About 4-Dimensional tiering

[Mister_Death]

So I have a question regarding

Universe level +

vsbattles lists this tier as

"Characters who can destroy and/or create the entire 4-dimensional space-time of one universe, not just the physical matter within one."

But how can that be? General relativity states

"What we call space is just another feature of the gravitational field of the universe, so space and space-time can and do not exist apart from the matter and energy that creates the gravitational field. This is not speculation, but sound observation."

Space Time clearly consists of the sum total of the gravitational fields of all matter.

Would'nt that mean Space-Time is automatically destroyed as a result of everything in the universe being destroyed? How do we decide a character's tier if for example there are two characters who can desrtroy a universe, but how do we know space time is, or apparently isnt, destroyed?

 

[Promestein]

Fiction is not consistent with relativity.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

what prom said


inb4 this thread explodes into an ultimately unyielding arument

 

[Mister_Death]

^ I didnt mean to cause any harm lel

Though, what about how characters become 2-C? How do we know if they destroyed space time? By statements?

I'm only asking because this is the only tier I'm still confused about.

 

[Promestein]

By statements, proof, or sound reasoning, yes.

 

[Antvasima]

For example, Galactus was going to devour an entire timeline in an alternative future. That is a 4-Dimensional universal feat.

 

[Antvasima]

Still, 3-A and Low 2-C are usually the tiers that I have the hardest time gauging the differences of myself for practical feats. We base it from how I understood the ACF wiki's tiering system to work, along with basic geometry.

 

[Mister_Death]

^ I suppose I have a decent understanding, though however, I have seen a few characters here who are listed as 3-A even though they are able to destroy an entire universe. Are statements alone able to decide tiering? I mostly made this thread when I thought about how Beers is only 3-A and he is consistently shown as a universe buster, same with a couple of other characters I've seen who seem to be just 3-A.

From what I've learned, destruction of timelines, and of course general proof are tier makers in these situations

Also, off topic, but how do we determine if a verse is 12 dimonsional or higher? (I am referring to the unknown status of the Godhead)

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I am uncertain how to solve this ongoing problem myself.

Let's say that we do merge 3-A and Low 2-C together. Then what happens to characters that can destroy entire timelines, which is far more impressive, or characters that have infinite 3-Dimensional power (High 3-A)?

Unlike DarkLK/the ACF wiki, I do not really have the necessary know-how to make a proper distinction.

As for when a multiverse is higher than 11-D, we usually tend to go by explicit explanations or statements.

 

[Mister_Death]

^ Doing things like merging 3-A/2-C or even suggesting the possibility of using general relativity for fiction would be a massive change, and it might be impossible to do here

As Promi mentioned, its true fiction does'nt go by GR(even though our universe does)

But I just personally believe the 3-A to 2-C Path shouldn't be so vague

For example, to be listed as a mountain buster, you need to have an attack which deals a certain level of energy

But to be listed as 3-A and not 2-C, which is still a single universe, you need to be able to destroy the universe but just not really? Only the infinite physical matter in it?

I guess my thoughts on this before I made this thread are this


When a character destroys, or is said to be able to destroy a universe, why do we assume that they don't destroy the entirety of it? Do we assume the universe itself still somehow exists as a space-time fabric with no contents?

 

[Antvasima]

Essentially yes. If it is just a massive 3-Dimensional explosion or shockwave that destroys all of the stars and planets, we tend to treat it that way, whereas destroying an entire continuum so that the spacetime itself does not exist anymore is considered harder to prove.

 

[Blahblah9755]

I don't know if this is 100% accurate so I'll have to ask the others here to confirm or deny this explanation, but to my understanding; when you "destroy the universe" 3 dimensionally, the matter still exists as small particles since matter can not be created or destroyed, therefore there is still a gravitational field (however weak) and as a result space-time. On the other hand if your were to completely truly erase all matter, and therefore the gravitational field that creates space time, that wouldn't necessarily count as destroying a space time continuum as it would only be a side effect, similarly to how if your punch created a vacuum that caused an opponent to die of suffocation but the punch was too weak to actually hurt them, you wouldn't receive the tier required to harm them as it was only a side effect.

 

[Jockey-1337]

Interesting question

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

well its best if we dont introduce reality into this

cuz irl, iirc spacretime cannot be destroyed, only very warped

 

[SSJRyu1]

That is actually very interesting. I suppose it makes sense, after all "space time" is said to have only existed in the confines of the big bang, and simply expanded with the energy as it expanded, so space-time is clearly directly linked to the energy itself which is linked to gravity as was said, so it falls in line with all that we know about how space-time was formed and expanded.

I suppose if one were able to turn the universe into a complete void that would in effect remove all energy and thus all gravity and space time. But you'd have to literally be able to turn it into a void, not just blow stuff up and leave atoms or even energy behind.

It would be a large undertaking, but I think if we were to implement 3A and Low 2C as being the same, it would actually be more accurate.

 

[Promestein]

Technically accurate according to our laws of physics is very different from fiction, especially when, as tlt said, spacetime cannot be destroyed irl.

Besides, this is a horrible idea which we would never have the time for and which would undermine the tiering system, so. Really bad idea.

 

[SSJRyu1]

Well we are trying to use irl physics for the rest of our tiering such as the Hilbert space and specific amounts of joules needed to destroy specific objects as they are in our own universe. So really we do try to use irl physics already for the rest of the stuff.

Also in actuality removing all matter and energy would destroy all space time, or at least cause it to stop existing theoretically as pointed out here, so it's not true that it is impossible to destroy space time irl assuming you had a way to turn the universe into a true void.

I do agree it would be a huge undertaking however, but you can hardly fault people who bring up that it would be more accurate, and if it were done would improve the wiki's tiering system in terms of accuracy.

 

[Promestein]

If we tried to use irl physics for everything everyone who's faster than light would be relativistic+. Some things are just a bad idea to use irl physics for, as fiction doesn't work that way and ignores whatever physical laws it wants to whenever it wants to.

The fact is that this is a horrible idea, and it's not more accurate, either, especially when many fictions make a distinction.

Also, there needs to be distinction between characters who can legitimately destroy spacetime and those that destroy it as a side-effect of destroying everything else, which isn't even a thing in a lot of fictions because fiction doesn't care about physics.

 

[SSJRyu1]

Well when it is clearly shown that somebody is ftl then of course allow it to be the impossible number despite physics. However the fact is destroying all matter and energy in the universe will theoretically destroy the space time as well.

So if a character is said to be able to actually destroy all matter and even energy in the universe, making it a true void, then they technically have destroyed space time of it in the process.

So yes it is more accurate to say if a character can make a universe a true void that it is the same as destroying it completely, space time and all, and they should be technically listed as Low 2C if we are going for accuracy.

Edit: To your last comment, your welcome to your opinion but technically speaking it is more accurate if we are trying to make the tiering system logical as was the reason for implementing the Hilbert space idea and current recent changes in the first place.

As far as Dragon ball it would indeed make them Low 2C, but that does not change the fact that it is still more logical.

I said theoretically but in reality it is the current prevailing opinion of the scientific community in the same sense that the big bang theory is theoretically accurate.

Whether you decide to implement it is completely up to the staff, you can trust me or not, that is your choice, but I have never lied or been malicious, simply pointed things out, and at times had a different opinion than others, backed up by reasons for my opinion, so if you deem me untrustworthy due to having a different opinion than you, or because I like Dragon Ball, you should probably reflect.

As for fiction and physics they ignore many things yes, such as having different definitions for dimensions, ignoring universal speed limit of light speed and so on, but unless it is specifically shown to ignore physics in that case, we should always apply physics to the instance to gauge it if possible.

Is it a lot of work to implement the change, yes, is it more logical and accurate, yes.

 

[Promestein]

The more you talk the more I feel that you care less about accuracy and are just using it as an attempt to get Low 2-C Dragon Ball, given that everything you've done on this wiki has been related to Dragon Ball and getting Dragon Ball as strong as you can manage.

Theoretically. We cannot assume physics works like that within fiction when there are so many distinctions between such feats within fiction, and when fiction typically ignores such things entirely! It is not accurate, and staff members I trust far more than I trust you have agreed that it is the best to leave the tiering system how it is. I'd really suggest you drop this, and I'm closing this thread as it isn't going to go anywhere productive, and as TLT said, is a horrible argument waiting to happen.