Aleph cardinals

[Oblivion_Of_The_Endless]

Anyway, now that I'm on pc, I feel compelled to make a better response...

If you have aleph-omega amount of universes that's only 2-A without further context.

Aleph-omega universes is 1-A+

From aleph-2 sets and onwards, each of those is a transcendence into 1-A (for example, aleph-2 amount of anything would be baseline 1-A, aleph-3 amount of anything would be a transcendence into 1-A, etc), so aleph-omega would be equivalent to 1-A+

This can be extrapolated to larger cardinal numbers as well, such as aleph-3, aleph-4, and so on, and works in much the same way as 1-C and 1-B in that regard.

No that's absolutely not how the wiki treats alephs.

Kek

Only if those universes are stated to have R>F difference.

They don't need to because aleph-1 universes is the equivalent of a R>F difference. Or to be more exact, we equate a R>F difference to uncountable infinite quantities, because if taken literally, R>F feats would be 1-A or 0. The tiering system has its basis in mathematics, not esotericism.

Ask any staff

Okay, and I just provided it. Tier 1 can only be reached from 2-A with qualitative superiority. Adding more universes doesn't get you there.

No, it isn't, the same way infinite universes isn't "qualitatively superior" to finite universes. It's just more universes. Adding more universes doesn't bridge the gap between Tier 2 and Tier 1.

If we're referring to dimensions, yes, but not amounts of universes.



That's a fascinating theory, but as it stands, there is no such standard on the wiki that claims this.

I think you killed the FAQ three times.

And higher infinites AKA alephs are not some "transidental" shit but just how many things in this case, how many universes there are.

At some point, the sheer quantity of something breaches into the next cardinality.

 

[Deagonx]

I think you killed the FAQ three times.

I will readily admit I didn't know the FAQ said that. But now that I do know, I think it should absolutely be changed.

 

[Fixxed]

That's not true, no. You're making an assumption that there is a well-defined -- and moreover useful -- notion of "difference" between cardinalities.

What?? Assumption?? Bruh... each aleph is more infinite than the previous, you can see the proof in aleph 0 and 1. Aleph 0 is the countable infinite that are equal to the set of integers, and set of integers in continuum hypotesis is strictly smaller than the set of real number that is equal to aleph 1 or uncountable infinite

 

[Tarang123]

Alephs don't "transend" each other but just have bigger cardinality than the lower one.
If you have aleph-omega amount of universes that's only 2-A without further context.

It's 1A+

 

[Tarang123]

I will readily admit I didn't know the FAQ said that. But now that I do know, I think it should absolutely be changed.

Why? The tiering system is based on size. Aleph omega universes still retains that kind of size

 

[Deagonx]

Why? The tiering system is based on size. Aleph omega universes still retains that kind of size

I don't think that approach is the most logical when it comes to a number of universes. However, I'd be surprised if there was a scan that actually established that the amount of universes was "uncountably infinite."

 

[Tarang123]

I don't think that approach is the most logical when it comes to a number of universes. However, I'd be surprised if there was a scan that actually established that the amount of universes was "uncountably infinite."

I mean, we already given Tier 1 ratings if things are large enough in a way that Tier 2 things are infinitesimal in comparison.

 

[Hasty12345]

It’s not common whatsoever, but it’s possible to attain low 1-C with an aleph 1 amount of 4D timelines.

 

[Yusuf21259]

Tiering System FAQ

A: Whether higher-dimensional entities qualify for such high tiers or not depends on several different factors, which may take root both in and out-of-verse. To explain this situation, we must first clarify what exactly being higher-dimensional entails. In a way, yes, though not how most would...

vsbattles.fandom.com

hi, assuming aleph omega as the peak for 1-a is still countably infinite, assuming that the infinite aleph omega is an uncountable infinite, which will be the peak for 1a and does the h1a layer only exceed the aleph omega or the infinite aleph omega ?

 

[Tarang123]

hi, assuming aleph omega as the peak for 1-a is still countably infinite, assuming that the infinite aleph omega is an uncountable infinite, which will be the peak for 1a and does the h1a layer only exceed the aleph omega or the infinite aleph omega ?

High 1A is the inaccessible cardinal. You can see this on the tiering system.

 

[Yusuf21259]

High 1A is the inaccessible cardinal. You can see this on the tiering system.

yes i know but i mean what is the highest value for layer 1-a. Top point of tier 1a ? omega? infinite series of omegas?

 

[Tarang123]

yes i know but i mean what is the highest value for layer 1-a. Top point of tier 1a ? omega? infinite series of omegas?

Not sure. I don't think there is one. It's just anything that isn't an inaccessible cardinal

 

[Reiner04]

FAQ rip

 

[Reiner04]

Anyway, it should be in general discussion forum or QnA. Will ask to move it.

 

[Gasper]

yes i know but i mean what is the highest value for layer 1-a. Top point of tier 1a ? omega? infinite series of omegas?

Inaccessible Cardinal = baseline High 1-A

Mahlo Cardinal = baseline boundless

 

[Andika_CL_atmadja]

well yeah, vs wiki tiering are based on measure theory according to donttalkDT

 

[Yusuf21259]

In the video shown in the faq section there seems to be a lack of harmony with this layer, aleph layer seems to have no definite limit, making infinity infinite and expanding it with another infinity, and this is an endless loop, it can expand to infinity, like an infinity ending one infinity and starting another. I guess the question of what the boundary point is for layer 1a like the unbounded set is not yet known, I don't think this cardinal knows a limit. I don't think it's necessary to sample Alef at layer 1-a.

 

[Tarang123]

In the video shown in the faq section there seems to be a lack of harmony with this layer, aleph layer seems to have no definite limit, making infinity infinite and expanding it with another infinity, and this is an endless loop, it can expand to infinity, like an infinity ending one infinity and starting another. I guess the question of what the boundary point is for layer 1a like the unbounded set is not yet known, I don't think this cardinal knows a limit. I don't think it's necessary to sample Alef at layer 1-a.

There's no actual limit to how high alephs can go, just a limit to what they can reach. Their "limit" is the inaccessible cardinal, something so large that no amount of aleph stacking would reach it.

 

[Yusuf21259]

There's no actual limit to how high alephs can go, just a limit to what they can reach. Their "limit" is the inaccessible cardinal, something so large that no amount of aleph stacking would reach it.

yes it is not the highest level specifier in layer 1-a for this

 

[RALFdoang]

Aleph 0 is the countable infinite that are equal to the set of integers, and set of integers in continuum hypotesis is strictly smaller than the set of real number that is equal to aleph 1 or uncountable infinite

Continuum Hypothesis isn't describing superiority between set of Natural number and Real number, it just say that "There's no set between those two". Also, it status cannot be proven if its true neither false, as it's an independent axiom from the ZFC system.

 

[Fixxed]

Continuum Hypothesis isn't describing superiority between set of Natural number and Real number, it just say that "There's no set between those two". Also, it status cannot be proven if its true neither false, as it's an independent axiom from the ZFC system.

When the explanation literally say that? Bruh continuum hypotesis is solution by cantor for that

Cantor gave two proofs that the cardinality of the set of integers is strictly smaller than that of the set of real numbers (see Cantor's first uncountability proof and Cantor's diagonal argument). His proofs, however, give no indication of the extent to which the cardinality of the integers is less than that of the real numbers. Cantor proposed the continuum hypothesis as a possible solution to this question.
The continuum hypothesis states that the set of real numbers has minimal possible cardinality which is greater than the cardinality of the set of integers. That is, every set, S, of real numbers can either be mapped one-to-one into the integers or the real numbers can be mapped one-to-one into S.

 

[KntolRicat]

Continuum Hypothesis isn't describing superiority between set of Natural number and Real number, it just say that "There's no set between those two". Also, it status cannot be proven if its true neither false, as it's an independent axiom from the ZFC system.

But the wiki use it. it's the part of the standard