• 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.
Ultima_Reality

Ultima_Reality

VS Battles Administrator
?????????
Joined
Messages
5,546
Reaction score
13,030

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Donatien
    Hello. I was wondering something about what you said in this thread. How come another axis is necessary to simultaneously encompass a space and comprise an area external to it? I suppose this would be true if the space is "external" to the other space in the sense that they have no overlap. In that case, an additional axis would be necessary to separate the two (like how a second dimensional axis would be necessary to separate parallel lines). However, neither space would necessary have an extra dimension. Only the space that contains the two would need another dimension. This doesn't scale anywhere according to our standards since destroying an infinite 4-D multiverse is still considered 2-A despite needing a 5th axis to separate the spacetime continuums within it.

    Thank you for the "long line" example. I do think there are other ways to separate the spaces without an additional axis though.
    • Like
    Reactions: Huesito88
    View previous comments…
    Donatien
    Donatien
    What I don't get is how it being observed as an external force makes a difference, requiring an extra dimensional axis. Wouldn't part of an encompassing space already be observed as an "external force" by default and by definition?

    Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by "external force." Is the realm entirely external as opposed to being partially external? And why is another axis necessary?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    It wouldn't be, no. For example, compare the real line to the long line: If you start as the former, and then extend into the latter, you're not really reaching outside of the axis that already exists, just "stretching" it a bit (For lack of a better reason). To get truly outside of that space, you would need to not be in any of the coordinate points laid out over that single axis, and for that you require a second dimension.
    Donatien
    Donatien
    I still think there's ways for that area to not scale to Low 1-C, and even a way for that area to be separated without having an additional axis.

    A fifth axis could exist, but the two spaces would be separated by an infinitesimal distance along the 5th dimensional axis. The space would be 5th dimensional, but the 5th dimension could simply be compactified.

    Alternatively, the external space could be separated from the encompassed space by quantum decoherence. Despite still being in the same 4D spacetime, the external space would be separated by quantum decoherence, thus making it separate and external due to not being able to interact with each other. Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding how MWI and quantum decoherence work.
    Eseseso
    Hey Ultima, I was rereading the 1984 Secret Wars and I was wondering: How can Galactus be High 1-B via chain-scaling above the Cosmic Cubes (via Mad Celestial Scaling) when the Beyonder, who is a Cosmic Cube, in Secret Wars 1984 utterly dwarfed him in power and stomped both him and a Doctor Doom who had stolen Galactus's power?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    Galactus canonically heavily varies in power based on how well-fed he is. So he can go from being weaker than a failed Cosmic Cube to Celestial level on a dime.

    He has other High 1-B feats, anyway. He fought Agamotto to a stalemate one time, so he certainly gets scaling from Slorioth. And he, of course, is evenly matched with Odin in his hungrier states.
    Eseseso
    Eseseso
    That all makes sense, especially the Agamotto part.

    Tbh, I am curious as to how the Odin-lvl people scale to High 1-B. I don't recall the skyfathers having any infinite-dimensional scaling.
    Eseseso
    Eseseso
    Also, what will starving Galactus scale to? Even if moderately fed Galactus scales to High 1-B, will starving Galactus still be 2-C?
    Tdjwo
    Hello Ultima. Do you know what tier a character that's able to destroy "all space which contains all logical coordinates using an ability that evokes non-euclidean geometry?
    LazyMortician
    Hello and good day, Ultima. I have a question for you.

    For example, the cosmology of a verse was presented to us in 6D. But later it was noted that it is included in infinite layers. In this verse, does the QS between one layer prove the QS between all the other layers? The QS example is this: One has nothing but physical realms, but the other has abstract realms/spaces that transcend physical realms. Do you think it is enough for QS?
    Gasper
    Do you have any plans for Cthulhu mythos? Their profiles are pretty garbo and outdated at this point.
    Are u brazillian? Se for, olá.
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    Sou.
    Yagooo
    Me dizeram que foi você que criou o Tiering System. Na verdade, a criação do mesmo leva créditos ao Galaxy Pyron, certo?
    Eseseso
    Hi!

    I just heard that you are planning an upgrade for Marvel's Thor.

    Would it be possible to get some more info on that?
    DaReaperMan
    Somehow I feel letting this be settled by democracy is not the most prudent road to take, but, if that's what everyone ie fine with, then it's how it be. (Although your use of the word "decree" makes me laugh a bit)
    Click to expand...

    Palpatine would not approve of this message
    Gasper
    Hi, sorry to bother you but do you plan on making any revisions on WOD?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    I'd like to, yeah.
    • Like
    Reactions: Gasper
    Gasper
    Gasper
    Do you have any scaling in mind?

    Some of the profiles are very outdated too.
    Gasper
    Hi i would just want to ask, will you make a separate profile for those who sit above in shadow or will they merge with beyonders?
    ThanatosX
    Hi, I'm sorry to bother you, but I would have a question for you. I am discussing with someone about our standards for being above baseline, and we disagree with something. Basically, a character is able to destroy an infinite amount of 6-D structures, and they say that this makes the character infinitely above baseline 6-D both in Range and AP. However, I don't agree with this notion since a 6-D realm would already be a bigger infinite, so multiplying it for an infinite amount would still make it the same infinite that makes our baseline for 6-D, at least from my limited knowledge of this kind of stuff. Would you be able to tell me if destroying an infinite amount of 6-D structures would actually qualify for "infinite above baseline 6-D" in AP and Range or not?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    Depends on the specifics of the 6-D things being destroyed. A 6-dimensional structure isn't necessarily Low 1-C, so the feat being High 3-A for example is a feasible scenario.

    Now, suppose that the verse defines higher-dimensional objects as all being infinitely higher in power. If each 6-D structure being destroyed is finitely large (i.e Its 6-D volume is finite, not its 3-D volume), then, yeah, destroying them all would be "infinitely above baseline Low 1-C."

    If the 6-D structures all have infinite 6-D volume, though, then if the above condition holds, destroying even a single one already makes you infinitely above "baseline" Low 1-C. Destroying more doesn't add to that, though, no.
    ThanatosX
    ThanatosX
    This is interesting, I didn't knew that that's how it works. Thank you very much for the answer!
    The_Yellow_Topaz
    Timeless
    how does oblivion play into the high 1-a marvel revisions
    Gasper
    Gasper
    He is the far shore level. Above Nutral zone/Eternity but below "The Beyond".
    AlexZiggy
    Yo Ultima, would a character scale higher into Set Theory if the author knows about certain concepts or do we need explicit in universes acknowledgement?
    TastyCream
    Honestly, do you think DC's cosmology is on par with Marvel if we composite the cosmologies or are they very far apart?
    LuisGeno
    Hello Ultima. Sorry to bother you again, but... could you give me permission to speak on your abstract Marvel post? If it's not too much trouble, of course. Greetings!
    Eseseso
    Hi!

    Just a few questions:

    1. Do you plan to discuss Modern Dormammu's scaling as well?

    2. When exactly will P&A for abstracts be covered? I may have already asked this (so I apologize for asking again), but I forgot what you said.

    3. If you don't mind, whenever you make the next thread, I'd like to discuss prep/tech/absorption Doom.

    Most of it is going to already be applied, like him absorbing Galactus's power, him using Vibranium to surpass the Cosmic Cube, him absorbing House of M Scarlet Witch's power and saying it surpassed the Beyonder (though I'm not certain whether or not you want to make it scale to "Pre-Retcon" or "Post-Retcon" Beyonder), but I will probably wish to bring up Doom's forcefields taking hits from 4 Mad Celestials for 28 minutes.

    @Eficiente disagreed with the feat being valid, but I now disagree with his disagreeing for reasons I'll provide when I bring this up.

    4. Ngl, Marvel mindhax masters (Doom, Xavier, Moondragon, Dr. Strange) are about to have the most OP mindhax in fiction via scaling off Strange mind-haxxing Umar, who will be Low 1-A via scaling to Dormammu.
    View previous comments…
    Eseseso
    Eseseso
    Also Ultima, IIRC The Mad Celestials matched an alternate Reed Richards who had the Infinity Gauntlet, and at least one of them endured a blast from the same alternate Reed Richards using the Ultimate Nullifier.

    Would that affect scaling by any chance?
    Ultima_Reality
    Ultima_Reality
    I don't remember which comic the Mad Celestials thing happened in. Do you happen to know it? Will check myself.
    Eseseso
    Eseseso
    This is the issue where alternate Reed Richards uses the Ultimate Nullifier (though it kills him when he loses his will/focus). The other alternate Reeds note it to be the strongest weapon in the universe despite knowing of the IG, so it doesn't seem to be nerfed or anything.

    He uses the IG at the start of the chapter in one of the panels.

    Not sure if the previous chapters in that storyline show the IG being used by one of the alternate Reeds.
    TheGodOfICE777
    Hey, Ultima can you check this crt? The main contentions seem to be something you said about 2 years ago but your reasoning doesn’t seem to fit our current standards so we need your comments on your subject. Thanks in advance
    TOAAPRESENCE1
    Question of TES ultima, but where does the quote "Magic and spells Come from the act of the caster willing/exerting changes into reality according to their will." come from? i am looking at the lore page etc. but i can't find where that comes from.
    LuisGeno
    Hello Ultima, I wanted to share these Marvel scans. Which, I think can mean an aleph-1 number of universes in Marvel.
    It speaks of the aleph numbers, and it explicitly says that the number of universes is greater than an already infinite number of universes. So, it explicitly talks about the cardinality of the multiverse
    BECAUSE THE MULTIVERSE IS LITERALLY A TRANSFINITE NUMBER, THAT IS, A NUMBER GREATER THAN INFINITE UNIVERSES.
    That is to say that the cardinality of the multiverse is greater than one infinity, the lowest "interpretation" is logically used here, so the multiverse has a Cardinality greater than at least aleph-0, thus being aleph-1.

    Please comment on this when you have time.🙏
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top