Case by case thing, if verse treats it as something entirely different and transcendent/outside from the rest of the cosmos as an very idea of space without which "spacetime" would have no meaning. Then 1a seems more suitable. Well no, isn't our 1a is also a uncountable number of dimensions rather than something outside of dimensions?
That's low 1-ACase by case thing, if verse treats it as something entirely different and transcendent/outside from the rest of the cosmos as an very idea of space without which "spacetime" would have no meaning. Then 1a seems more suitable. Well no, isn't our 1a is also a uncountable number of dimensions rather than something outside of dimensions?
Again
The thing I like with thoses posst is the fact the user is commiting the fallacy he made a comment.
Does this sentence can still convey the message you wanted to transmit if we deprive each word of its meaning. Don't tap dance arount the question, stay consistent with your framework.
The problem is this word, which is used losely not just around but in fiction as well.
Care to make it sense?
Then the character did not create any concept, but another higher space if your method is as following: "n+1D".
I did not specifcy "a Supreme Being", I said a character. As for the question:
-> " Provide one exemple of a fictional character who is truly Omnipotent."
That's the point of having a dictionary, i.e, to help you understand the meaning of words you don't know.
A simple research would have tell you I'm taling about the DC Universe.
1. Like i said before, if the verse establish the cosmology clearly then yes, if not, then no we are not going to give 1-A randomlyCase by case thing, if verse treats it as something entirely different and transcendent/outside from the rest of the cosmos as an very idea of space without which "spacetime" would have no meaning. Then 1a seems more suitable. Well no, isn't our 1a is also a uncountable number of dimensions rather than something outside of dimensions?
Still give nothing, you again assuming the same thing that concept of space equal all definition of dimension, don't participate in it mean you mean you beyond all definition of dimension which is NLF
1. I didn't exactly say it, probably you misunderstood. And the later part is unnecessarySecond, a concept is not " beyond all definition". If you don't know what a concept even means in the first place, dont comment on a thread talking about it:
concept - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
en.wiktionary.org
Wdym by configuration of space independent of concept???. My english is not too good so could you re-explain it??
No, can't make sense any other than that.
Agree but Comon how many members are going to mention it
I just typed it in hurry regardless my above post quite describes why these kinds of spaces are way higher than low 1a or 1a.
Is a vague term, doesn't mean anything without proper context. Only on basis of this word is a rat arguement.
I clicked wrong button bruhh, since the Q is above A on keyboard bruhhh1-A
This isn't something I support. This "silly" reasoning was an example to counter your concept of space arguments. Don't shift the goalpost.
And a single phrase can have an endless number of interpretations and meanings based on a dictionary. "Transcending the concept of space" can literally just amount to something as simple as teleportation or omnipresence based on context.
No I meant what portion of my post you were responding to. But anyway, considering you skipped the last part of my post I assume you concede that omnipotence can indeed exist in fiction?
That's clearly not a problem, unless you are still living in the same periode of time when Einstein came up with a model of a four dimensional spacetime universe.
www.universetoday.com
It's not, especially at the time we are living.
Anyway what justifies it to 1a or any higher? Something that is different than the space whose property is to have dimensions why does it have to be a kind of canvas to our space of dimensions? I can say samething about such spaces that if this kind of spaces are stacked infinitely even then they wouldn't amount to anything in our dimensions of space. And so our space can act as canvas now.
Such as what? What "context" would be necessary that does not involve any inclusion of infinite dimensions or anything vaguely describing them?
Yes, I think it's possible within the context of fiction. But in this thread I only used it as a point of argument, not something I would actually support.Damn, people till now still thinks that true omnipotence exists in fiction and should be taken literal
It's was not even the point in the first place to further explain why it's should be at low 1-A, as I was only pointing out something you have distorted.
Thanks to Wikitionary.
Can a character still be able to create any configuration of space apart from the concept to which it is related . I gave you an exemple of what I meant.
No, it is not possible, something like this does not exist in fiction. Author most of the time when they use the term, they just want to describe it as “all-mighty, Godlike, all powerful” that's it.
It was still a poor attempt, as you failed to provide one fictional character who is "Omnipotent". This point would have been" acceptable" if there was even a single one.
This is irrelevant, as the thread is clear about the context. Otherwise, you could have asked me to clarify in what sense I'm using the terms "concept of space", but you still decided to give your opinion.
Maybe because there was not "portion", but instead I was responding to your point that "the concept of space also encompasses real life."
I suggest you to read my previous posts on this matter.
Yet you provide no justification.
There are some, like this which use Apophatic Theology, some use math
Uh oh, i distorted what???
And, you still assuming that lacking any dimensionality before the creation of the concept of space mean when a character create the concept of space, said cosmology instantly = uncountable infinite amount of dimension layer = at least Low 1-A, which is a big leap in logic
If i'm not wrong, what you trying to say is....a character can't create another space that somehow not depend or related to concept of space????. If that is then why a character can't create such space???
Yes it is possible, but again with enough contexts, and within the boundary said fiction show
We are talking about the framework of the tiering system here. It isn't built upon examples from fiction.
Don't try to backtrack now. Your OP treats "concept of space"(even puts in quotation marks every time) as if it has a specific meaning in its own, even trying to put a baseline on it. And yes, I will give my opinion whenever I want based on the points you have presented in the thread.
Nice deflect. I don't see any argument so concession accepted.
And...what is that exactly?
" We no longer give characters 1-A only because they transcend the concept of space." Still does not mean such a character would not be above any dimension regardless.
Creation = / = Manipulation
You can.....google about this. It is a theology about "God" is beyond all description, you can't actually describe "God", all attempt to describe "God" resulting in something entire different, unrelated, that the general gist of it, still it need to be evaluated case-by-case depend on verse
No, otherwise everyone with omnipotence reached boundless automatically, heck even boundless is not enough for a truly omnipotent being. Because everything he can't do, it is contradiction.
The whole thread point is that you want to give Lucifer 1-A for that, lol.
Creation is a part of manipulation, silly, destroy/create/change is manipulation. Damn.
See my previous post
"uncountable infinite amount of dimension layer " This is also wrong, the dimensionality of an object is defined by natural numbers, e.g 1-D, 2-D, 3-D, etc.
Conclusion that lead to an non sequitir, as only the character would have been able to reach this tier, not the cosmology.
For the same reason I gave you in my second exemple, which you did not respond:
Lucifer is not even able to create anything "Ex nihilo", he shapes things LOL. Wrong character.
Yes, but this is not true in both ways. That's the point.
You can manipulate non-existent fire. I don't see an issue.
This statement is false, "the framework of the ranking system" is in fact "built on examples of fiction." Otherwise, what would be the point of developing a tiering system and tiering fictional characters accordingly? It does not add up.
LOL, as if it would happen one day.
That's clearly not what quotation marks stands for LOL. Maybe you should actually also do your own research on it.
I don't see the issue.
Then don"t say nothing regarding the context of the terms "concept of space" as it was already given in this thread.
Say the one who made claim that Omnipotence is a thing in fiction.
It does add up yes. We are ranking fictional characters in a neutral tiering system. We aren't structuring a tiering system out of fictional characters.
????
Jfc
You made the claim that the concept of space is a thing in fiction, the burden of proof is on you.
I seen many other verses that described God like that, but they are still only 2-A or Low 1-C typically.
Just to make a clarification unto that (haven't read the whole thread).
