- 13,826
- 19,643
I see. Then i suppose Tier 1 is fine considering the case laid out in OP does signify that case.
-
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.
My Little Pony should be just Low 1-C
- Thread starter StrymULTRA
- Start date
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #44
That's something you gotta ask to @PonePoster, @Spinoirr and @ArzCosmos_888, given they're the ones who came up with that idea. I was just there to enforce a standard that I found violated.
- 576
- 549
Given this was a massive point of discussion, how do you come to the conclusion that infinite branching eventually leads to a powerset of such?
- 22,683
- 23,259
You have infinite universes that infinitely at all points in time, that lead to infinite universes, which themselves split off infinitely at all points in time. It would be valid for an Aleph-1 number of universes.
- 7,780
- 11,571
But isn't it possible here that all these different variations of the ponies share the same set of infinite variants containing each other?
Like if the decision to say a certain word creates alternate realities where you say every other word, wouldn't this set of you saying different words be identical for each version of you? Why are we assuming that each infinite set must be unique and therefore spirals, rather than them being countable and shared?
- 576
- 549
The problem i find with this is, ur still just adding more and more countable sets, the original size of the set was and still is countably infinite. We can set up a tree diagram to show the branching and still index it with countably infinite numbers. We arent exactly creating a new element outside of the current set of universes.
Last edited:
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #49
"2" is literally a countable set, yet by multiplying it infinitely you get aleph-1.
Because why would it be? It's shown that every possible future is for the individual pony in their individual hallway, there's no reason why it'd be shared.
- 576
- 549
???? Dude what are you even on about
2 to the power n is just the formula for the powerset of any set. The powerset of any set is always larger than the set itself. therefore the powerset of aleph null is aleph 1
powerset =/ multiplication in the context of infinite sets.
i dont know why i have to specify this
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #51
But why when you use infinity instead of 2 it suddenly becomes still countable?
- 576
- 549
it doesnt become countable? infinity ^ infinity is uncountably infinite. frankly im beginning to lose hope with you.
The series itself does not have anything like infinity ^ infinity. thats the whole point, that was the argument.
- 7,780
- 11,571
2*infinity is not aleph-1.
But the ponies in these possible futures are the same ponies, just who made different decisions.
So from their perspective, wouldn't the hallway be identical, with the only difference being which door they originate from?
I don't see why they have to be different hallways.
- 848
- 123
Are you guys inifintly X inifintly = uncountable infinte whem it actually just
Inifintly X inifintly = 2 sets of inifintly ?
- 576
- 549
He thinks exponentiation of infinite sets is the same as finite sets. so he thinks infinity * infinity = infinity ^ 2 , thats what hes trying to argue.
- 7,780
- 11,571
- 576
- 549
Ive been trying to explain that to him all this time, im hoping that since ur saying it, it might get through to him.
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #58
But 2^infinity is.
When did I say that n0 * n0 = n1? Stop putting words in my mouth.
- 848
- 123
I’m not sure why, but this is one of the most persistent questions about mathematics. I understand that infinity is fascinating or confusing, but it’s useful to understand that we have great freedom in math to define things however we wish, and we choose to do so when it’s useful, or beautiful, or interesting.
Yes, there are various contexts where
∞
=
∞
+
1
is a valid, formal, precise assertion. There are other contexts in which this would be a meaningless expression, and yet others in which it would be false. The symbol
∞
is used in many different ways across math.
Here is Rudin, Real and Complex Analysis, a standard graduate-level textbook on measure theory and integration, p. 18:
Arithmetic in
[
0
,
∞
]
1.22 Throughout integration theory, one inevitably encounters
∞
. One reason is that one wants to be able to integrate over sets of infinite measure […] much of the elegance of theorems like 1.26 and 1.27 would be lost if one had to make some special provisions whenever this occurs.
Let us define
a
+
∞
=
∞
+
a
=
∞
if
0
≤
a
≤
∞
[…]
It’s nothing profound or philosophically deep; it’s just a convenient shorthand which makes certain statements about sums and integrals easier to write down.
In cardinal arithmetic,
κ
+
1
=
1
+
κ
=
κ
whenever
κ
is an infinite cardinal (which is one common mathematical concept corresponding to “infinity”). On the other hand, in ordinal arithmetic,
1
+
ω
=
ω
while
ω
+
1
≠
ω
. So here is a case where “infinity + 1” is not the same as “infinity”.
Does this work this site ?
- 576
- 549
it would be appreciated if you dont fill up the whole thread with ai jargon.
- 848
- 123
It actually from guy from 6 years ago
- 7,780
- 11,571
Yes, as well as if 2 is any larger number as well. Maybe this chart will help anybody who doesn't currently understand.
Regardless, I feel you've failed to prove that every subset of the corridor is also infinite, or if it just loops back into the same corridor set.
If the set is "every version of you for every choice you could have made", then there's no reason to assume each version has its own subset of infinity. The set for each of them will be identical except for which part they identify as.
The only way that works is if it's a lie that the first set actually contains every version of you for every choice, or if they pointlessly duplicate the same infinite set forever, which I don't think we have any reason to assume without confirmation.
In short, my current vote is disagreement, though I could potentially be convinced.
Last edited:
- 22,683
- 23,259
I'm viewing it more as א^א, which to my knowledge is the same Cardinality as Aleph-1 since the wiki uses the Continuum Hypothesis as the baseline.
Though like I said in my first comment, this is only valid if the cosmology works as I laid out.
- 7,780
- 11,571
Well, how do you feel about my arguments above regarding that?
- 848
- 123
Can be this a Low 1-A Structure?
Basically, If There is a infinite multiverse, where each universe is a High 1-B Structure. Then, it would be a Super High 1-B or a Low 1-A? Thanks for the answers.
- 7,780
- 11,571
That post is incredibly old. The Tiering System wasn't even the same back then.Can be this a Low 1-A Structure?
Basically, If There is a infinite multiverse, where each universe is a High 1-B Structure. Then, it would be a Super High 1-B or a Low 1-A? Thanks for the answers.vsbattles.com
- 848
- 123
Damn sorry for that but is there another thread with similar thing ?
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,663
- 2,941
I disagree with the thread.
- 848
- 123
Can you give a reason why ?
- 7,780
- 11,571
I don't know, but it seems like the conclusion there was essentially that infinite and uncountably infinite are very different, which I think we can all agree on here too.
The contention is over which category this fits in.
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,663
- 2,941
Same as Vesxpura. There is no uncountable infinite set.
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #72
As I said, I barely know jack on the verse, but I think that the current "2-A, possibly Low 1-C" is silly, and that the verse should be just one of the two.
- 7,780
- 11,571
Given the ambiguity discussed in this thread, don't you think Possibly Low 1-C is a fine compromise that captures both possible interpretations?
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #74
No, stuff is either countable infinity or not in these cases, unless you mean the "it's possible that each pony in the alternate futures also has its own hallway too and so on", which there I could see it.
I mean that the Low 1-C currently comes from some wacky R>F from the Storyworld, which however makes no sense.
- 7,780
- 11,571
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. It's possible they each have their own (and so on), but also possible that they share one, and neither breaks any logic nor is confirmed.
Well yeah, if nothing else we can certainly replace that justification with this one.
So I'll switch my vote to agreeing with this CRT as a Possibly for the sake of doing that.
- 7,780
- 11,571
@Reiner04 @Qawsedf234
And how would you two feel about listing it as a Possibly Low 1-C for the reasons above?
And how would you two feel about listing it as a Possibly Low 1-C for the reasons above?
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #77
As also said, given that I don't know much of the verse, once an agreement is settled, either you or one of the decidated supporters should work on a more updated and on-standards cosmology blog, as the current blogs are definitely dated in wording, tiering and standards.
I am not saying that ditching the Storyworld is something we have to do, it definitely needs its own section.
- 7,780
- 11,571
It can certainly still be mentioned, but dimensional scaling via R>F is always tricky and if we have a more mathematical way to reach the same conclusion we should prioritize that.
And after this we can definitely make a new thread focused on revising the cosmology page.
- 19,280
- 11,978
- Thread starter
- #79
My issue is that by the scans shown the Storyworld is not really something that transcends the "fictional" universes, but more like serves as a gateway to them. It's almost the same as how Earth-Prime is in DC comics where the main 52 Earths are seen as fictional comics, but they're all part of the same multiverse and beings from these universes can equally fight against each other or travel between these universes without any transcendence involved (the pony and the human versions of Mane-iac for instance are not any different in an ontological nature, and the pony version treats the human world as just another world despite it viewing that universe having the pony one as fiction from what I understood).
Eh... given how some of the threads that went on for even years (Kirby or Fist of the North Star that went for over 20 pages of overall arguments for the verse), I think we can indeed talk about it still here.
- 7,780
- 11,571
That makes sense to me.
Similar threads
