Then provide evidence from your side because the term "Universe" in Ben 10: Omniverse consistently refers to creation of Annihilargh as accepted in previous thread.
It has context if you read it carefully with an unbiased mindset
Good
It's an analogical explanation which contextualizes my premise unlike yours which has nothing to do with the context of other statements
Thank you
You've agreed to them being higher dimensions.
See what I mean. You're jumping from one analysis to another. Pick a lane.
All of SB is fully mapped out Paradox and the Map of Infinity. As mentioned before.
It's location has been mapped out with the rest of the Space Beyond and all of Time and causality as a whole.
2) It isn't a dimension but rather a a universe
3) But since annihilarg universes are experiment and contumilla made it as experiment for abstract and here inaclcuable means abstract
And sir firestorm refuted it
If I am missing some arguments or debates then please add them in another message @Hellformer @Celestial_Scaler25
Good job, now we wait for Firestorm to get some spare time and discuss it with Ultima
I won't let all that effort get wastedGood job, now we wait for Firestorm to get some spare time and discuss it with Ultima
Don't forget that the whole of spatiotemporality has been mapped out by Paradox. So everything has coordinates and can be located. As their possisions can be identified with the Chrononavigator(GPS for the Multiverse) and the Map of Infinity.
I’ll just say that the point it can’t be calculated due to being in a location that can’t be. You’re right that infinite timelines were indeed calculated, which is why I said that it should be outside of it.
The entire Space beyond is mapped out. So everything in it has a location and position on said maps(Chrononavigator and Map of Infinity). Including the Omega Universe.
white void lacks time so he couldn't time travel with his abilities, Malturant used Time beast which has immeasurable speed
This was discussed in the cosmology revision thread. It's a request from my side to not derail this thread. I'll answer your questions in engaged conversation whenever I have some free time
In the context of Ben 10 at this point in the series, there is a distinction between the usage of Universe and Dimension. A "Universe" is an entire hyper space-time structure overall. Dimension in the context of the statement refers to a layer of reality. The context of the terminology has been agreed prior.
If it refers to a layer of reality, it isn't High 1-B. And I've already pointed out that the statement itself uses both terms to refer to the same thing. The aliens describe themselves as being from an "incalculable dimension," and this incalculable dimension is "a glorious universe." So even the attempted appeal to some kind of consistent overarching terminology (Which I doubt exists) fails in its own terms.
The aliens being higher-dimensional based on independent pieces of evidence doesn't really change anything. They can be higher-dimensional all they want, and the statement still isn't High 1-B because that reading of the text is not necessary nor even possible.
It isn't, no. Dimensions aren't places and nor are they structured in terms of ordinal placements, so "I am from the nth dimension" is a statement with no meaning.
You’re right that dimensions are spatial axes, not places. However, when we say "I’m from the 5th dimension", we’re using a bit of shorthand to describe an origin in a reality that includes an additional spatial dimension beyond the familiar three dimensions of space and one of time. It’s a way to convey that someone or something exists in a higher-dimensional space. In fact, it is not uncommon for a five-dimensional space to be called the fifth dimension in fiction(or even non-fiction).
It's a piece of nonsense-wording, ultimately, so you'd need positive evidence to say that this is the case in this specific situation. There is none here {And I've already said that "The aliens can be inferred to be higher-dimensional based on these other statements" isn't adequate evidence to infer it at all)
Where?
he agreed but not leaning much into it
you do realize this kind of wording is used frequently in fiction and irl right? To the point educational YouTubers use it.
he changed his mind countless D to High1B
It being nonsense does not change the fact that it is used that way. Word dimension is either like space in context, or means spatial axis and nth dimension is clearly n-D universe in this case.
Wait for what firestorm has to say
Btw IIRC wikipedia also treats 5 dimensional geometry and geometry of fifth dimension same.
Yeah Ultima’s argument is the definition of “but ackyually”
Doesn't particularly matter. If a verse had a character blurt out "I am from the nth dimension," it wouldn't count as anything whatsoever for precisely the reason I'm bringing up, regardless of "It's often used that way in coloquial contexts." Don't even know why the occasional coloquial usage of these terms matters here.
Not really. You can also just say the statement is meaningless. It's just babble.
Why would the characters make a “meaningless” statement when trying to explain something?
A statement can be just meaningless babble even when it's meant as an explanation in-universe. "Technobabble" is a term for a reason, for example.
Sure thing bro, let’s just ignore the lore explanation cause it’s “technobabble” or similar, I’m sure that’s a reasonable approach to analyzing fiction.
It matters since you're saying it is a meaningless statement. "nth dimension" is described as universe and being higher dimensional. Then we say either "this can't be described as this, so it's meaningless" or "since it's described as it should be for using its common usege, it refers to it being nD". Like, if someone says something like nth dimension is a universe beyond your understanding due to being higher dimensional, it's normal to take that universe as nD. Otherwise it would be more assumptionous.
Yeah but characters' dimensionality doesn't matter here anyway.
If there are two choices, why do we choose the meaningless one, when on the contrary we should reject it? Idk how we treat "it's meaningless in its direct meaning" over statement's common usage. The things you mentioned that "make the expression meaningless" just match the way the expression is usually used with the expression in the series.
Dismissing the evidence as "technobabble" is completely misguided, especially given the context of the argument and the evidence presented. First, the reference of "incalculable dimension" or "we are from the 5th Dimension" isn't just arbitrary jargon; it's a clear statement within the show that hints at something beyond the scope of the verse cosmology. The fact that these aliens are incomprehensible to Ben and the team shows how important those statements are and cannot just be dismissed as "technobabble"
Nah I think Ultima basically just auto-conceded. It’s a powerscaler’s job to form interpretations for given statements and Ultima is effectively refusing to do said job, instead claiming that the statement has no meaning, which is a very rare case in fiction, especially when a character is trying to explain something.
When it comes down it: Yeah. I've already went over why the "alternative" basically involves an extremely scuffed reading of the text that verges into being a formally invalid argument, so, "The statement is meaningless" (Could also be framed as "The statement is vague," which has the same end conclusion for our purposes, anyway, so as to be effectively interchangeable) is a perfectly tenable outcome. I don't believe it takes much to realize that "To calculate a universe" is just meaningless jargon overall.
The bolded bit here already shows you're reading the statement as containing far more information that it actually has. There is no comparison between "The nth dimension is a universe beyond your understanding, because it is higher-dimensional" and "We are beings from an incalculable dimension that defies the limits of space and time. A glorious universe unfathomable to a primitive mind such as yours." The former statement is a hypothetical that includes a reference to higher dimensionality already. The latter doesn't even require that, and needs other pieces of information to be inferred as talking about higher-dimensional space.
I already took the evidence presented into account (I granted the conclusion that the aliens are higher-dimensional for the sake of the argument, even, despite finding it weak. I could very easily contest that, too, since the only remotely good piece of evidence is the Feedback thing) and it does the proposal no good whatsoever.
You claim to have considered the evidence, but your dismissal afterward suggests you didn't engage with the full context or depth of the points made, particularly the implications of 'incalculable dimensions.'
You granted the conclusion but immediately undermined it by labeling it weak without thoroughly explaining why(unless i missed the explanation) This weakens your concession and makes it seem superficial.
By focusing only on the Feedback example, you're ignoring other valid evidence, like the reference to 'incalculable dimensions' and the team's inability to comprehend the aliens(something you acknowledge). This selective approach feels like cherry-picking, not a comprehensive counter.
Stating the proposal does no good is an unsupported conclusion. You haven't demonstrated how or why the evidence is ineffective beyond briefly calling it 'weak,' which is insufficient for a proper rebuttal.
You're adding an extra 's' that doesnt exist here.
