Although we assume they are so usually unless context suggests otherwise.... But that's exactly what's happening here.
So what you're doing here is just writing a long text wall that doesn't in any way address my primary argument.
Backtracking now? You were the one who used the raws, and if you've read dao's previous threads, you should know otl has a mistranslation here.
Top that off with the fact that you said "official translation has it as higher dimensional beings" when in fact it says "higher level beings" instead.... I don't think I can trust you with scans anymore.
Anyways no, the otl is the incorrect one here since the raws say is 多元宇宙 (from your very own thread op btw), which literally means Multiverse, not "Dimensional Space".
jisho.org
You have not shown me why these higher universes should be uncountably infinitely larger than the Sea, so I see no reason on why we should let them be higher dimensional when they're just called higher order universes.
Alright, go on:
the bolded part is a mistranslation. And i never denied the lower universes don't have parallel worlds. In fact I support that notion:
Lower Universe -> Parallel Worlds branching from it -> Local multiverse -> Different Worlds with their own parallel sets and this goes on endlessly.
But is this anything above 2-A? NO
This is just a 2-A within another 2-A, which as said above, is simply a matter of arrangement and thus still baseline 2-A.
No???
This is a huge NLF and leap of interpretation lol
The text calls space and time infinite in context to the totality of existence, the Ultimate Ensemble.
It specifically says "total collection of Universes"
You can't just isolate a line like "space and time are infinite" and apply it to every level of space time there is in-verse, especially when the context literally talks about the totality of all universes, the Ultimate Ensemble. Sure, the Ultimate Ensemble is infinite, but that would still be 2-A baseline unless you can prove that Infinity refers to uncountably infinitely larger instead (which is not the baseline assumption btw)
Minus the parts I pointed out above, I don't have any other problem with your interpretation of the structure, it's simply the tiers you assign to them that I disagree with.
This, btw, is out of context once again. The context clearly just suggests "a higher level being", not mathematically higher dimensional. You were pointed out that in the tl thread. Okay, Raiki isn't trusted? But there's
@ExcelsisBerny who's trusted with knowing Japanese on an advanced level, approving Raiki's translation.
At this point you're just arguing with empty straws lol
Immense does not by default even mean
countably infinitely stronger, much less
uncountably infinitely stronger.
Transcneding space time isn't defaulted to any tier. Also, can you send the raws? I need to confirm if it's transcendence as in moving across or transcending as in surpassing something. Japanese has different kanji for both.
A: Whether higher-dimensional entities qualify for such high tiers or not depends on several different factors, which may take root both in and out-of-verse. To explain this situation, we must first clarify what exactly being higher-dimensional entails. In a way, yes, though not how most would...
vsbattles.fandom.com
Yeah no, most of this here are conclusions from empty straws.
Same as above, there's nothing justifying this tier other than vague statements