A different essay for Ascended Athena????? (God of War)

[Georredannea15]

Where was that discussed? I cannot imagine us using the phrase "qualitative superiority" in two different ways given that this is a term we invented ourselves. It would be entirely pointless to do that because we could just say "superior" to.

The previous TD thread was intended to be removed because of this confusion, but the reason was later explained, it was discussed for a long page

 

[KLOL506]

@Planck69 Would you also be able to refine the descriptions since Deagon expressed some slight concerns here?

 

[Planck69]

@Planck69 Would you also be able to refine the descriptions since Deagon expressed some slight concerns here?

I don't see much of something to refine. Their predating reality is via their existence before time and the universe began (in the primordial realm of Chaos). That's made pretty clear on the explanation pages.

 

[Robo432343]

"Said aspects include, space and time, life and death, darkness and light, dreams and the physical world and more"

the "and more" part makes it sound like they transcend most dualities but not all of them

 

[Planck69]

"Said aspects include, space and time, life and death, darkness and light, dreams and the physical world and more"

the "and more" part makes it sound like they transcend some dualities but not all of them

I wasn't gonna list every godly domain and primordial there. That's literally it. You can just read the thread for it for more.

 

[Georredannea15]

Btw my proposal is clear, ND nature type 2, if it was QS as you said, you would always need dimensional superiority for TD but we don't do that on the wiki, no.

And one cannot talk about TD if you are already dimensionally superior somewhere, but in Athena's case there is no dimensional superiority against this plane

 

[Deagonx]

@Planck69 Would you also be able to refine the descriptions since Deagon expressed some slight concerns here?

I don't see much of something to refine. Their predating reality is via their existence before time and the universe began (in the primordial realm of Chaos). That's made pretty clear on the explanation pages.

I'll likely handle this in a separate revision, so no need to get all the way into it here, I just don't care for this:

Are the personifications of the most fundamental aspects of reality

The scan is just pictures of them with their names and the translations of their names. I can't imagine "Mountains" being characterized as "one of the most fundamental aspects of reality" and I am not sure why we are characterizing that way, but it can be handled later.

Btw my proposal is clear, ND nature type 2, if it was QS as you said, you would always need dimensional superiority for TD but we don't do that on the wiki, no.

And one cannot talk about TD if you are already dimensionally superior somewhere, but in Athena's case there is no dimensional superiority against this plane

Athena would need to have QS to the Primordials to have Transduality.

 

[Planck69]

Btw my proposal is clear, ND nature type 2, if it was QS as you said, you would always need dimensional superiority for TD but we don't do that on the wiki, no.

And one cannot talk about TD if you are already dimensionally superior somewhere, but in Athena's case there is no dimensional superiority against this plane

Then what's even the difference between that and Nonduality Type 1 Aspect 2? She'd still be effectively untouchable by the dualities of the verse, it'd just also extend to Type 1 concept manipulation.

 

[Georredannea15]

Then what's even the difference between that and Nonduality Type 1 Aspect 2? She'd still be effectively untouchable by the dualities of the verse, it'd just also extend to Type 1 concept manipulation.

Nature type 1 is simply means you're lacking dualities, nature type 2 means you're beyond these dualities with your nature. "Without no dimensional superiority"

Damn, really, if your only argument is still "TD should have be QS and QS was rejected by dimensional superiority for Athena" then call a TD expert and see the difference between the two.

 

[Deagonx]

IMO we should just say "TD" or "ND" rather than "Nature Type 1/2" With that said:

Nature type 1 is simply means you're lacking dualities, nature type 2 means you're beyond these dualities with your nature.

It means you are qualitatively superior. You seem to think they just meant "superior" but the phrase QS means like infinite transcendence, which Athena doesn't have over the Primordials.

 

[Georredannea15]

In order to have QS in TD, it is enough to be existentially beyond non-dual beings or dualities and to be non-interactive towards them. It's simple Lmao

 

[Deagonx]

In order to have QS in TD, it is enough to be existentially beyond non-dual beings or dualities and to be non-interactive towards them. It's simple Lmao

That's not enough for qualtiative superiority. You keep asserting that the concept of QS has different standards when we're talking about nonduality than when we're talking about tiering, but you haven't substantiated that with anything.

 

[Georredannea15]

It means you are qualitatively superior. You seem to think they just meant "superior" but the phrase QS means like infinite transcendence, which Athena doesn't have over the Primordials.

Dude, stop making the whole thing about "infinite transcendence" and dimensional superiority, no character on the wiki has received TD with dimensional superiority or infinite transcendence

 

[Deagonx]

Well this is going nowhere.

Put me down for "Nonduality Type 2" and disagree for Transduality. I don't see any benefit from going in circles.

 

[Georredannea15]

Then you guys should just read this and learn how we can take TD. At least that's what was accepted

 

[KLOL506]

Well this is going nowhere.

Put me down for "Nonduality Type 2" and disagree for Transduality. I don't see any benefit from going in circles.

There is a Nature Type and an Aspect Type. So, I assume you're going with ND Nature 1 Aspect 2?

 

[Deagonx]

There is a Nature Type and an Aspect Type. So, I assume you're going with ND Nature 1 Aspect 2?

"Nature Type 2" is Transduality. So I wouldn't say "ND Nature 2 Aspect 2" I'd just say "Transduality Type 2" or "TD Type 2."

 

[Robo432343]

"Nature Type 2" is Transduality. So I wouldn't say "ND Nature 2 Aspect 2" I'd just say "Transduality Type 2" or "TD Type 2."

i don't think we're allowed to do that anymore because of the new standards tho?
in every profile with nonduality you'll see that characters have nonduality on the profile, not transduality

one of the staff members made it so that characters who have "transduality type 2" on the profile are changed to nonduality type 1 aspect 2 or something

 

[Georredannea15]

Then you guys should just read this and learn how we can take TD. At least that's what was accepted

At least in this quote you guys understand the difference between the two and that in order to have TD it is enough to be beyond dualities or non-dual beings and be non-interactive towards them and you will not bring up rejected QS for Athena's dimensional superiority again

 

[Deagonx]

At least in this quote

One comment from Qawsedf in a 14 page revision thread does not supercede how the standards are actually written on the page itself.

 

[Georredannea15]

One comment from Qawsedf in a 14 page revision thread does not supercede how the standards are actually written on the page itself.

But the accepted and implemented standards are based on this.

On the contrary, you are the one who claims that we need to have QS with dimensional jump to win this. We've never done this at TD.

It's up to you to accept it or not, but know that these are two very different things, Athena's rejected qualitative superiority was for dimensional transcendence

 

[KLOL506]

"Nature Type 2" is Transduality. So I wouldn't say "ND Nature 2 Aspect 2" I'd just say "Transduality Type 2" or "TD Type 2."

We're not allowed to do that anymore. Nonduality Type 2 is Transduality now.

 

[Deagonx]

We're not allowed to do that anymore. Nonduality Type 2 is Transduality now.

That doesn't seem sensible to me because "Nonduality Type 1" is just... Nonduality. This seems really redundant to me and I don't really see anything in the page specifying that, but I might do a quick Staff thread to rectify it.

 

[KLOL506]

That doesn't seem sensible to me because "Nonduality Type 1" is just... Nonduality. This seems really redundant to me and I don't really see anything in the page specifying that, but I might do a quick Staff thread to rectify it.

Hey, I didn't revise Transduality and make it into Nonduality. Fuji did and got multiple staff to accept it too.

Though Ultima plans to overhaul Transduality altogether in the future.

 

[Deagonx]

Hey, I didn't revise Transduality and make it into Nonduality

Right but that's not the part I have an issue with. I don't see why we would need to refer to it with the format of "Nonduality Type # Aspect #" Instead of "Transduality Type 1" or "Nonduality Type 1" where Type refers to aspect and whether its TD or ND is implicit to which one we use.

 

[Georredannea15]

Can you guys... stop now? We don't know what will happen in the future and who wants to do what, but this is how we use it now.

 

[Deagonx]

I mean we can, but both myself and Planck have said ND Type 2 is more fittin than TD Type 2 and that's what the standards are based on. You would need to substantiate the claim that QS means something different in our ND standards, but I find that extremely far fetched given that there is no benefit to use using the term in different ways.

 

[KLOL506]

I don't see why we would need to refer to it with the format of "Nonduality Type # Aspect #" Instead of "Transduality Type 1" or "Nonduality Type 1" where Type refers to aspect and whether its TD or ND is implicit to which one we use.

Because that's how it is right now. Nonduality Nature Type 2 is referred to as Transduality.

If you don't like it, you can make a CRT to fix it, since that is beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[Deagonx]

Because that's how it is right now. Nonduality Nature Type 2 is referred to as Transduality.

If you don't like it, you can make a CRT to fix it, since that is beyond the scope of this thread.

I feel there may be a miscommunication issue. I have no issue with referring to "Nonduality Nature Type 2" as Transduality. That is, in fact, explicitly what I am saying and it seems to be what the page standards also say.

 

[Georredannea15]

I mean we can, but both myself and Planck have said ND Type 2 is more fittin than TD Type 2 and that's what the standards are based on. You would need to substantiate the claim that QS means something different in our ND standards, but I find that extremely far fetched given that there is no benefit to use using the term in different ways.

As I said, it's up to you whether you accept it or not, I can never interfere with that.

However, I want you to know that Athena's rejected QS for dimensional transcendence and the QS here are completely different from each other, and there is no such obligation in any character with TD.


I think it would be better if I call a TD specialist because you don't believe me

 

[Deagonx]

However, I want you to know that Athena's rejected QS for dimensional transcendence and the QS here are completely different from each other,

You keep saying that but I don't see why QS would mean something different for TD than tiers.

@Qawsedf234

The character in the OP (Athena) was rejectedfor QS over the other godly beings, she's higher than them but it's far too vague to grant QS. The Primordials currently have Nonduality and the OP wants to give Athena transduality on account of being above them, but if it was already determined that she doesn't have QS over them I don't see how that works.

He is claiming that the term QS in our Nonduality standards has a different meaning and set of criteria than it does in our tiering standards, and I have absolutely no idea why that would be the case. Can you offer clarity in that regard?

 

[Georredannea15]

You keep saying that but I don't see why QS would mean something different for TD than tiers.

@Qawsedf234

The character in the OP (Athena) was rejectedfor QS over the other godly beings, she's higher than them but it's far too vague to grant QS. The Primordials currently have Nonduality and the OP wants to give Athena transduality on account of being above them, but if it was already determined that she doesn't have QS over them I don't see how that works.

He is claiming that the term QS in our Nonduality standards has a different meaning and set of criteria than it does in our tiering standards, and I have absolutely no idea why that would be the case. Can you offer clarity in that regard?

I talked to him and I guess he would say that the QS in Higher D is not the same as the QS in TD.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm sure he can speak for himself.

 

[Georredannea15]

Alr

 

[Georredannea15]

In fact, I would say that this profile is the best example of how there is a huge difference between the QS required by higher-D and the QS required by TD.

 

[Qawsedf234]

QS used in dimensional superiority =/= QS used in TD, this has already been discussed in the previous TD thread.

1. Transduality: Characters with this type of nonduality exist outside and independently of the logical systems they're nondual regarding while also possessing qualitative superiority to them. Besides immunizing them against the dualities in question, this power also immunizes them against attempts to apply those dualities to them, as they would transcend the scope of the haxes that could do so.

Q: What is qualitative superiority?
A: Qualitative superiority, also sometimes called being qualitatively greater, is a term colloquially used to mean that something is superior to an extend that it justifies being on a higher tier of infinity in terms of our Tiering System than the thing they are superior to. That means a character qualitatively superior to the usual spacetime continuum would, for example, be Low Complex Multiverse level (Tier Low 1-C) at the level represented by the R^5. Someone qualitatively superior to that would have the same tier, but on the higher level of infinity represented by the R^6 and someone qualitatively superior to that level would be baseline Complex Multiverse level (Tier 1-C).
In the same vein a space being qualitatively superior to another space, means that destroying that space would land you on a higher level of infinity in the Tiering System than destroying the space it is superior to.
In rough terms it means as much as being "more than countably infinite times greater in power or size".

The reason it is called qualitative superiority is that, instead of quantitative terms such as being 2 times, 100 times or even infinite times more powerful or greater, this type of superiority is typically justified by the nature of the superiority. The most standard case is dimensionality, where a difference in the quality that is dimensionality, implies the necessary quantitative difference. Another typical example is reality-fiction differences. Those are cases like viewing a plane of reality as mere fiction, like for example writing on a sheet of paper or a dream. They are assumed to imply superiority of a similar scale.
Of course, the same levels of superiority can also be reached via sufficiently explicit quantitative statements, such as when cardinalities above countably infinite get involved in a manner that implies a corresponding difference in power/size.

As the idea of "more than countably infinite times greater in power or size" implies, most statements of superiority wouldn't suffice to reach qualitative superiority, even if applied to already being infinitely stronger than the baselines for the level. E.g. being twice, a hundred or even infinite times stronger than a Multiverse level+ character, who already has infinite multiversal strength, would still not be enough to reach qualitative superiority over a multiverse.

QS is uses identically in the wiki for all terminology. To qualify for TD you have to show a transinfinite difference between them and everyone else.

The reason why TD was revised to ND was because virtually no one ever qualified for it and we made up the term for the site.

 

[Robo432343]

In fact, I would say that this profile is the best example of how there is a huge difference between the QS required by higher-D and the QS required by TD.

rimuru doesn't even need qualitative superiority because he is ND type aspect 1

 

[Georredannea15]

QS is uses identically in the wiki for all terminology. To qualify for TD you have to show a transinfinite difference between them and everyone else.

The reason why TD was revised to ND was because virtually no one ever qualified for it and we made up the term for the site.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be QS here, but the reason they basically reject it is because they say that since TD is required to have QS, it also requires higher -D power or existence.

 

[Georredannea15]

rimuru doesn't even need qualitative superiority because he is ND type aspect 1

But he has ND nature type 2 = TD, Aspect type 2 means which and how many dualities

 

[Robo432343]

But he has ND nature type 2 = TD

..no
rimuru has nature 1 aspect 1
it is literally on his profile