My Little Pony should be just Low 1-C

[Phoenks]

Didn't I already make this thread before? Huh.

Is My Little Pony Low 1-C? Let's Find Out.

I'm a bit bored right now, so let's try this. On this thread it was brought up that MLP could not only qualify for 2-A (Which is currently accepted), but Low 1-C. I will explain why. I would like to premise this by saying I want to keep this thread short and to the point. One of my issues with...

vsbattles.com

 

[StrymULTRA]

Didn't I already make this thread before? Huh.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/is-my-little-pony-low-1-c-lets-find-out.158192/

Link doesn't work.

Also we have precedents of doing stuff like this anyways, so :V

 

[Phoenks]

Link doesn't work.

Also we have precedents of doing stuff like this anyways, so :V

Fixed link but this was agreed upon before

I don't remember why it was 'possibly' though

 

[StrymULTRA]

Fixed link but this was agreed upon before

I don't remember why it was 'possibly' though

It was because Qawself at the time did not agree with the Hallway chain being Low 1-C and thought it was just infinite x infinite, so staff decided to make it a compromise, with the R>F stuff being to solidify that possiblt. But now he agreed that it should be just Low 1-C.

 

[Phoenks]

Oh, well, it is very clearly not just Infinite x Infinite. I guess I agree with the thread then.

 

[Qawsedf234]

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

I mean, for that thread, if you have a multiverse of High 1-B spaces, that's still just High 1-B. To get to High 1-B+ you need an Aelph-1 amount of High 1-B universes and Low 1-A requires the combined set of all possible cardinalities.

And how would you two feel about listing it as a Possibly Low 1-C for the reasons above?

I mean it's either going to be infinite branching infinite multiverses or it's just an infinite multiverse. I'm not sure if you can go either way here.

 

[Reiner04]

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.

I mean from what i understand from the situation is the following:

• There are infinite Universes like: 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.
• Each of them has further infimite Universes like lets say Universe 1 from above is: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, etc
• Each of those Universes of Universe 1 contains further imfinite Universes like Universe 1.1 from above would have: 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, etc
• And so on.

Now lets list the base Universe and its expznsions:
U1: 1 → 1.1 → 1.1.1 → 1.1.1.1 → …
U2: 1 → 1.2 → 1.2.1 → 1.2.1.1 → …
U3: 2 → 2.1 → 2.1.1 → 2.1.1.1 → …
U4: 1 → 1.1 → 1.1.2 → 1.1.2.1 → …
....
adinfinitum.

Now take 1st step of U1: 1
Now take second step of U2: 2 (2 of 1.2)
Now take 3rd step of U3: 1 (1 of 2.1.1)
Adinfinitum.
We have (1, 2, 1, etc)
Now we just change those step numbers and get (2, 1, 2, etc)

Now listing it, we will get the Universe that differs from all the Universes at each particular step:
U*: 2 → 2.1 → 2.1.2 → etc

This new Universe differs from all the Universes listed before but still exist inside the multiverse OP described. So Cantor's diagonal theorem still seems applicable/to work unless i am missing smth.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

OP looks good to me.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

I don’t really understand anything about Tier 1 so I can’t really help.

 

[Spinoirr]

Speaking of cosmology, this should be included in the cosmology blog if we're making a new one

 

[StrymULTRA]

Speaking of cosmology, this should be included in the cosmology blog if we're making a new one

Don't think it adds anything worth noting, not only it's WoG, but "space between universes" stuff don't grant anything anymore.

 

[Xdsagecat]

Looks good tbh

 

[LittleGuy99]

Agree with OP

 

[Mbpoops]

5D finepoint. Seems fine to me tho

 

[FinePoint]

I mean it's either going to be infinite branching infinite multiverses or it's just an infinite multiverse. I'm not sure if you can go either way here.

Theoretically, yes, but without confirmation of which interpretation is correct we can't be certain.

When there's different interpretations that are both valid that's typically when we use the Possibly rating.

 

[FinePoint]

5D finepoint. Seems fine to me tho

WHAT!?

 

[Mbpoops]

WHAT!?

your pfp reminded me of a mlp character

 

[FinePoint]

your pfp reminded me of a mlp character

Blasphemy. My pfp is a legally distinct original character, thank you very much.
(But maybe heavily inspired.)

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

5D finepoint

So FinePoint argues against his own upscaling huh

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

WHAT!?

No offense, just joking, but having a My Little Pony avatar and not wanting it to be Low 1-C is like being a fan of magic… but with a built-in power limit

 

[PonePoster]

I think I'm almost convinced, but why do we assume that the dreams of the ponies in these theoretical realities also branch off further into distinct sets?

Is that confirmed, or do we just find it logical?

I'm a little late, but essentially each doorway leads to a different choice/future/timeline. All choices, which would include stuff like Luna herself delving into a person's dreams, and Infinite Hallways... like she did with Discord. She could have just as easily chosen to go to another pony's Infinite Hallway, like Celestia's, or Twilight's, or anyone's. It's something she has had experience with, and even points out that everyone has one. This choice to walk into Discord's dreams and show him the Infinite Hallway, would just itself be included as another doorway there, and the Luna within this future would also have her own Infinite Hallway where this choice is just a doorway there, and so on and so forth forever. These choices are actual worlds, with actual beings that would also dream, since Luna exists within them to moderate their dreams and so on

 

[Vesxpura]

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.

i was kind of questioning how the cosmology you laid out qualifies for any n ^ N. Since i do mention my reasons asto why i dont think infinite branching does infact give a higher order quantity.

Now lets list the base Universe and its expznsions:
U1: 1 → 1.1 → 1.1.1 → 1.1.1.1 → …
U2: 1 → 1.2 → 1.2.1 → 1.2.1.1 → …
U3: 2 → 2.1 → 2.1.1 → 2.1.1.1 → …
U4: 1 → 1.1 → 1.1.2 → 1.1.2.1 → …
....
adinfinitum.

Now take 1st step of U1: 1
Now take second step of U2: 2 (2 of 1.2)
Now take 3rd step of U3: 1 (1 of 2.1.1)
Adinfinitum.
We have (1, 2, 1, etc)
Now we just change those step numbers and get (2, 1, 2, etc)

Now listing it, we will get the Universe that differs from all the Universes at each particular step:
U*: 2 → 2.1 → 2.1.2 → etc

This new Universe differs from all the Universes listed before but still exist inside the multiverse OP described. So Cantor's diagonal theorem still seems applicable/to work unless i am missing smth.

Although the grid you made does seem a bit misleading and weirdly made since it doesnt fully capture the true extent of our scenario, its manageable.
ur diagram is presupposing that each universe is an infinite path, even though its not. Even if we appeal to ur understanding you blatantly index universes with finite labels. which suggests its countable. Therefore theres a logical jump between ur understanding and ur diagram, which is why i called it misleading. From my understanding ur assuming its already uncountably infinite, not deriving it as a conclusion.

A simple analogy of ur understanding could be shown like this:

Let Set U` = {A,B,C,...,infinity} be the base set of universes, so the infinite universes with infinite ponies.
Set A = {a,b,c,d,....,infinity} because each universe encompasses more infinite universes, so the section where each pony has its own infinite doors, where each door = 1 universe
This goes on for each element of each set. If we now substitute each element of each set to the one above it, we just get a very dense countable set not an uncountably infinite set(the difference between all rational numbers and all real numbers is a good example between the difference of what ur understanding and what ur trying to explain respectively)

Well first the places each doorway go aren't just a single universe, since it would need to account for beings like Discord who can hop realities, and has traveled the infinite multiverse himself. Each doorway leads to every possible past, present, and future, which would include traveling to infinite realities and infinite timelines themselves, which all are contained in each doorway. Each doorway has ponies, who also dream and create their own choices, which lead to infinitely exponential timelines.

For reference, we are counting universes as singular instances so it doesnt really matter what i call it. as long as theres a unit in place and the contents of it arent changed, Also ur scan doesnt explicitly show what ur claiming about discord. it only ever shows him travelling to a couple of universes not all of the universes in the hallway. Also idk how you came to the conclusion that its an exponential growth considering u didnt even rule out the possibility of it being multiplicative or additive(prove it cannot be the case).

 

[Echidnacodefan2512]

i was kind of questioning how the cosmology you laid out qualifies for any n ^ N. Since i do mention my reasons asto why i dont think infinite branching does infact give a higher order quantity.

Although the grid you made does seem a bit misleading and weirdly made since it doesnt fully capture the true extent of our scenario, its manageable.
ur diagram is presupposing that each universe is an infinite path, even though its not. Even if we appeal to ur understanding you blatantly index universes with finite labels. which suggests its countable. Therefore theres a logical jump between ur understanding and ur diagram, which is why i called it misleading. From my understanding ur assuming its already uncountably infinite, not deriving it as a conclusion.

A simple analogy of ur understanding could be shown like this:

Let Set U` = {A,B,C,...,infinity} be the base set of universes, so the infinite universes with infinite ponies.
Set A = {a,b,c,d,....,infinity} because each universe encompasses more infinite universes, so the section where each pony has its own infinite doors, where each door = 1 universe
This goes on for each element of each set. If we now substitute each element of each set to the one above it, we just get a very dense countable set not an uncountably infinite set(the difference between all rational numbers and all real numbers is a good example between the difference of what ur understanding and what ur trying to explain respectively)

What would make it uncountable ?

 

[Vesxpura]

What would make it uncountable ?

what exactly are you referring to

 

[Echidnacodefan2512]

what exactly are you referring to

This goes on for each element of each set. If we now substitute each element of each set to the one above it, we just get a very dense countable set not an uncountably infinite set

 

[Vesxpura]

If a single universe was an infinite path just like how Reiner made the diagram

 

[Echidnacodefan2512]

I going delete this question due being dumb soo sorry vesxpura

 

[Lort15]

cool, make miraculous low 1-C as well

 

[StrymULTRA]

I am finally home and I have to say that the opposition pretty much seems to believe that I think that the cosmology gets to n^n for the wrong reasons, so I'll try to make this little table in an attempt to explain how I see this cosmology:

Base Multiverse (from where the ponies originate all from): As there are infinite universes with infinite poinies, I shall assign to each pony a number, aka Pony 1, Pony 2, Pony 3, and so on.

Pony 1 Multiverse (aka Pony 1's infinite hallway): Given that each Pony has its own Infinite Hallways, leading to infinite universes each, taking Pony 1, from its infinite hallway we also have the following infinite ponies that derivate from it, aka Pony 1.1, Pony 1.2, Pony 1.3, etc.

Pony 1.1 Multiverse (aka Pony 1's infinite hallway): Same as before, Pony 1.1 also branches its own infinite ponies, aka Pony 1.1.1, Pony 1.1.2, Pony 1.1.3, etc.

This pretty much goes on infinitely without a real end, as each multiverse, while having infinite universe inhabiting infinite ponies, also branches infinite multiverses of infinite size each due to each pony inhabiting it spawning an infinite multiverse, and said new multiverse also generating infinite ponies with also their own individual multiverse, and so on.

The reason why this is uncountable infinite is also because of the fact that if we assign to each universe in this chain a number with the system above, we get the whole of the irrational and real numbers, given that we'll get every possible combination of decimal numbers of both finite or infinite lenght, something that countable sets like rational numbers don't have. (Yes I shamelessly copied from @Reiner04, but it's the closest way I can get my idea across).

Hence, this is where I get confused:

For reference, we are counting universes as singular instances so it doesnt really matter what i call it. as long as theres a unit in place and the contents of it arent changed, Also ur scan doesnt explicitly show what ur claiming about discord. it only ever shows him travelling to a couple of universes not all of the universes in the hallway. Also idk how you came to the conclusion that its an exponential growth considering u didnt even rule out the possibility of it being multiplicative or additive(prove it cannot be the case).

Why would it be this? I don't get what do you mean by "the possibility of it being multiplicative or additive" (no seriously, you're just saying words without elaborating much). Are you saying that this chain does not continue infinitely, but it somewhere just stops and/or loops?

I cannot see how it cannot be interpreted any differently from the explanation above, given it's the most simple and normal one, nor why it's so extraordinary. It seems to me you're just searching for issues that aren't there.

 

[Vesxpura]

(no seriously, you're just saying words without elaborating much).

Because theres no other meaning in this context. hes coming to the conclusion that its exponential without ever disproving why it could be a multiplicative increase or an additive increase, therefore he isnt justified in believing so. which is why i questioned his conclusion

Are you saying that this chain does not continue infinitely, but it somewhere just stops and/or loops?

no, im literally assuming the same things ur arguing.

I cannot see how it cannot be interpreted any differently from the explanation above, given it's the most simple and normal one, nor why it's so extraordinary. It seems to me you're just searching for issues that aren't there.

Ive explained why it can multiple times, u just keep ignoring it.

The reason why this is uncountable infinite is also because of the fact that if we assign to each universe in this chain a number with the system above, we get the whole of the irrational and real numbers, given that we'll get every possible combination of decimal numbers of both finite or infinite lenght, something that countable sets like rational numbers don't have. (Yes I shamelessly copied from @Reiner04, but it's the closest way I can get my idea across).

You copied his mistake too, i already addressed how his understanding concludes to what im trying to say. Idk where ur getting decimal numbers from since you explicitly index it using finite natural numbers(you can derive a bijection between each level of the multiverse) which literally proves its countably infinite

 

[StrymULTRA]

Because theres no other meaning in this context. hes coming to the conclusion that its exponential without ever disproving why it could be a multiplicative increase or an additive increase, therefore he isnt justified in believing so. which is why i questioned his conclusion

And why would it be? No like, what do you even mean by "multiplicative/additive increase", what's the exact difference from the exponential thing I am argiung?

Ive explained why it can multiple times, u just keep ignoring it.

If I do not think it makes sense, I won't understand it, yes.

You copied his mistake too, i already addressed how his understanding concludes to what im trying to say. Idk where ur getting decimal numbers from since you explicitly index it using finite natural numbers(you can derive a bijection between each level of the multiverse) which literally proves its countably infinite

The decimal parts was taken from me naming each universe after a decimal number based on the system above.

 

[Phoenks]

Bluds explaining stuff I already explained 3 years ago and got accepted in another thread

It's funny how FinePoint agreed in the previous thread but seemingly isn't as convinced now, though.

I'm not sure if it's enough for a solid rating since there is not definitive proof it goes on for infinitely many points, it's just very heavily implied

 

[Vesxpura]

If I do not think it makes sense, I won't understand it, yes.

Then just leave it to the mods.

The decimal parts was taken from me naming each universe after a decimal number based on the system above.

I figured as much, but the problem is, they arent decimals. moreso theyre js addresses used to visual this kind of structure with each individual number in the address being finite. and like ive said, the way ur explaining the framework is countably infinite.

 

[Vesxpura]

Bluds explaining stuff I already explained 3 years ago and got accepted in another thread

ur explanation was kind of flawed. u correctly assessed its a progressive increase in the multiplication, but then assumed it completely encompassed all possible values of N0 at the conclusion. when thats not the case, what u described was N0 * itself approaching infinity which would be finite at any stage, and not the full infiniteness of the cardinal, hence being the same infinity.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Then just leave it to the mods.

I am sorry but you are not contributing to the debate. At all. I do not get what you mean by "it can be additive or multiplicative, not exponential" when I do not get what's supposed to be the difference, and then you just decide to say "leave this to staff" despite them agreeing to OP???

I figured as much, but the problem is, they arent decimals. moreso theyre js addresses used to visual this kind of structure with each individual number in the address being finite. and like ive said, the way ur explaining the framework is countably infinite.

1) I used decimals to say that there are as many universes as there are real numbers.
2) "each individual number in the address being finite." I do not get how is it relevant.

 

[Vesxpura]

I am sorry but you are not contributing to the debate. At all. I do not get what you mean by "it can be additive or multiplicative, not exponential" when I do not get what's supposed to be the difference, and then you just decide to say "leave this to staff" despite them agreeing to OP???

Yeah so im going to put this simply, its not my fault if you dont understand a specific thing. Ur next best step would be to research the topic and then maybe u can finally understand what im trying to say. im telling you to leave it to the staff because if they agree and i disagree, i can simply put forward my points asto why it is wrong or appears wrong. the staff have final say, as long as they understand theres no problem.

1) I used decimals to say that there are as many universes as there are real numbers.
2) "each individual number in the address being finite." I do not get how is it relevant.

1) so ur already assuming there is an uncountably infinite amount of universes, ur not proving that to be the case.
2)Ive said this before, this is the last time im going to say it, if you can index it through finite natural numbers, its a countably infinite amount of objects.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Yeah so im going to put this simply, its not my fault if you dont understand a specific thing. Ur next best step would be to research the topic and then maybe u can finally understand what im trying to say. im telling you to leave it to the staff because if they agree and i disagree, i can simply put forward my points asto why it is wrong or appears wrong. the staff have final say, as long as they understand theres no problem.

So you decide to just isolate me from the conversation, despite this being my thread. Seems like a coward's tactic given that instead of just trying to explain you're pretty much treating me like a complete moron, and I am not having that.

1) so ur already assuming there is an uncountably infinite amount of universes, ur not proving that to be the case.

Yours is beginning to be just a boring spam of "no it's not" lol.

2)Ive said this before, this is the last time im going to say it, if you can index it through finite natural numbers, its a countably infinite amount of objects.

Huh... 2^n0 is n1, and yet 2 is a finite, natural number.

 

[Reiner04]

Chill, guys. If a common ground doesn’t seem plausible, it’s better to agree to disagree and move on.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Chill, guys. If a common ground doesn’t seem plausible, it’s better to agree to disagree and move on.

It's not even that, is that he's explicitly saying that I am not capable of comprehending his arguments so he's not bothering to explain. Aka he's basically treating me like a brainless child. How is this not insulting?

 

[Vesxpura]

Chill, guys. If a common ground doesn’t seem plausible, it’s better to agree to disagree and move on.

Im genuinely trying so hard but he doesnt get the memo.