A Major Concern with current Reality-Fiction Transcendence page:

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I’m making this thread, to call to attention an issue I have with the current Reality-Fiction Transcendence page. Currently the page says:

“A character that qualifies would usually then scale to one level of infinity higher than the totality of the cosmology they transcend. So for example, viewing a Low 2-C to 2-A cosmology as fiction would grant Low 1-C, doing so to a 6-Dimensional Low 1-C construct would scale the character to 1-C, doing so to a 10-Dimensional High 1-C structure would be the equivalent of an 11-D High 1-C and so on. However, depending on the details and depictions of the Reality-Fiction Transcendence, it can be more than a simple 'dimensional jump', for example because each reality-fiction "level" having been explained to contain more than one level of infinity (e.g. due to containing large higher-dimensional spaces or similar).”

My problem with this is that it grants a character the tier of Low 1-C without that character being able to affect, create, or destroy an entire Low 1-C. To me, this is like giving a character Low 2-C because they exist inside a universe. Characters should get tiers for what they have done, not because of where they exist.

From speaking with other users on this forum, I understand the main argument for supporting this:

A. The character in question is viewing a tier 2 structure as fictional.

B. The characters inside the tier 2 structure will never being able to reach or access or affect the higher character with their own power and no matter how many multipliers or infinites is stacked or given to those characters, they will never reach that higher character.

Let’s address both points:

A. Irrelevant. Viewing something as fiction is completely arbitrary. There are an assortment of works of fiction where fictional characters within those works are able to do anything from nothing, to completely rise above the entire verse. Also, the comparison to real life just falls apart. In real life, we have no power over fiction. It is a purely conceptual thing that we interact with, the most we can do is change other people’s perspective about those fictions. Perspective shouldn’t give you a tier.

B. This is the main argument to me that makes sense. But to me this argument only holds up as long as you accept certain ideas as objectively true. First of all, let’s talk about the inaccessibility. Inaccessibility should not warrant a tier jump. There are tons of examples of characters who are inaccessible to other characters. A character in another universe can be inaccessible to other characters. A character maybe in another dimension, be dead, a ghost, non-existent. Being inaccessible is just a flavor of the story. Also, we have multiple examples of characters gaining access to these inaccessible characters and places, as just another flavor of the story.
It is also a weird assumption, to claim that a character could not access this higher layer if we gave them more power. They can’t access these layers because the story has made it so. Again, how many characters do finally access these layers after a power boost or through some method.

It is also goes against verse equalization. A character may be inaccessible in their own story, but different a character from another story can have feats of accessing “inaccessible” places. And not to mention, in our fictional battle domes, we are placing both characters within the same arena where they have general access to each other. And to that statement, someone will say, "well the lower level character is infinitely weaker and smaller than the higher dimensional character" and to that leads my next point:


That it tries to equate the differences between layers, as the differences between dimensions, but there is a fundamental misunderstanding with that.

Higher Dimensional spaces are not fundamentally inaccessible to lower dimensional spaces and Higher Dimensional objects are not infinitely bigger than lower dimensional objects.

First some background: Spaces can have any number of dimensions. We currently live in a 3D space, and no other dimensional spaces have ever been observed and discovered. Our notions of other spaces, being parallel 3D spaces, higher dimensional spaces, lower dimensional spaces is completely theoretical. So theoretically, Higher Dimensional space is as inaccessible to a lower dimensional space, in the same way that one universe is inaccessible to another universe. Of course, in fiction, we have ways of getting around this via, teleportation, phasing, portals, immeasurable speed etc.

Lower dimensional objects can exist normally in higher dimensional spaces. An example of this: draw a flat plane in a 3D graph. You can move the flat plane in any direction or way while inside the 3D graph. A lower dimensional object is not infinitely smaller than a higher dimensional object. For example, a flat square can be as large as a planet. The two objects can exist next to each other without problem. To say the round spherical planet is infinitely bigger than the planet sized flat square is like saying a meal with salt is infinitely more flavored than a meal without salt. It's a silly way to describe an object lacking a dimension and not in anyway scientific.

The only problems with dimensional spaces is whether a higher dimensional object can enter a smaller dimensional spaces**.

For example, The flat plane that is as large as as planet, could easily fit inside a 2D space, but what about the planet: here are possibly three outcomes:

• The planet simply cannot enter the 2D space.
• The planet is compressed into 2D
• The planet phases through the space and only appears as a 2D crosscut.

**(Also it is possible to take a 2D object and fold it in 3D space. That folded 2D object wouldn’t fit in the 2D space while folded and would need to be unfolded or suffer the potential 3 out comes I mentioned above)

While a 6D object may or may not be able to enter a Lower Dimensional Space normally, a lower dimensional object can enter a Higher Dimensional space, and exist normally and move around in all dimensions of the space. Should a 3D character gain Low 1-C because they can exist normally in a 6D space. No. That 3D character should gain Low 1-C because they can destroy that 6D space. The dimensionality of the character means nothing. It is about what they can do.

We have multitude of examples of weaker characters being able to exist in the same space as extremely powerful beings. We do not give these weaker characters the same tier as these extremely powerful beings unless they show they are capable of the same feats.

Low 1-C should be given to characters that can affect, destroy, create, these 6D spaces. As the current tier says:

“Characters or objects that can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)”

In conclusion, I think R>F transcendence can be good to pinpoint if a special structure in a story is beyond the tier 2, and that characters who can affect, destroy, or create them should be given Low 1-C. Characters who simply exist in these spaces shouldn’t get higher tiers by virtue. If layers are equivalent to dimensions, then we know that beings from lower layers should be able to exist in these places with no issue, and any issue is a story specific element that can’t be applied to all fiction. Also, these spaces being inaccessible would also be a story specific element and many fictions have examples of characters accessing supposedly inaccessible places. Characters should not get higher tiers for existing superior places, but rather having superior feats.

 

[ImmortalDread]

We have dealt with this and you seems not to understand how tiering system operates in this cases. The fact that I sent you a specific note in that page that clear cut explains the difference between a medium and its contents and yet you ignored it is waste of time.

In this years, we always rate those beings who view any tier 2 structure as low 1-C.

I disagree and my stance won't be changed.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

We have dealt with this and you seems not to understand how tiering system operates in this cases. The fact that I sent you a specific note in that page that clear cut explains the difference between a medium and its contents and yet you ignored it is waste of time.

In this years, we always rate those beings who view any tier 2 structure as low 1-C.

I disagree and my stance won't be changed.

You misconstrue my not understanding with my not agreeing. But its fine if you disagree.

 

[Deceived3596]

If someone can view a 4-D structure as fiction, similar how we, the audience views the manga/show/game we're currently consuming, or how the author views their own story, then they would be 5-D innately because of how inaccessible cardinals work, you objectively couldn't view something as "fiction" while existing within the same level of dimensionality of the structure you see as "fiction", it's axiomatic.

Lacking feats of destroying/creating or heavily effecting Low 1-C structures isn't evidence against that character being Low 1-C when they see that entire structure as "fiction", which is above an more than infinite degree between both objects. That's an argument from ignorance.

Just because a structure is inaccessible to another, doesn't mean it's dimensionality transcendent over the previous structure without further context, this is explicitly explained in our Reality > Fiction Transcendence page, viewing someone or something as "fiction" is innately "transcending" of that specific someone or something by a more than infinite degree if said transcendence is objective, and not hyperbolic. This is what Reality > Fiction Transcendence is.

Everything about this post comes from ignorance on how Reality > Fiction Transcendence actually works, despite the fact i'm not that knowledgeable about this specific topic, i believe i'm qualified enough to assert you're wrong about this topic, but i could be wrong, we'll have to ultimately see from more knowledgeable sources on whose claims are more supported.

Disagree.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

If someone can view a 4-D structure as fiction, similar how we, the audience views the manga/show/game we're currently consuming, or how the author views their own story, then they would be 5-D innately because of how inaccessible cardinals work, you objectively couldn't view something as "fiction" while existing within the same level of dimensionality of the structure you see as "fiction", it's axiomatic.

Fiction does not exist in any dimensional way in the real world and has nothing to do with inaccessible cardinals. Fiction is a completely abstract thing maintained by our own cognition. Also the jump from 3D and 4D to 5D and 6D, (the dimensional equivalent) as in Low 2-C and Low 1-C is not described with inaccessible cardinals within the tier system.

Lacking feats of destroying/creating or heavily effecting Low 1-C structures isn't evidence against that character being Low 1-C when they see that entire structure as "fiction", which is above an more than infinite degree between both objects. That's an argument from ignorance.

I think you need to check my argument again. I am debating giving characters Low 1-C for viewing Low 2-C structures as fiction with no evidence that they can affect a low 1-C structure.

Just because a structure is inaccessible to another, doesn't mean it's dimensionality transcendent over the previous structure without further context, this is explicitly explained in our Reality > Fiction Transcendence page, viewing someone or something as "fiction" is innately "transcending" of that specific someone or something by a more than infinite degree if said transcendence is objective, and not hyperbolic. This is what Reality > Fiction Transcendence is.

Viewing something as fiction is not in anyway transcendence. Me viewing Harry Potter as fictional does not mean I transcend harry potter. The whole notion of this is irregular and made up. There is nothing objective about it.

 

[ShivaShakti]

I disagree with the OP.

 

[Deceived3596]

Fiction does not exist in any dimensional way in the real world and has nothing to do with inaccessible cardinals. Fictional is a completely abstract thing maintained by our own cognition. Also the jump from 3D and 4D to 5D and 6D, (the dimensional equivalent) as in Low 2-C and Low 1-C is not described with inaccessible cardinals within the tier system.

"Fiction" itself doesn't exist within a specific set of dimenstionality, but "viewing" something as "fiction" absolutely does. If you're "viewing" something as "fiction" you're axiomatically viewing that structure from a higher level of dimenstionality because of how inaccessible cardinals work, your subjective opinion doesn't debunk set theory.

"Fictional is a completely abstract thing maintained by our own cognition" doesn't explain anything and is just a word salad, it doesn't address the fact viewing something as fiction is innately above an more then infinite amount of degree, to the point of accessing higher level of dimensionality/cardinality. You aren't addressing this main point, you're just asserting other claims without proving why they're more correct comparative to our claims with evidence, you have the burden of proof, actually fulfill it.

I think you need to check my argument again. I am debating giving characters Low 1-C for viewing Low 2-C structures as fiction.

I know, which is why that exact statement you quoted was about me addressing that exact argument .

Viewing something as fiction is not in anyway transcendence. Me viewing Harry Potter as fictional does not mean I transcend harry potter. The whole notion of this is irregular and made up. There is nothing objective about it.

Yes it does, you're viewing a structure, alongside its space-time continuum, as "fiction", which would objectively cause you to "transcend" that piece of "fiction" to a more than infinite degree. You aren't understanding how cardinals work, if you exist within a higher cardinal comparative to another you're would view that person, object or structure as a more than infinite degree lower than yourself, which is exactly similar how we, the consumers, would view manga/games/shows.

Hopefully someone else more knowledgeable about this topic can explain this to you, because i'm not someone whose exactly knowledgeable about these topics, we should have @Everything12, @DontTalkDT and @Ultima_Reality comment on this thread. As they're knowledgeable on this topic.

 

[Maitreya12]

Ok there are many things wrong the post but I’ll address this one.

Lower dimensional objects can exist normally in higher dimensional spaces. An example of this: draw a flat plane in a 3D graph.

No it cannot. Let’s look at your example. Draw a flat plane on a 3D graph. What do you get? You get a flat, 3D plane that we simply describe as being 2D for convenience purposes. But make no mistake that flat plane you just drew on that graph is entirely 3D not 2D. Why? To quote you again:

A lower dimensional object is not infinitely smaller than a higher dimensional object.

Yes it is. That’s why. The 2 dimensions we describe, length and width, cannot be physically represented in our 3 dimensional space, which includes height and depth. It can only be metaphysically represented for simple understanding purposes.

The common thing we use to represent the second dimension, a flat line you can draw, is 3D. Because no matter how small it is, that line has depth to it. So your comparison falls flat because these things cannot exist in the same space because there is a fundamental difference between being two dimensional and three dimensional. They’re inaccessible to each other.

Disagree

 

[Jinsye]

Disagree still. Everyone else is already going in so I guess I'll take my share.

You say that we equate R>F to Dimensions, but that's just misleading. We equate the power gained from R>F to someone destroying a dimensional structure, but the exact concepts are not the same. You can't apply standards of dimensions to R>F because they aren't equivalent in anything else other than power.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Disagree with this. The reason a Low 2-C to 2-A structure being viewed as fiction grants Low 1-C is because it's a dimensionality thing (a 4-D structure being perceived by someone as fiction would make them 5-D, for instance). The example you gave of giving Low 2-C for existing in a universe doesn't hold up, though, because fiction doesn't have a set dimensionality. It's only perceiving something that has a set dimensionality as akin to fiction that actually means something.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

"Fiction" itself doesn't exist within a specific set of dimenstionality, but "viewing" something as "fiction" absolutely does. If you're "viewing" something as "fiction" you're axiomatically viewing that structure from a higher level of dimenstionality because of how inaccessible cardinals work, your subjective opinion doesn't debunk set theory.

Where in set theory does it say that viewing something as fiction is specific set of dimensionality? Which mathematician?

"Fictional is a completely abstract thing maintained by our own cognition" doesn't explain anything and is just a word salad, it doesn't address the fact viewing something as fiction is innately above an infinite amount of degree, to the point of accessing another level of dimensionality/cardinality. You aren't addressing this main point, you're just asserting other claims without proving why they're more correct comparative to our claims with evidence, you have the burden of proof, actually fulfill it.

What is fiction?

something invented by the imagination or feigned

What is imagination?

Imagination is the production or simulation of novel objects, sensations, and ideas in the mind without any immediate input of the senses. Stefan Szczelkun characterises it as the forming of experiences in one's mind, which can be re-creations of past experiences, such as vivid memories with imagined changes, or completely invented and possibly fantastic scenes.

Fiction has nothing to do with dimensions and isn't inaccessible. It is a purely cognitive phenomena.

Yes it does, you're viewing a structure, alongside its space-time continuum, as "fiction", which would objectively cause you to "transcend" that piece of "fiction" to a more than infinite degree. You aren't understanding how cardinals work, if you exist within a higher cardinal comparative to another you're would view that person, object or structure as a more than infinite degree lower than yourself, which is exactly similar how we, the consumers, would view manga/games/shows.

Again with this thing where someone claims someone doesn't understand something when they don't agree with how something is done.

No it cannot. Let’s look at your example. Draw a flat plane on a 3D graph. What do you get? You get a flat, 3D plane that we simply describe as being 2D for convenience purposes. But make no mistake that flat plane you just drew on that graph is entirely 3D not 2D. Why? To quote you again:

This false. You can literally draw a 2D plane on 3D graph. A 3D cube is made of 2D faces.

Yes it is. That’s why. The 2 dimensions we describe, length and width, cannot be physically represented in our 3 dimensional space, which includes height and depth. It can only be metaphysically represented for simple understanding purposes.

What are you talking about? Our 3 dimensional space is comprised of the 2 lower dimensional ones. A 3D cube is described as having length, width, and height. Dimensions are simply directions: up and down, right and left, forward and back. A 2D shape can move up and down, right and left, and forward and back while it is inside 3D space.

You say that we equate R>F to Dimensions, but that's just misleading. We equate the power gained from R>F to someone destroying a dimensional structure, but the exact concepts are not the same. You can't apply standards of dimensions to R>F because they aren't equivalent in anything else other than power.

We give characters Low 1-C for destroying 5D or 6D spaces. We give character Low 1-C for viewing a Low 2-C structure as fiction. That's the equivalency. To the bold, I have no problem with someone who views a Low 2-C structure as fiction as being Low 2-C in power. I have problem with giving them Low 1-C based on R >F with zero evidence that they can destroy a Low 1-C structure.

Disagree with this. The reason a Low 2-C to 2-A structure being viewed as fiction grants Low 1-C is because it's a dimensionality thing (a 4-D structure being perceived by someone as fiction would make them 5-D, for instance). The example you gave of giving Low 2-C for existing in a universe doesn't hold up, though, because fiction doesn't have a set dimensionality. It's only perceiving something that has a set dimensionality as akin to fiction that actually means something.

Viewing a 4D structure as fiction, should not warrant that character be given the tier of people who can destroy 5D structures. That is my argument.

 

[InfiniteDay]

Disagree fra, I swear I've seen this same thread before.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Viewing a 4D structure as fiction, should not warrant that character be given the tier of people who can destroy 5D structures. That is my argument.

Yeah and it's not a good one imo, because doing so indicates qualitative superiority

 

[RitsuØ1]

Disagree FRA. Gonna put my two pennies here. Viewing Tier 2 (4-D) structures as fiction indicates qualitative superiority, thus granting Low 1-C (5-D). If the structure is infinitely bigger than 4-D structures, then pretty sure it’s blatant 5-D.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Disagree FRA. Gonna put my two pennies here. Viewing Tier 2 (4-D) structures as fiction indicates qualitative superiority, thus granting Low 1-C (5-D). If the structure is infinitely bigger than 4-D structures, then pretty sure it’s blatant 5-D.

How does viewing a 4D structure as fiction, grant a character the ability to destroy 5D structure?

 

[It_is_i_wyatt]

How does viewing a 4D structure as fiction, grant a character the ability to destroy 5D structure?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

There's no need for spamming and derailing. Thanks.

 

[RitsuØ1]

How does viewing a 4D structure as fiction, grant a character the ability to destroy 5D structure?

If you view 4-D structure as fiction and it makes you 5-D, then you theoratically can physically harm other 5-D beings. Capable of harming 5-D is 5-D AP but that’s just my take.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

If you view 4-D structure as fiction and it makes you 5-D, then you theoratically can physically harm other 5-D beings. Capable of harming 5-D is 5-D AP but that’s just my take.

Yeah, that doesn't work. A being that incapable of destroying a 5D structure cannot harm a being who can affect, create, destroy 5D structure (assuming their Durability scales to their AP).

 

[Ss3micah]

Sigh
I really don’t have to comment anything here because I already know this is gonna be rejected
But I suppose I’ll add my 2 cents

Disagree

Being able to view any 1 to infinite amounts of 4-D structures (ranging from low 2-C to 2-A) is Low 1-C.

Comparing Reality to Fiction is like comparing Infinite to 0. Low 1-C means you see any quantity of 4-D structures and 4-D power as being the equivalent of Zero to yourself which is infinite. It does not matter how much or how far into 2-A one can go because ultimately that power is still categorized as a 4-D

Low 2-C is 4-D
2-A is 4-D
2-A squared is 4-D
2-A squared an endless number of times is 4-D

When you perceive a Low 2-C structure as Fictional compared to yourself, you perceive the very definition of 4-D as fictional compared to yourself. Be it one space-time or an infinite number of space-times both are still 4-D in nature and those who can perceive Low 2-C as fiction perceives ALL OF 4-D as fiction. Any and every kind of 4-D power and structure is fictional to them.

Thats Because their is a distinct difference between quality and quantity

Low 2-C multiplied by infinite multiplied by infinite multiplied by infinite multiplied by infinite multiplied by infinite multiplied by infinite is quantity. Your only just increasing the number of 4-D structures and nth more


Low 1-C is when the quality difference. Low 1-C exists at a state where no amount of stacking and multiplying infinity over and over endlessly for all eternity can reach. Low 1-C exists at such a state that increasing the quantity can never hope to even reach.

Characters who can view low 2-C structures as fictional are at that level. They are at the level where EVEN IF ITS JUST A SINGULAR SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM. They see anything that’s categorized as 4-D as fictional hence why 2-A multiples infinitely is also fictional to them because that’s still just 4-D.

2-A can never hope to reach the point where it can view 4-D structures as Fictional. It’s a transcended state. Hence why these characters are Low 1-C

They don’t need direct feats of affecting or destroying Low 1-C structures. If anything that’s just a higher than baseline level of Low 1-C. But the baseline level of 5-D Low 1-C is that you need to at least perceive 4-D as fictional to your own existence.

You can have ZERO power to affect a Low 1-C structure and you’d still be baseline Low 1-C just by fulfilling that requirement alone.

And btw, 5-D beings by nature ARE 5-D structures. Why? Because they exist at a level more complex than 4-D space-time continuums. They exist in a state and nature where they infinitely dwarf the entire idea of 4-D. That’s a 5-D structure and that’s what 5-D beings are. Just as a house is a 3-D object it’s ALSO a 3-D structure. The Human Body is a 3-D structure. So 5-D beings by nature are 5-D structures for being infinitely more complex that 4-D structures to the point 4-D structures are fictional to their existence

Case and Point
COMPLETELY DISAGREE

 

[CloverDragon03]

As based as Scott the Woz is, please do not derail the thread.

How does viewing a 4D structure as fiction, grant a character the ability to destroy 5D structure?

It indicates qualitative superiority over a 4-D structure, making that character 5-D, which indicates that they themselves can affect 5-D beings and structures by virtue of being of the same dimensionality as them

 

[Tarang123]

I think the way I view it is, if someone exists in a reality that views a tier 2 world as fiction, and they actually scale to it, then tier 1 should be accurate. Otherwise, it doesn't really make much sense. So perhaps clarifying that characters can't just exist in a thing that's beyond other things, but have to actually scale to that cosmological structure. In fact, I remember DT saying this in a thread (albeit it was in a context I can't remember for the life of me)

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Low 2-C is 4-D
2-A is 4-D
2-A squared is 4-D
2-A squared an endless number of times is 4-D

All these are tiers that characters get for destroy, affecting, or creating entire 4D structure.

Low 1-C is a tier for characters that can destroy 5D structures. Characters who cannot be proven to be able to destroy those structures should not get it.

Low 1-C is when the quality difference. Low 1-C exists at a state where no amount of stacking and multiplying infinity over and over endlessly for all eternity can reach. Low 1-C exists at such a state that increasing the quantity can never hope to even reach.

The same thing applies to Low 2-C. The difference between Low 2-C and Low 2C is indefinite, and currently no multipliers, even stacking infinities will not get a Low 2-C to become any higher tier. A character can only achieve it if they simply prove they can destroy, create, or affect more than one universe at once.

And just like Low 1-C, a character should only get it once they have proven they can create/affect/destroy a 5D structure.

Characters who can view low 2-C structures as fictional are at that level. They are at the level where EVEN IF ITS JUST A SINGULAR SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM. They see anything that’s categorized as 4-D as fictional hence why 2-A multiples infinitely is also fictional to them because that’s still just 4-D.

Irrelevant. If they cannot destroy a 5D structure then they cannot get the AP of someone who can destroy a 5D structure.

This fiction over reality thing is literally just being used as a crutch to get characters a tier they do not have the feats for. It's cheating in my opinion.

2-A can never hope to reach the point where it can view 4-D structures as Fictional. It’s a transcended state. Hence why these characters are Low 1-C

Any dimensional character, 1D, 2D, 3D can easily reach Low 1-C by simply destroying a 5D space. The dimensionality of the character is irrelevant. It is about what they can destroy.

You can have ZERO power to affect a Low 1-C structure and you’d still be baseline Low 1-C just by fulfilling that requirement alone.

Do you hear yourself? ZERO is not a baseline. Destroying should be 5D structure is the baseline. A character that has ZERO power to affect a Low 1-C structure does not belong in the tier.

It indicates qualitative superiority over a 4-D structure, making that character 5-D, which indicates that they themselves can affect 5-D beings and structures by virtue of being of the same dimensionality as them

The dimensionality of the beings is irrelevant. If a 2D being can destroy a 5D structure then they deserve the Low 1-C tier. If a 5D being can't, then they don't get it.

 

[Ss3micah]

I think the way I view it is, if someone exists in a reality that views a tier 2 world as fiction, and they actually scale to it, then tier 1 should be accurate. Otherwise, it doesn't really make much sense. So perhaps clarifying that characters can't just exist in a thing that's beyond other things, but have to actually scale to that cosmological structure. In fact, I remember DT saying this in a thread (albeit it was in a context I can't remember for the life of me)

I have 2 questions for you

1. Lets say I view a Low 2-C structure as fictional. I still view a cosmological structure and power of 4-D as fictional in comparison to myself. But just because it was Low 2-C structure and power and not 2-A structure and power (which is still 4-D btw). Should that 2-A power be capable of remotely affecting a being that perceives 4-D structures and power as fictional?

2. If a 3-D being has a 3-D body which is a 3-D structure (unless you wanna tell me your body is below a 3-D structure)
Then what is the structure of a a 5-D being that has a 5-D body that’s infinitely more complex than 4-D structures (I dare you to say they would have a 4-D structure)

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

The amount of throwing around infinities, and set theory, and qualities is all a bunch of smoke and mirrors. Let me simplify my argument:

The quality of the character is irrelevant; what matters is the quality of their actions. If a character cannot showcase they have the power to affect, create, or destroy a 5D structure, then they should not be granted Low 1-C. It is absurd to argue that a being by virtue of being just 5D (or in this case viewing a Tier 2 structure as fiction) can harm and fight a character who can destroy an entire 5D structure.

It is no different from a character being unable to jump from Low 2-C to 2C without deliberately showing they can affect, create, or destroy more than one universes.

 

[Tarang123]

1. Lets say I view a Low 2-C structure as fictional. I still view a cosmological structure and power of 4-D as fictional in comparison to myself. But just because it was Low 2-C structure and power and not 2-A structure and power (which is still 4-D btw). Should that 2-A power be capable of remotely affecting a being that perceives 4-D structures and power as fictional?

No, but that's more because the disconnection rather than one being hopelessly more powerful than the other. I'll give a bit of a counter question. If a tier 2 character was brought into a realm that viewed their world as fiction, should we automatically assume that they're now tier 1?

If a 3-D being has a 3-D body which is a 3-D structure (unless you wanna tell me your body is below a 3-D structure)
Then what is the structure of a a 5-D being that has a 5-D body that’s infinitely more complex than 4-D structures (I dare you to say they would have a 4-D structure)

My point isn't that worlds need to go out of their way to show this qualitative nature, but there are times where it could be useful. A 3D person who scales to at least some part of their 3D cosmology (which humans do) would scale unimaginably above any 2D cosmology. Makes sense. But if a 2D person was just brought into our 3D universe, do we just assume that their existence has morphed into 3D as well? Is there any evidence for that? That's why I think evidence for characters scaling to the realms they exist in could be necessary.

But most fictions don't really have those kinds of scenarios

 

[Tarang123]

The quality of the character is irrelevant; what matters is the quality of their actions. If a character cannot showcase they have the power to affect, create, or destroy a 5D structure, then they should not be granted Low 1-C. It is absurd to argue that a being by virtue of being just 5D (or in this case viewing a Tier 2 structure as fiction) can harm and fight a character who can destroy an entire 5D structure.

I mean, the ability to destroy a 5D structure can range from breaking a pencil to destroying universes. Any kind of feat in a higher level of existence (that views lower levels as fiction) would scale it above. But I do think that feats of characters scaling to those worlds is necessary

 

[CloverDragon03]

The dimensionality of the beings is irrelevant. If a 2D being can destroy a 5D structure then they deserve the Low 1-C tier. If a 5D being can't, then they don't get it.

Being 5-D yourself is literally one way to get the tier...

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

1. Lets say I view a Low 2-C structure as fictional. I still view a cosmological structure and power of 4-D as fictional in comparison to myself. But just because it was Low 2-C structure and power and not 2-A structure and power (which is still 4-D btw). Should that 2-A power be capable of remotely affecting a being that perceives 4-D structures and power as fictional?

I cannot answer that question without you first telling me that being's stats. The quality of the being's backstory irrelevant. What is relevant is:

A. Has that being shown that they are unaffected by 2A attacks?
B. Has the being shown that they are in a tier above 2A through their own feats of affecting, destroy, creating a Low 1-C structure or scaling to a character that does.

In vs battle, we take two characters and bring them to a neutral space and allow them to fight each other. If that being only feat is simply viewing the other character as fiction, then I say that fictional character kicks their ass. We have many examples of abstract, fictional, imaginary characters harming real characters.

2. If a 3-D being has a 3-D body which is a 3-D structure (unless you wanna tell me your body is below a 3-D structure)
Then what is the structure of a a 5-D being that has a 5-D body that’s infinitely more complex than 4-D structures (I dare you to say they would have a 4-D structure)

I'm not playing this semantics game. When I say structure, I mean an entire 5Dimensional Space which goes infinite in all 5 directions the space is composed.

I mean, the ability to destroy a 5D structure can range from breaking a pencil to destroying universes. Any kind of feat in a higher level of existence (that views lower levels as fiction) would scale it above. But I do think that feats of characters scaling to those worlds is necessary

Like I said in the OP, the idea that higher dimensional objects are superior to lower dimensional ones is wrong and silly. A flat plane that is as large as planet is still planet size in 2 dimensions. There is no such thing as higher level of existence. You measure all dimensions with the same length of unit. Energy and speed are the same in any dimension.

A object that is 5 meters in 3 directions is not infinitely more complex than an object that's 5 meters in 4 directions.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Being 5-D yourself is literally one way to get the tier...

I know that. That's what I'm arguing against. I'm saying that it is not enough.

 

[Ss3micah]

I'll give a bit of a counter question. If a tier 2 character was brought into a realm that viewed their world as fiction, should we automatically assume that they're now tier 1?

Depends on context but I have seen multiple cases that actually happens. Ask DC supporters and Suggsverse supporters to confirm this lol.

My point isn't that worlds need to go out of their way to show this qualitative nature, but there are times where it could be useful. A 3D person who scales to at least some part of their 3D cosmology (which humans do) would scale unimaginably above any 2D cosmology. Makes sense. But if a 2D person was just brought into our 3D universe, do we just assume that their existence has morphed into 3D as well?

Ask Bill Cipher and Doodlebob

 

[CloverDragon03]

I know that. That's what I'm arguing against. I'm saying that it is not enough.

If a 2-D being can interact with 5-D beings and structures somehow, it'd probably be Low 1-C as well. Being able to interact with those of said dimension grants the tier, because it indicates an ability to bridge the gap in dimensionality.

 

[Ss3micah]

I know that. That's what I'm arguing against. I'm saying that it is not enough.

If being a 3-D being can give a 3-D Tier
And Being a 4-D being a 4-D Tier
Then a 5-D being a 5-D Tier

it’s enough
Always has been and Always will be
Characters that are living Space-Time Continuums (4-D structures) automatically get at least Low 2-C Tier by nature

Same applies with 5-D beings
It’s enough

Dozens of profiles reflect this

 

[Tarang123]

Depends on context but I have seen multiple cases that actually happens. Ask DC supporters and Suggsverse supporters to confirm this lol.

Suggsverse has supporters? Impossible

That's interesting. Well, I'll remain neutral and just see how things go.

Ask Bill Cipher and Doodlebob

Iirc he became 3D after destroying his 2D universe and travelling to the 3D world, correct? Idk if this would apply to every fiction, but I suppose that's definitely a good point made. Like I said earlier, I'll remain neutral

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

If being a 3-D being can give a 3-D Tier
And Being a 4-D being a 4-D Tier
Then a 5-D being a 5-D Tier

it’s enough
Always has been and Always will be
Characters that are living Space-Time Continuums (4-D structures) automatically get at least Low 2-C Tier by nature

Same applies with 5-D beings
It’s enough

Characters get 3D tiers if they meet the destructive capabilities for they 3D tier, not because they are 3D.

infact, there are lots of 3D characters with the unknown tier because it is impossible to gauge the extent of the destructive capability based on their source material.

is unknown only for 3D characters?

 

[Ss3micah]

I'm not playing this semantics game. When I say structure, I mean an entire 5Dimensional Space which goes infinite in all 5 directions the space is composed.

This Sir is YOUR personal standard

 

[Ss3micah]

Characters get 3D tiers if they meet the destructive capabilities for they 3D tier, not because they are 3D.

infact, there are lots of 3D characters with the unknown tier because it is impossible to gauge the extent of the destructive capability based on their source material.

is unknown only for 3D characters?

Isn’t 10-B also a 3-D Tier Sir?
You know the tier NORMAL PEOPLE with AVERAGE STATS get?

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

This Sir is YOUR personal standard

It is also the standard of the tier page:

Low 1-C
Characters or objects that can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)”

 

[Ss3micah]

It is also the standard of the tier page:

Low 1-C
Characters or objects that can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)”

You know the difference between the word “can” and “have to” right?

And now I can see that the source of your concerns is that it mentions spaces and not structures and your taking that SUPER literal

You think affecting a 5-D structure doesn’t qualify for Low 1-C?
You think being a 5-D structure doesn’t qualify for Low 1-C?

This also proves my point as well because it also mentions that are infinitely greater than Low 2-C structures. A 5-D being has a 5-D structure that’s infinitely greater than a Low 2-C structure

We can easily have the Tier page just edit this in since you seem to be taking this to the most literal interpretation cause the same page as Dread points out can work for Low 1-C if you perceive 4-D as fictional, but I digress

To point out the obvious
A 4-D structure and 4-D space are equal in nature. 4-D spaces are not above 4-D structures and Vice Versa. Hence why our standards have it that 4-D structures like timelines are contained in a 5-D space (rather than a 4-D one)

The same applies to 5-D spaces and structures. A 5-D space isn’t superior to a 5-D structure and vice versa. So affecting a 5-D being that has a 5-D structure or being a 5-D being is a 5-D structure qualifies as equivalently as affecting a 5-D space

THATS WHY WE HAVE DOZENS OF PROFILES THATS REFLECT THIS IDEOLOGY. 90% of which was approved by the staff that made these standards

If you need structure to be added to the description for you to know that rather than it being obvious on inception then there is nth else that needs to be done here

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

You know the difference between the word “can” and “have to” right?

Do you know be cause can means capable. Characters who can't shouldn't be in the tier.

And now I can see that the source of your concerns is that it mentions spaces and not structures and your taking that SUPER literal

This is silly. Destroying space is as literally as it gets. There is no other interpretation.

You think affecting a 5-D structure doesn’t qualify for Low 1-C?
You think being a 5-D structure doesn’t qualify for Low 1-C?

The tier says affecting, destroying, or creating a 5D space. And that's what qualifies for it.

This also proves my point as well because it also mentions that are infinitely greater than Low 2-C structures. A 5-D being has a 5-D structure that’s infinitely greater than a Low 2-C structure

Read it again. The space must be infinitely greater. Not the object or beings.


Characters or objects that can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)”

The pronoun, whose, is refering to spaces.

A 4-D structure and 4-D space are equal in nature. 4-D spaces are not above 4-D structures and Vice Versa. Hence why our standards have it that 4-D structures like timelines are contained in a 5-D space (rather than a 4-D one)

No they are not. A cube floating in 3D space is not equivalent to infinite 3D space. Now we are just making things up.