A definitely not so controversial Dragon ball toei upgrade

[Qawsedf234]

I do want to note 2 separate people from the translation team said the translation he used was correct

I didn't say "transcend" was an incorrect translation, in fact I provided two other examples of a sentence that used it in that way OP is suggesting. My point is that the word being used for transcendence can be both metaphorical and literal depending on the context since it just "stands above", "is beyond" and other such phrases. Nothing given in the text implies, in my reading at least, that dimensional transcendence is the logical choice over just spiritual or authority transcendence.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

I didn't say "transcend" was an incorrect translation, in fact I provided two other examples of a sentence that used it in that way. My point is that the word used being used for transcendence can be both metaphorical and literal depending on the context since it just "stands above", "is beyond" and other such phrases. Nothing given in the text implies in my reading implies dimensional transcendence is the logical choice over just spiritual or authority transcendence.

You are aurging the translation is incorrect and that the translators should have translated it as stand above look
Uaaa also the "offical" Japanese to English translation...sucks it's bad never use it, go with the words the translators gave


By the offcial translation of English to Japanese there is literally no distinction between toast and bread and many other ridiculous things, please take my word for it and never use sources like that again

 

[Darkmon_cns]

You are aurging the translation is incorrect and that the translators should have translated it as stand above look
Uaaa also the "offical" Japanese to English translation...sucks it's bad never use it, go with the words the translators gave


By the offcial translation of English to Japanese there is literally no distinction between toast and bread and many other ridiculous things, please take my word for it and never use sources like that again

This is because Japanese is a super context dependent language. It's very possible the difference between dtand above and trascend is at all times 100% clear to a native Japanese speaker and for reason we can't really understand the scan given absolutely must be translated as transcend.

 

[Robo432343]

he is not saying the translation is wrong

don't strawman

 

[Qawsedf234]

You are aurging the translation is incorrect and that the translators should have translated it as stand above look

I'm not. To restate my core reasoning

The OP proves the word "超越した" and the only evidence presented is the affirmation that it's transcendence in the literal sense.

So to my research Lephyr the strongest piece of evidence is based on shaky ground. Unless the OP wants to argue that the Olympics dimensional transcende other sporting events they would have to admit that 超越 is not always literally, but metaphorical and used in that way very commonly in written media.

My argument was never that the word wasn't transcendence. But that word can only be used in a literal definition of transcendence. It can be used metaphorically, as shown multiple times.

After that it becomes a question of is it dimensional transcendence as in it has a superior spatial axis or is it just a more vague way of saying it stands above and beyond the mortal plane. I don't see the former as being more valid than the latter.

also the "offical" Japanese to English translation...sucks it's bad never use it, go with the words the translators gave

If it want a Japanese speaker giving their view then here's a dude writing the following on stack exchange about a year ago

Xを超越している usually means something cannot be measured/analyzed by the existing framework of X. 次元を超越している means something cannot be analyzed in terms of "dimension", which, as you say, generally refers to time and space ruled by the physics of our world. Therefore, we can say this world (天界) is not governed by the ordinary rules of physics, but the phrase by itself does not tell if the world is a spiritual world or just a parallel world. It does not necessarily say the world is "higher" than our world, either.

Conceptually, 次元を超越している is different from 高次元 (high-dimension) such as the 1024-dimensional space. When you say 高次元, you are discussing something within the framework of 次元. 次元を超越 refuses such an analysis

Which echoes all of my issues with the statement. Japan has a word that only ever means a spatial higher dimension that can't be confused with anything else. The word used here it context dependent and can mean different things.

So my view is unchanged. I don't see this interpretation being more valid than the current one. The most you'll get from this is that heaven is maybe bigger than it currently is, but it's still Tier 2.

 

[Hasty12345]

You are aurging the translation is incorrect and that the translators should have translated it as stand above

no he isn’t, he’s arguing the word has multiple meanings

 

[Darkmon_cns]

Then I'll formally ask you for your aurgment for why it is metaphorical, I do not believe assuming language like this is metaphorical is the default, as such you must provide an arugment for why it is.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

no he isn’t, he’s arguing the word has multiple meanings

My opinion on this was because he was using Japanese text to prove that, the translators already gave us an English version of the text, were ment to do that, I still can't understand how using Japanese text like that and using that to determine meaning is anything other then saying you don't trust the translation given

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

It would have made sense of there were 2 temporal dimensions as opposed to 4 spatial dimensions, but I do not think this qualifies for Low 1-C.

Reading only the OP, the only evidence that could count in my mind is the transcendence statement which I don't see as being enough at face value. The OP proves the word "超越した" and the only evidence presented is the affirmation that it's transcendence in the literal sense. Looking up a Japanese-English dictionary its "transcend" or "supremacy" with the example sentence being metaphorical:



It also gives examples of what the OP is talking about:



So to my research Lephyr the strongest piece of evidence is based on shaky ground. Unless the OP wants to argue that the Olympics dimensional transcende other sporting events they would have to admit that 超越 is not always literally, but metaphorical and used in that way very commonly in written media. In fact one of the definitions is literally just "stands above" and you can replace transcends with "stands above" and it makes the same level of sense.

Additional containing an infinite space can be done with a non-transinfinite space in the same way a 2-A space doesn't need to be 5D to contain infinite 4D spaces.

Overall, in my admittedly bias position, this is taking a quote talking about heaven having supremacy over the mortal plane and scaling it to an illogical level.

So list me as disagree for now.

I also disagree for Qawsedf's reasons.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Additional containing an infinite space can be done with a non-transinfinite space in the same way a 2-A space doesn't need to be 5D to contain infinite 4D spaces.

If I'm not mistaken, Heaven is established as a spatial location/area of the Afterlife. The argument presented in the OP is that the Afterlife is spatially 4-D, then it'll also make Heaven a 4-D spatial construct as a byproduct because it is directly a location of the Afterlife and not an infinitesimal subset. Considering the statement that Heaven is as big as the Universe, I suppose there might be merit that Heaven is the higher +1 dimensional equivalent to the mortal Universe in terms of volume. So apparently, Heaven is actually spatially Low 2-C, not High 3-A. However, I might reconsider my stance if this line of logic doesn't work well or is contradicted by our established standards and applications of higher infinities on the wiki, but currently, I don't find a considerable amount of issues with this line of logic as far as I recall with our standards in higher infinities.

 

[Wesker018]

My opinion on this was because he was using Japanese text to prove that, the translators already gave us an English version of the text, were ment to do that, I still can't understand how using Japanese text like that and using that to determine meaning is anything other then saying you don't trust the translation given

He is not saying that the specific context of Dragon Ball is metaphorical, but that since the word is used both literally and metaphorically, the case of the afterlife is ambiguous, since one can argue that it is a dimensional transcendence and others that it is simply above the human world. That same ambiguity unilaterally makes the CTR fail.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

I also disagree for Qawsedf's reasons.

Sense you quoted them I would like to note DDM hadn't replied to some aurgments made against there orginal statment
I'd also like to see how other people will reply to the aurgments made

 

[Qawsedf234]

The argument presented in the OP is that the Afterlife is spatially 4-D, then it'll also make Heaven a 4-D spatial construct as a byproduct because it is directly a location of the Afterlife and not an infinitesimal subset.

While off topic, i do want to explain my reasoning first. When the wiki uses 3D+1 the +1 means a temporal dimension that isn't bound by spatial dimensions that propagated the flow of events. This snap shot of events gets you a higher rating, since destroying tbe time aspect of space-time would involve destroying an Aleph-Set of universes.

However, there are other interpretations of that construct that instead has time be how a dimensional cross section interacts. Or in other words the 4th Dimension is both a spatial dimension along with the dimension that acts as the axis for the progression of events.

Either way you get a Low 2-C rating because in either scenario you can fit a trans-infinite number of 3D spaces within that +1 time dimension or 4D cube.

I said all of that to say that Heaven being within the Afterlife and Heaven being infinite ultimately doesn't make it Low 1-C. Because Heaven ia just 3D infinite, meaning it having an insubstaintal 4D axis and a time dimension would make the Afterlife itself Low 2-C to 2-C on its own, without getting into Low 1-C while still being able to embed said infinite space. Or to say in another way, just holding a space within it, even an infinite one, isn't enough for that rating. It's why the FAQ has this section:

To elaborate, a structure larger than 2-A meets the requirements for dimensional superiority over them if it either explicitly mentions an uncountably infinite number of universes or has portrayals/statements of being larger than 2-A structures to the point that even infinite multipliers on top of the size of that structure are of no relevance to it. Multiversal structures past Low 2-C frequently have a distance of unknown length along a 5th dimensional axis separating them. That isn't automatically Low 1-C, as for Low 1-C the distance must be known to be of non-insignificant size.

Having an infinite multiplier doesn't make a Tier 2 space Tier 1. Even if that multiplier is some high set. It would have to be a power ser of infinity to get there and I don't see that being provable for Dragon Ball since the needed evidence is pretty specific and difficult to come by.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Sense you quoted them I would like to note DDM hadn't replied to some aurgments made against there orginal statment
I'd also like to see how other people will reply to the aurgments made

Chill, dude. We're already preparing our counters, patience is the key.

 

[GarrixianXD]

I'll change my stance to neutral for now, considering the discussion we had on the Dragon Ball scaling Discord server, I'm currently confused with all the different flow of arguments back and fourth. I'll await for a proper summarisation and give another re-evaluation.

 

[PrinceofPein]

3 staffs disagreed with this, if there are no new arguments, this should closed.

 

[DivineAura44]

3 staffs disagreed with this, if there are no new arguments, this should closed.

We're already preparing our counters

 

[Hellformer]

3 staffs disagreed with this, if there are no new arguments, this should closed.

Have some patience, let the supporters provide their counters

 

[Chariot190]

This is because Japanese is a super context dependent language. It's very possible the difference between dtand above and trascend is at all times 100% clear to a native Japanese speaker and for reason we can't really understand the scan given absolutely must be translated as transcend.

It really, really, isn't. Context can effect things, but this meme is overblown to hell and back. Words do have actual meanings, Japanese in particular can at times be less contextual given how many hyperspecific words and terms they have for the most specific and nuanced shit imaginable.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

It really, really, isn't. Context can effect things, but this meme is overblown to hell and back. Words do have actual meanings, Japanese in particular can at times be less contextual given how many hyperspecific words and terms they have for the most specific and nuanced shit imaginable.

you dont get it. there's a hidden esoteric meaning in japanese that we can never hope to grasp

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

3 staffs disagreed with this, if there are no new arguments, this should closed.

Stop.

 

[Darkmon_cns]

3 staffs disagreed with this, if there are no new arguments, this should closed.

Honestly closing a thread prematurely would just lead to it being opened again later with someone sighting "we just needed a few hours"

 

[Qawsedf234]

Honestly closing a thread prematurely would just lead to it being opened again later with someone sighting "we just needed a few hours"

If a CRT is rejected then the proposal can't be brought up again for six months unless new evidence is presented.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

That's pretty irrelevant, no one should be rushing to close the thread while the supporters are still working on replying. That's lame ass behavior.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Unless there are new arguments but
1. Afterlife is called transcendent
2. Afterlife is infinite and contains another infinite space

These 2 are not enough for a low 1-C upgrade, they may be used as supporting argument but not as the main.
What I am trying to say is that, a rebuttal that does not bring in any new argument entirely will not really change the entire point of the fact that these 2 points are not enough.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Unless there are new arguments but
1. Afterlife is called transcendent
2. Afterlife is infinite and contains another infinite space

These 2 are not enough for a low 1-C upgrade, they may be used as supporting argument but not as the main.
What I am trying to say is that, a rebuttal that does not bring in any new argument entirely will not really change the entire point of the fact that these 2 points are not enough.

I don't care. Don't try to push for an ongoing thread to be closed again. Whether your 'summary' is correct or not is irrelevant, it's lame and unproductive.

You haven't even seen these rebuttals yet. None of that is for you to decide.

 

[Chariot190]

While I can think of like, a dozen blatant fuckys with some of this shit, closing it early is just a lil scummy. May as well let lil bro cook, maybe some better evidence and confirmation and proper rebukes to the contradictions get brought forth, or maybe none of that happens. Either way. it's only for the best, even if it's a waste of time, that at least gives dudes enough reason to go "damn it was rejected don't make this again without actual new info" or maybe it gets accepted with new yap, who knows, who gives a shit, as long as they ain't asking mfs to wait like a week who gives a ****.

 

[BoastJr]

Going with possibly was probably the best option for the supporters in hindsight.

It was like 1-2 statements that could imply the afterlife has dimensional superiority.

 

[Eseseso]

I just don't think it's portrayed as higher dimensional and transcendent of the normal universe by nature in the actual story

 

[Hellformer]

2-C, possibly Low 1-C can work

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

2-C, possibly Low 1-C can work

With a wank you can be Low 1-C, but this is not the case.
I guess you have read the counterarguments, right?

 

[Qawsedf234]

That's pretty irrelevant, no one should be rushing to close the thread while the supporters are still working on replying. That's lame ass behavior.

I didn't say it should he closed. I do agree that DDM should comment again to reaffirm their stance. I was just clarifying what a rejection entails.

I'm not for a possibly rating either. I'm just against any upgrade bases on the OP's evidence currently.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

With a wank you can be Low 1-C, but this is not the case.
I guess you have read the counterarguments, right?

Thread isn't over yet, and people can disagree with the counter arguments. If people didn't think the counter arguements were solid the supporters wouldn't be working on a reply right now.

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

Thread isn't over yet, and people can disagree with the counter arguments. If people didn't think the counter arguements were solid the supporters wouldn't be working on a reply right now.

Really? But if they didn't even address Compsito's arguments and didn't even demonstrate what I asked for, what can you expect from there?

 

[Darkmon_cns]

Really? But if they didn't even address Compsito's arguments and didn't even demonstrate what I asked for, what can you expect from there?

There making aurgments give them sometime

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Really? But if they didn't even address Compsito's arguments and didn't even demonstrate what I asked for, what can you expect from there?

He didn't really make any good arguments tbh that werent just repeating the bare bones basis of the arguements then saying in his opinion they dont meet the standards so there isnt much there, at least anything thats not already been addressed, and I don't even recall what you asked for, if that's actually something required or another 5D gravity thing, or if it's not currently being responded to right now.

Supporters literally said they are working on a reply, so this 'they didn't even address this guy' doesn't work.

 

[Chariot190]

How about instead of yapping ya'll just wait for the dudes to make whatever arguments they're allegedly cooking instead of arguing about past arguments. All this does is clogs the thread, and this is really not the type of thread you wanna derail or bloat.

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

He didn't really make any good arguments tbh that werent just repeating the bare bones basis of the arguements then saying in his opinion they dont meet the standards so there isnt much there, at least anything thats not already been addressed, and I don't even recall what you asked for, if that's actually something required or another 5D gravity thing, or if it's not currently being responded to right now.

Supporters literally said they are working on a reply, so this 'they didn't even address this guy' doesn't work.

I repeated them because they wouldn't give them to me, and I was asking for proof that the other world has coordinates that a three-dimensional being like Goku can't see, which they didn't prove.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

I repeated them because they wouldn't give them to me, and I was asking for proof that the other world has coordinates that a three-dimensional being like Goku can't see, which they didn't prove.

Thats not a reasonable requirement, so it was ignored because it's a weak counter arguement.

Now let's stop clogging the thread.

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

Thats not a reasonable requirement, so it was ignored because it's a weak counter arguement.

Weak, but necessary when an additional spatial axis is involved.

Now let's stop clogging the thread.

Okay, I'll wait to see the continuation of this