All of Dragon Ball Cosmology revision (STAFF ONLY)

[First_Witch]

I am neutral regarding this, as I am too overworked to properly read the arguments. Personally speaking, it would be kind of fun with a higher-tiered Dragon Ball, but accuracy is most important.

@Elizhaa @Theglassman12 @Antoniofer @DarkDragonMedeus @Crabwhale @TISSG7Redgrave @Promestein @Ryukama @Dino_Ranger_Black @Dragonmasterxyz @Soldier_Blue @KLOL506 @Therefir @DemonGodMitchAubin @Ionliosite @LordGriffin1000 @Starter_Pack @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Agnaa @Ovy7 @QuasiYuri @First_Witch @KingPin0422

Would you be willing to help analyse and evaluate this please?

Sorry but i don't touch anything Dragon Ball related

 

[DontTalkDT]

AKM sama asked me something regarding this thread and wanted me to post my answer here. For disclosure: I have gotten around to reading the full blog yet. Anyway, I will just quote our conversation.

AKM sama: Would you say a multiverse that is a timeline consisting of 12 Low 2-C universes is sufficient evidence for it to be Low 1-C?
Me: No.
Allow me to explain.
We have three dimensions of space, which we could (in a simplified version) model as RxRxR, that is the cartesian product of three infinite real number lines.
Time we could model as a single infinite real numbers line R.
A timeline is then (RxRxR)xR i.e. space x time.
Now, for multiple timelines, we need to operate in a 5-dimensional space. In the 5th dimension, they would all lay beside each other. Let's say we have 12 timelines, with their positions in the 5th dimensions being 1,2,3,4,..., 12. {1,2,3,4,...,12} is the set of those positions.
The multiverse consisting of 12 timelines would then be described by {1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)xR.
In other words the cartesian product of the locations of each timeline, with one timeline.

Let's compare this to a timeline consisting of 12 universes. One universe is again RxRxR.
Those universes are in a multiverse. We again model their positions as {1,2,3,4,...,12}, just that this time those positions wouldn't be across the 5th dimensional axis, but the 4th one. (Which is really just arbitrary numbering)
So the multiverse is {1,2,3,4,..,12}x(RxRxR), in other words, a universe for each of the 12 positions.
Now let's make a timeline out of that. How do we do that? We again multiply (take the cartesian product) with the time axis. The same way we previously went from universe to timeline. The time axis is again modelled as R.
What we get is Rx{1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR). That is in mathematical terms a timeline consisting of 12 universes.
Let's make sure we got that right: We wanted Low 2-C universes, i.e. entire spacetimes. Are those entire spacetimes? Yes! Because the time dimension we added is equally applied to all universes. We, for example, have a point that is 5 seconds in the future of universe 3 at the coordinates (0,1,15). That point is in the construction above {5}x{3}x(0,1,15).
So those construction meets all demands. A timeline consisting of multiple universal spacetimes.

Let's compare those two constructs now.
Multiverse from 12 timelines was: {1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)xR
Timeline of 12 Universes was: Rx{1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)

Notice how those look almost the same? That's because they are! They are in fact only a rotation away from each other. The way the are rotated has no particular meaning, though. It's only result of how we happened to construct it. It's a difference equivalent to having north up on the map or having east up on the map.
If we rotate the constructs so that their time and space dimensions each fit to each other and do the same with their position in the multiverse we get that they are exactly the same. I.e. just write the universes number first, then write space and lastly write which time it is and you get exactly the same constructs.

Sooo... yeah, the two constructs are in fact exactly the same thing. So the object in question is just a regular 2-C Multiverse.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

From my knowledge, we take the manga as primary canon over every other source. That means if the databook, animes, canon movies, or author statements say something, the manga is the priority.

Everything I used was given the okay by Toriyama. Such as the Daizenshuu and his map.

Goku couldn't sense energy in different space times in the manga but he could sense energy in the afterlife from earth (which is why he could teleport to the afterlife during Cell's explosion).

The ROSAT is stated to be a special dimension that’s closed off. It doesn’t say that Goku can’t teleport there because of different time.

I fail to see how the walls of the ROSAT stretch out to the afterlife and such.

I didn’t say that. I said the walls that separate the ROSAT from the universe are like the walls that separate the dimensions, because that’s stated verbatim.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

AKM sama asked me something regarding this thread and wanted me to post my answer here. For disclosure: I have gotten around to reading the full blog yet. Anyway, I will just quote our conversation.

I mean, this conflicts with what others said.

 

[LightReinh12345]

I mean, this conflicts with what others said.

DT just comments because akm asked him to do so I guess he doesnt know that what akm said is not the thing we are arguing but he just did what he was asked to do thats it
Akm just didnt represent it quite correctly
The thing we are arguing is uncountable infinite Low 2-C being low 1-C not 12 low 2-C universes (which is indeed 2-C but we are not arguing that) but instead hypertimeline in a single universe so I think akm didnt quite get the point

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

DT just comments because akm asked him to do so I guess he doesnt know that what akm said is not the thing we are arguing but he just did what he was asked to do thats it
Akm just didnt represent it quite correctly
The thing we are arguing is uncountable infinite Low 2-C being low 1-C not 12 low 2-C universes but instead hypertimeline in a single universe so I think akm didnt quite get the point

Yeah, the explanation AKM gave can be kinda misleading tbh, so it could be because of that

 

[KingTempest]

The ROSAT is stated to be a special dimension that’s closed off. It doesn’t say that Goku can’t teleport there because of different time.

The only difference that's stated in your scan is that the space is different and the time is different

I didn’t say that. I said the walls that separate the ROSAT from the universe are like the walls that separate the dimensions, because that’s stated verbatim.

Fair

 

[DontTalkDT]

I went ahead and read the blog now.
I have no idea how you guys arrived at the conclusion that universes/realms are 4D in any way other than their space and time together being 4D. And if what is meant as being 4D is the spacetimes of the realms being 4D, then the timeline is still only a multiverse by my explanation above.

 

[AKM sama]

misleading

How exactly?

The thing we are arguing is uncountable infinite Low 2-C being low 1-C not 12 low 2-C universes (which is indeed 2-C but we are not arguing that) but instead hypertimeline in a single universe so I think akm didnt quite get the point

No, the thing that is being argued is that canon Zeno should be Low 1-C for destroying a multiverse containing 12 universes. They don't contain uncountable infinite Low 2-C universes.

This entire thread is born of something Ultima said on discord in passing, and people ran with it without understanding how it works just because it provided an opportunity to upgrade their verse. Not to mention Ultima has a past track record of exaggerating high tiered verses or rather, the tiering system itself.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

The only difference that's stated in your scan is that the space is different and the time is different

“Son Goku and Merus train in a special dimension cut off from the outside world where time flows differently.”
That’s just one of the three quotes I posted.

 

[SamanPatou]

Just a couple of questions, for now:

1) Why are the afterlife and other dimensions (Makai, World of Kaioshins..) considered separated space-times? As AKM said, we see in the Saiyan and Buu saga that the flow of time is the same, they are separated by space boundaries.

2) Now that I think of it, why do we consider all 12 universes to be separate space-times? Time is the same even for them, we see it during the ToP, as people from different universes are watching the tournament at the same time. The same is when the universes are restored, all the characters perceive the restoration at the same time (and see Super Shenron flying over their skies). Even more, when Beerus goes killing Zamasu, people in U7 are doing stuff at the same time, I really have never seen a different flow of time between all 12 universes.
The 12 universes seem to be separated by an "extra thick" space boundary, which allows the travel only to Angels, Kaioshins and the users of the cube.

The hyperbolic time chambers are exceptions, but I don't think they alone make great difference.

 

[DivineAura44]

I know I am to not intrude so I'll keep it short but the second question doesn't make sense as they were in the world of void. That's why they perceived it the same.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

2) Now that I think of it, why do we consider all 12 universes to be separate space-times? Time is the same even for them, we see it during the ToP, as people from different universes are watching the tournament at the same time. The same is when the universes are restored, all the characters perceive the restoration at the same time (and see Super Shenron flying over their skies). Even more, when Beerus goes killing Zamasu, people in U7 are doing stuff at the same time, I really have never seen a different flow of time between all 12 universes.
The 12 universes seem to be separated by an "extra thick" space boundary, which allows the travel only to Angels, Kaioshins and the users of the cube.

Same rate of flow of time isn't a contradiction to space-time separateness...

Any parallel timelines do tend to have same rate of flow of time...and considering U6 is same type of cosmology as U7 i don't see why it having same timeflow is a contradiction to separateness...

Timeflows can be congruent in speed and direction, doesn't necessarily mean they are one and the same.

Think of two trains running in same direction and same speed and same alignment.
Doesn't mean they are both one train.

 

[LightReinh12345]

How exactly?


No, the thing that is being argued is that canon Zeno should be Low 1-C for destroying a multiverse containing 12 universes. They don't contain uncountable infinite Low 2-C universes.

This entire thread is born of something Ultima said on discord in passing, and people ran with it without understanding how it works just because it provided an opportunity to upgrade their verse. Not to mention Ultima has a past track record of exaggerating high tiered verses or rather, the tiering system itself.

You didn't understand then I See
I didnt say they contain uncountable infinite low 2-C "universes"
I say uncountably infinite above Low 2-C is low 1-C which is the case here
Imagine like a normal Timeline is uncountable infinite parts of 3-A so a infinite low 2-C is part of Low 1-C since it can replicate 4D objects like normal Timeline does with 3D objects

 

[SuperGodzilla_Kaiju_King]

I have no idea how you guys arrived at the conclusion that universes/realms are 4D in any way other than their space and time together being 4D.

Simply put, the Afterlife within Universe 7 dimensionally transcends the living universe, completely encompasses it and has its own flow of time. That should mean it's a 4th dimensional structure, which Goku and Beerus were going to destroy.
Sorry for not being staff but no one answered the question.

 

[DivineAura44]

This entire thread is born of something Ultima said on discord in passing, and people ran with it without understanding how it works just because it provided an opportunity to upgrade their verse. Not to mention Ultima has a past track record of exaggerating high tiered verses or rather, the tiering system itself.

Also this is a fallacy so if it's not relevant it shouldn't be brought up.

 

[SamanPatou]

Same rate of flow of time isn't a contradiction to space-time separateness...

Any parallel timelines do tend to have same rate of flow of time...and considering U6 is same type of cosmology as U7 i don't see why it having same timeflow is a contradiction to separateness...

Timeflows can be congruent in speed and direction, doesn't necessarily mean they are one and the same.

Think of two trains running in same direction and same speed and same alignment.
Doesn't mean they are both one train.

Ok then.

(I was actually thinking that the different timelines move at the same speed)

And what are the reasons to consider them different space times? I mean, besides the "they are called different universes". This is a genuine question.

Btw, being in the World of Void wouldn't mean much, it's not like the time there would flow equally for all universes even if they had different flows of time, nor would equalize their flow.

 

[DastardlyDangerousDracoga]

Also this is a fallacy so if it's not relevant it shouldn't be brought up.

Explain?

 

[Alphaapexnep00]

I taught this was a staff thread.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

And what are the reasons to consider them different space times? I mean, besides the "they are called different universes". This is a genuine question.

If two universes are said to be separate and there are no contradictions then it’s 2-C. I pointed out why there are no contradictions so it would be 2-C by default.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

And what are the reasons to consider them different space times? I mean, besides the "they are called different universes". This is a genuine question.

Well as DDM in one of his comments in last page put it...
If two parallel universes are like "mirror" to each other then default label we give them is of timeline or space-time.

U7 and U6 have similar cosmology, both have Saiyans albiet of different nature due to different histories, many other similarities with just enough differences to set them apart.
Basically all the jazz you encounter in a different variation of a timeline when compared with each other.

Another point is RoSaT...but this one I'll leave to DB cosmo experts...because I don't want to bungle it up.
But I'll try explaining it if no one answers immediately.

 

[KingPin0422]

Just for the record, if we're going to use Ultima's Discord comments to prove that timelines are Low 1-C, then I would also like to bring up Ultima later stating that these could just be timelines with a larger hypervolume:

Even if we agree that the space of each universe has infinite volume, that doesn't translate to the spacetime of those universes having infinite hypervolume. On that note, the multiverse as a whole quite explicitly has a beginning, and even if we say that it does not have an end (which would still qualify as infinite time), that would only make the multiverse's timeline infinite, not necessarily that of each individual universe.

Also, in episode 49, Whis explicitly describes time as moving in one direction when he's explaining why time travel is forbidden, and the way he does so makes it evident that he is referring to the multiverse's time, so it makes no sense for nested spacetime continua to entail higher temporal dimensions in this case. To say otherwise would be to dismiss a serious explanation from one of the most reliable and knowledgeable sources of information in Dragon Ball as a whole.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, I personally think that Ionliosite and Kukui made a good case for a Low 1-C upgrade instead of a 3-A downgrade, but would prefer to see what @Ultima_Reality and @DontTalkDT think about this.

For the record, I agree with DontTalk's explanation from up above. Even in the past thread addressing this, and in multiple conversations about this subject, I made a very explicit distinction between an overarching flow of time which holds 4-dimensional spacetimes as infinitesimal cross-sections of itself and a spacetime which just has a larger hypervolume.

For contrast, DontTalk's construction ultimately involved the positions of each universe in 5-dimensional space being represented by a discrete set with a countable number of elements, namely {1, 2, 3, 4, 5... 12}, which, when taken as an element of the cartesian product representing an n-dimensional object, would have a size of size of 0 in the fifth dimension, since, as explained in here, constructing higher-dimensional objects requires cartesian products between continuous sets, which have uncountably-many elements instead. Hence why it could also be rotated into an identical construction where those universes were laid out on the fourth axis instead.

What I explained to qualify for Low 1-C beforehand would be something more along the lines of, for example, [0,1]x(RxRxRxR), which is a 4-dimensional spacetime being multiplied by a set with uncountably infinitely-many elements (Think of that as associating a copy of the timeline to each number that exists between 0 and 1), which, in practical terms, would just be said spacetime being dislocated 1 unit of time (Which is arbitrary: It can be an hour, or a second, or whatever) through another temporal axis.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Time passes the same between different timelines too in DB, just saying

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

What I explained to qualify for Low 1-C beforehand would be something more along the lines of, for example, [0,1]x(RxRxRxR), which is a 4-dimensional spacetime being multiplied by a set with uncountably infinitely-many elements (Think of that as associating a copy of the timeline to each number that exists between 0 and 1), which, in practical terms, would just be said spacetime being dislocated 1 second into an additional temporal axis.

Do mean to say that the space-time itself needs to be treated by overarching temporal dimension akin to a timeline treating 3D object right?
Simply put the space-time needs to move forward in the flow of higher time from past to present to future , correct??

 

[Giygas3]

Someone can delete this comment if it isn't allowed. At this point, I don't know. Everyone just seems to be replying to this board. But, I would like to ask something, but in a moment;

@DontTalkDT "
A timeline is then (RxRxR)xR i.e. space x time.
Now, for multiple timelines, we need to operate in a 5-dimensional space. In the 5th dimension, they would all lay beside each other. Let's say we have 12 timelines, with their positions in the 5th dimensions being 1,2,3,4,..., 12. {1,2,3,4,...,12} is the set of those positions.
The multiverse consisting of 12 timelines would then be described by {1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)xR.
In other words the cartesian product of the locations of each timeline, with one timeline."

I'm going to assume you're meaning timeline = Space-Time continuum in this comment. In this example, your cartesian product for {1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)xR. is only talking about the content within this 5-D plane where the Universes are setting across. Which would be essentially null if you destroyed just this part for talking about a 5-D dimension. What's being talked about is the (RxRxRxR)xR of the entire 'timeline' in its entirety, not its contents. This is because it's working with 3 spatial dimensions, with 2 temporal dimensions. (The second temporal dimension is the reason why it houses multiple discrete Space-Times, and why they all seem to duplicate whenever you time-travel) This in its entirety would be destroyed in the example, so it should be Low 1-C.

"
but the 4th one. (Which is really just arbitrary numbering)
So the multiverse is {1,2,3,4,..,12}x(RxRxR), in other words, a universe for each of the 12 positions.
Now let's make a timeline out of that. How do we do that? We again multiply (take the cartesian product) with the time axis. The same way we previously went from universe to timeline. The time axis is again modelled as R.
What we get is Rx{1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)"

Yes, this would just be rotating the original axis around. But this is entirely separate of a question. In this example, reality in its entirety is just described by Rx{1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR) because it's not working under a secondary spatial dimension; R, where the first one was. So, you're describing two entirely different things when we say it completely destroyed these two 'worlds' in its entirety.

"I have no idea how you guys arrived at the conclusion that universes/realms are 4D in any way other than their space and time together being 4D. And if what is meant as being 4D is the spacetimes of the realms being 4D, then the timeline is still only a multiverse by my explanation above."

This is a bit of a different topic. The timeline in this case is being argued from the 12 Universes, and not necessarily the 'Universe' in Dragon ball for its entirety. Which, I personally take an agnostic position on. I guess that's just a question for the OP, but still not that important to the main argument at hand.

@SamanPatou The main evidence that I would say is that IT doesn't work for traveling to other Universes, but it's quite capable of going to other spatially disconnected places. The HBTC is the only exception to this, and that's because it has a separate Space-Time. (Zamasu is arguing differently, he's saying it's because it's just a closed off realm and that's why he can't do it. Which, it's. But, that still seems to be pretty clearly be saying it's just because of the different for Space-Time, since they're other places in the Universe that's a closed off dimension from the living Universe; The kaioshin realm in particular)

Anyways, my opinion is that it should just be 2-C. There's no indication that this '5-D' dimension would take a literal 'dimension' worth of more energy to destroy. Similarly, it's applying the standards as you would from the Ben 10 series.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

Time passes the same between different timelines too in DB, just saying

Just so it doesn't get glossed over.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Just addressing two things quickly:

" On that note, the multiverse as a whole quite explicitly has a beginning, and even if we say that it does not have an end (which would still qualify as infinite time), that would only make the multiverse's timeline infinite, not necessarily that of each individual universe."

Not sure what you mean by beginning but if you mean physical beginning, it's already noted that you can have infinite numbers between two finite spaces. If it's beginning as in a beginning in time, I daresay MOST 2-A structures in fiction has a beginning with some creator God or something. An infinity having a beginning means NOTHING.
Also this infinite time only applying to the multiverse's timeline is headcanon. Not sure why you're selectively picking and choosing where the infinity applies.

"Also, in episode 49, Whis explicitly describes time as moving in one direction when he's explaining why time travel is forbidden, and the way he does so makes it evident that he is referring to the multiverse's time, so it makes no sense for nested spacetime continua to entail higher temporal dimensions in this case"

Or... Whis is talking about Time as a whole- in general. All of time moves forward and is not meant to be moved back.
Again, selectively picking and choosing where information applies doesn't make an argument stronger.

"To say otherwise would be to dismiss a serious explanation from one of the most reliable and knowledgeable sources of information in Dragon Ball as a whole."

This is literally "My interpretation is more correct than yours"

Anyways, i need to go now

 

[Antvasima]

Just a note that DontTalkDT has been my most reliable go-to guy for 6 years now, and that we would barely have had a wiki without him, as he built most of our system instruction pages almost from scratch. I trust his sense of judgement above anybody else in this community when it comes to this type of subject.

It seems like the tiers should remain the way that they currently are here.

 

[Ottavio_Merluzzo]

Just a note that DontTalkDT has been my most reliable go-to guy for 6 years now, and that we would barely have had a wiki without him, as he built most of our system instruction pages almost from scratch. I trust his sense of judgement above anybody else in this community when it comes to this type of subject.

It seems like the tiers should remain the way that they currently are here.

Side note, but I'll unsubscribe from the thread for a while.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

No. If you're going to only have one person dictate all the results, then this shouldn't be a debating and indexing site.

 

[GilverTheProtoAngelo]

AKM sama asked me something regarding this thread and wanted me to post my answer here. For disclosure: I have gotten around to reading the full blog yet. Anyway, I will just quote our conversation.

"

AKM sama: Would you say a multiverse that is a timeline consisting of 12 Low 2-C universes is sufficient evidence for it to be Low 1-C?
Me: No.
Allow me to explain.
We have three dimensions of space, which we could (in a simplified version) model as RxRxR, that is the cartesian product of three infinite real number lines.
Time we could model as a single infinite real numbers line R.
A timeline is then (RxRxR)xR i.e. space x time.
Now, for multiple timelines, we need to operate in a 5-dimensional space. In the 5th dimension, they would all lay beside each other. Let's say we have 12 timelines, with their positions in the 5th dimensions being 1,2,3,4,..., 12. {1,2,3,4,...,12} is the set of those positions.
The multiverse consisting of 12 timelines would then be described by {1,2,3,4,...,12}x(RxRxR)xR.
In other words the cartesian product of the locations of each timeline, with one timeline.

Well I am no expert in math....but I have few doubts.
Well the thing is , imo this is still observation of the set of 12 space-times while the observer is sitting in 5th dimension.
What the upgrade side is proposing is we observe the 5th dimension itself...that is the higher temporal dimension to be observed from outside.
That would lead to product of another R onto the current product ....
basically R×{1....12}×(R×R×R)×R.
Now I am not so brave as to apply entire set of points of this higher temporal dimension onto this product.

But as Ultima mentioned that any length of time in another axis of time suffices for "dislocation" as he put it

What I wanted show here is that these space-times flow forward in the flow of this higher time.

Lets take this and apply directly onto DB chronology.
In the past there were 18 space-times.
So the product will look like this at a single instant...."Zeroth" moment.
{1,2....18}×(R×R×R)×R

After some time " t" the 6 space-times are destroyed. And only 12 remain. Lets call this point of time in present as "t1".
So product will look like ...
{1....12}×(R×R×R)×R

So if were to sit outside the timeline and map all the progress of the universes from start uptill this point....

0+t=t1....or t=t1....basically the time interval.
[0,t1) is a uncountably large set , albiet not as large as R....but still uncountable, I believe this also called Cantor Set??
[0,t1)×{1...18}×(R×R×R)×R......
so this basically satisfies the condition for bijections of 5 sets containing uncountable elements I guess....

Low1C??

So basically I tried to map the journey of Present Timeline of DB and all universes inside it.

And I am a nervous wreck now....

 

[Greenshifter]

Anyways, my opinion is that it should just be 2-C. There's no indication that this '5-D' dimension would take a literal 'dimension' worth of more energy to destroy.

Pretty sure we do assume that by default with temporal dimensions, due to the nature of time. You don’t need to prove a timeline takes uncountably infinitely more energy to destroy than a universe for instance.

 

[Giygas3]

Pretty sure we do assume that by default with temporal dimensions, due to the nature of time. You don’t need to prove a timeline takes uncountably infinitely more energy to destroy than a universe for instance.

Do we? I just thought that was a case-by-case scenario on how the series treats dimensions outside of the normal 4 dimensions when it comes to power.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Do we? I just thought that was a case-by-case scenario on how the series treats dimensions outside of the normal 4 dimensions when it comes to power.

It depends on how exactly higher-dimensional spaces relate to lower-dimensional ones in the cosmology proper. For instance, in a setting where an uncountably infinite number of 4-dimensional spacetimes is stacked up to form a tiny subset of a 5-dimensional universe, destroying the latter would obviously be a Low 1-C feat, but destroying a random 5-dimensional object whose mass is finite wouldn't be. Temporal dimensions are different in that they always form a structure which embeds uncountably infinite states of a universe's spatial volume within itself.

 

[Greenshifter]

From this thread:

DontTalk has said this “The FAQ specifies that temporal dimensions are treated as similar to physical ones in that regard”

but this is written in the tiering system FAQ: "So, for example, a spacetime continuum comprising two temporal dimensions (Instead of just one) would have an additional time direction whose "snapshots" correspond to the whole of a 4-dimensional spacetime, and so on and so forth."

and he also said this as a response to me asking if it would be low 1-C: “It probably is assumed that they are large. At least I find a small time-like dimension rather unlikely, given the nature of time.”

So while it’s quite vague I do think that by construction a verse with 2 temporal dimensions would automatically be infinitely superior to a verse with only 1 temporal dimension.

 

[Greenshifter]

So I would argue that a (hyper)timeline (since it is literally called a timeline in-verse) consisting of 12 timelines would in fact be low 1-C, however some very decent counterpoints were brought up.

edit: If I am not mistaken, if a single regular timeline is proven to be infinite in size then it becomes very hard to argue the Hypertimeline is just a 4D space-time with larger hypervolume does it not? Because I am quite certain that proof of infinitely long regular timelines does exist in Dragon Ball, especially Dragon Ball Heroes.

Such as here (infinitely expansive universe means that space will keep expanding forever onwards, which doesn’t contradict it being infinite in size btw, which means there can be no end of time for this to be the case. This is also in reference to a single part of Universe 7 so I have no idea why this would only make the Hypertimeline infinite instead of all 12 regular timelines), assuming the scan is valid translation-wise.

 

[Agnaa]

I am neutral regarding this, as I am too overworked to properly read the arguments. Personally speaking, it would be kind of fun with a higher-tiered Dragon Ball, but accuracy is most important.

@Agnaa

Would you be willing to help analyse and evaluate this please?

Sorry friends! I'm not interested in evaluating this verse.

 

[Dino_Ranger_Black]

My knowledge with DBH is fairly limited so, I'm not too sure how much weight my decision holds but if what Kukui pointed out is true, then I guess I will accept it all together. I do remember that Zamasu (The user) pointed out that Zamasu (The character) destroyed the Super Dragon Balls in his timeline, which has been established to be spread out across different universes. Since this means each timeline has its own set of universes, the upgrade makes sense. I just hope I didn't overlook anything crucial.

 

[San-Kakarot]

Why not make a list of all the arguments for the separate time and space continuum and one against it and compare them to see which is stronger and more evident and judge based on that.