• 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.

Megaton Rainfall 1-A upgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
This should have enough to be accepted
1-A: 4 (Ultima_Reality, DarkDragonMedeus, Planck69, Elizhaa)

1-B, possibly 1-A: 1 (Everything12)

1-B: 1 (Agnaa)

Unclear: 1 (Deagonx (said he was sympathetic to it not being 1-A, and saw the math stuff as a noteworthy roadbump))

Note that DarkDragonMedeus and Planck69 haven't commented since I pointed out the issue in question.

If DDM and Planck reaffirmed their votes, and Deagon clarified that he was actually fine with 1-A, I'd see it as enough to be accepted. If DDM/Planck dip, and Deagon says he wants a possibly, I think that'd be the accepted stance. If DDM/Planck flip to 1-B, with Deagon joining them, then I'd see that as the accepted view.

@DarkDragonMedeus @Planck69 @Deagonx Please clarify your views so this thread can be concluded.
 
Last edited:
I think 1-B is the better choice here, and fits better with our stance of taking the lowest reasonable interpretation of something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm, so 4 for 1-A, 1 for 1-B possibly 1-A, and 2 for 1-B.

That's a bit tight for me to know how to slice it. I'd be fine with implementing possibly 1-A, likely 1-A, or full 1-A depending on what others think.
 
Maybe we can call some more staff to evaluate?
Seems since you and DDM didn't change votes, it still remains 1-A on the winning side with everything 12 going for a possibly. Agnaa would you be fine with a full 1-A rating?
 
If the majority agree with flat 1-A, then at worst this should be "Likely 1-A"

Edit: Updated Tally

Agree: Everything12 (With possibly 1-A), Ultima_Reality, Planck69, DarkDragonMedeus, Elizhaa
Disagree: Agnaa, Deagonx
 
Last edited:
Agree: Everything12 (With possibly 1-A), Ultima_Reality, Planck69, DarkDragonMedeus, Elizhaa, celestial_Pegasus (Possibly)
Disagree: Agnaa, Deagonx


If there's 4 for flat 1-A, 2 with possibly, I guess a fair middle ground is "At least 1-B, likely 1-A"

@Ultima_Reality can you give your thoughts again?

A justification can be something like "At least Hyperverse level, likely Outerverse level "There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities, each inside the mind of an even higher entity, being viewed as a dream. An entity lower in the hierarchy cannot interact in any way with an entity above them" or whatever else suggested
 
Last edited:
Agree: Everything12 (With possibly 1-A), Ultima_Reality, Planck69, DarkDragonMedeus, Elizhaa, celestial_Pegasus (Possibly)
Disagree: Agnaa, Deagonx


If there's 4 for flat 1-A, 2 with possibly, I guess a fair middle ground is "At least 1-B, likely 1-A"
Yeah sure.
@Ultima_Reality can you give your thoughts again?

A justification can be something like "At least Hyperverse level, likely Outerverse level "There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities, each inside the mind of an even higher entity, being viewed as a dream. An entity lower in the hierarchy cannot interact in any way with an entity above them" or whatever else suggested
The justification should explain why that distinction between 1-B and 1-A is being drawn.

I think the 1-B one should focus on the endless hierarchy of higher entities being fundamentally based on mathematics, while the 1-A one should focus on them being viewed as dreams and interactions to higher layers being impossible.
 
Not sure how to fully word the 1-B part but does this work:

At least Hyperverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities with the hierarchy fundamentally being based on mathematics), likely Outerverse level (Each entity is stated to be in the mind of the entity above them, and are viewed as nothing but a dream. It is further explained that entities lower on the hierarchy can't even see the entitiy above them or change their reality, but they can change the reality of those below them. The minds of the entities contain concepts beyond the comprehension of the entity below them with everything being maddingly different.)

Feel free to edit.
 
Not sure how to fully word the 1-B part but does this work:

At least Hyperverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities with the hierarchy fundamentally being based on mathematics), likely Outerverse level (Each entity is stated to be in the mind of the entity above them, and are viewed as nothing but a dream. It is further explained that entities lower on the hierarchy can't even see the entitiy above them or change their reality, but they can change the reality of those below them. The minds of the entities contain concepts beyond the comprehension of the entity below them with everything being maddingly different.)

Feel free to edit.
At least Hyperverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities whom are entirely inaccessible to lower ones, with them being incomprehensible to those lower on the hierarchy.), likely Outerverse level (The higher entities contain the lower ones within their own mind and see them as nothing but a dream, only existing while they allocate space within their mind to "count atoms".)
Think this (or something like this) works better
 
Eh, if people think it's for the best we can remove the "based on math" part from the 1-B part.

And I don't think "only existing while they allocate space within their mind to 'count atoms'" is the best way to phrase it. That seems like just the relation between the two we see canonically, and even then, I think they still exist when the higher being's not counting, they just remain still.
 
Eh, if people think it's for the best we can remove the "based on math" part from the 1-B part.

And I don't think "only existing while they allocate space within their mind to 'count atoms'" is the best way to phrase it. That seems like just the relation between the two we see canonically, and even then, I think they still exist when the higher being's not counting, they just remain still.
I think it makes it much more readable considering how it doesn't massacre the pacing, so instead I think focusing on the fundamentals of the hierarchy in the 1-B section and then elaborating upon what could make said hierarchy 1-A in the 1-A section would make the most sense to me.

For the first part yeah, that is just the relationship between the two canonically and as described by The Signer, I don't exactly see the issue with including it in the AP description.
For the latter half, I disagree, but I can understand if you think this is like an xkcd 505 situation, but we do get told that they simply cease to exist when The Signer stops counting atoms.
 
Ah, if it says that then that's probably true for that layer at least.

Still, it seems really weird in the greater scheme of things. Given the abstract, general terms that were used for beings in the hierarchy "simulating" lower levels, it seems very unlikely that all of those involve active pondering. I think an XKCD situation is more likely in general.
 
Still need to finish this. Maybe this?

At least Hyperverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities whom are entirely inaccessible to lower ones, with them being incomprehensible to those lower on the hierarchy.), likely Outerverse level (The higher entities contain the lower ones within their own mind and see them as nothing but a dream, only existing while they allocate space within their mind to "count atoms". Those higher in the hierarchy are completely inaccessible to those below them, and if any entity lower in the hierarchy tried, they would instantly go mad.)

If someone could @ Ultima that'd be great.
 
At least Hyperverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities whom are entirely inaccessible to lower ones, with them being incomprehensible to those lower on the hierarchy.), likely Outerverse level (The higher entities contain the lower ones within their own mind and see them as nothing but a dream, only existing while they allocate space within their mind to "count atoms". Those higher in the hierarchy are completely inaccessible to those below them, and if any entity lower in the hierarchy tried, they would instantly go mad.)
Honestly I'd have only a single explanation for the two ends. Something like:

At least Hyperverse level, possibly Outerverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities, where the lower level is contained within the mind and dreams of higher level's inhabitant, only existing while it allocates space in its mind to "count atoms," and being so inferior that to try to access and comprehend the higher entities would simply drive them mad. However, since mathematics is described as a self-same constant between all the levels, equally describing them all, it is uncertain if the gap between them is truly qualitative)
 
Last edited:
Honestly I'd have only a single explanation for the two ends. Something like:

At least Hyperverse level, possibly Outerverse level (There is an endless hierarchy of higher entities, where the lower level is contained within the mind and dreams of higher level's inhabitant, only existing while it allocates space in its mind to "count atoms," and being so inferior that to try to access and comprehend the higher entities would simply drive them mad. However, since mathematics is described as a self-same constant between all the levels, equally describing them all, it is uncertain if the gap between them is truly qualitative)
Yeah, that works and reads well
 

Done. Closing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top