• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah no, one singular, non-contradicted statement that emphasises on the spatial dimensions aka 3D, 4D, 5D all the way until 26D has no reason to be dismissed, the counter-arguments provided are as the supporters say, heavy unquantified mental gymnastics to reject the upgrade. The opponents have to provide evidence on their end why those dimensions aren’t spatial, why those dimensions don’t qualify besides the ”they didn’t clarify what they meant” argument (which is VERY flimsy btw), otherwise those arguments can be obliterated by Hitchem’s Razor.

I agree with the upgrade
just because there's no contradicting evidence doesn't mean it's true tbf. and we are basically saying it doesnt have enough context, if you want a solid argument we can just argue segans standard due to this lack of evidence. not to mention the statement of the omniverse stretching in all dimensions is skeptical (as qwasfed said) so this is mostly an argument that has been repeated numerous times and rejected numerous times, and goes against the rules
 
She doesn't mention them being spatial-temporal. She just says that there's 26 that matter. Though I guess you could argue that it means 26 geometric dimensions contextually

This is followed and proceed by him acknowledging the futility of his hatred towards Ben. Its not really a usable quote for size in my mind.

For the thread such an upgrade has no supporting evidence for higher dimensions and there's already a discussion rule about this topic. I'm not really for it.
I’m inclined to agree with @Everything12 and Qawsed
 
just because there's no contradicting evidence doesn't mean it's true tbf. and we are basically saying it doesnt have enough context, if you want a solid argument we can just argue segans standard due to this lack of evidence. not to mention the statement of the omniverse stretching in all dimensions is skeptical (as qwasfed said) so this is mostly an argument that has been repeated numerous times and rejected numerous times, and goes against the rules
Btw even extending in different directions does not mean geometrically extending to different dimensional axes. Ultima had a statement about this. But let's see, we'll wait.
 
no it hasn't
this is the first time someone made an argument like this
you're confused with people just sending a video of the nanjians with a bunch of terrible author statements
the argument of the najins saying ben 10 views in 3 spatial dimensions, so therefore najins 26 dimensions are higher spatial dimensions has been used before here, and subsequentially rejected

the only difference is the omniverse argument which is skeptical as qawsedf said
 
the argument of the najins saying ben 10 views in 3 spatial dimensions, so therefore najins 26 dimensions are higher spatial dimensions has been used before here, and subsequentially rejected

the only difference is the omniverse argument which is skeptical as qawsedf said
Yeah, the use of the omniverse argument makes it so it has new evidence, therefore not breaking the rules
 
Yeah, the use of the omniverse argument makes it so it has new evidence, therefore not breaking the rules
fair ig. but that statement is iffy and doesnt really add to much so the argument is still pretty weak, so ima stay on dissagreeing with the scale
 
It's better to stop with all this "Appeal to authority" thing. u disagree, u disagree, for someone reason or anyone's. No need to argue he said/she said or whatsoever. We read, we disagree or agree. That's all there's.
 
What if Kat agrees
don't bring that here 🤫 🤫
I mean, it depends is “directions” can be used to refer to higher dimensions
doesnt really support that these 26 dimensions are spatial higher dimensions. as this 26 dimension could be 3d in terms of qualitive superiority and the statement would still work if its not 26d in terms of QS
 
don't bring that here 🤫 🤫
Nah I will XD
doesnt really support that these 26 dimensions are spatial higher dimensions. as this 26 dimension could be 3d in terms of qualitive superiority and the statement would still work if its not 26d in terms of QS
I mean if every spcial dimension is infinite, it apparently qualifies for qualitative superiority, but the problem is imo whether directions can be used to refer to spacial higher dimensions
 
I mean if every spcial dimension is infinite, it apparently qualifies for qualitative superiority, but the problem is imo whether directions can be used to refer to spacial higher dimensions
the problem is, if the najins dimensions are directions at all I believe(i think?)
 
Misclicked when I clicked post the first time

This seems pretty simple to be 26D to me. Ben 10 is stated to perceive 3 dimensions, then asks how many dimensions there are. The Najian states only 26 that matter. Then, also states that they were visiting lower dimensions, so at the worst it’s insignificant 26D. This is easily tierable though when it’s stated that the omniversal force extends infinitely throughout every direction of reality. Spatial dimensions are directions, so this seems fine to me.
 
That’s why I’m waiting for ultima on whether higher dimensions can be referred to as directions
reading trough this, the only new argument is that the omniverse would actually scale to the 26 dimensions. no new argumemts have been presented for the 26 dimensions actually being coordinated spatial planes. (if im interpreting this correctly)
 
reading trough this, the only new argument is that the omniverse would actually scale to the 26 dimensions. no new argumemts have been presented for the 26 dimensions actually being coordinated spatial planes. (if im interpreting this correctly)
no, the new argument is that albedo stated every direction goes on for infinity, therefore each spacial dimensions goes on for infinity and that gives qualitative superiority
 
no, the new argument is that albedo stated every direction goes on for infinity, therefore each spacial dimensions goes on for infinity and that gives qualitative superiority
ah ok. isnt the dimensions being spatial rejected tho?
 
Man. I think we already have enough discussion about it.
She doesn't mention them being spatial-temporal. She just says that there's 26 that matter. Though I guess you could argue that it means 26 geometric dimensions contextually

This is followed and proceed by him acknowledging the futility of his hatred towards Ben. Its not really a usable quote for size in my mind.

For the thread such an upgrade has no supporting evidence for higher dimensions and there's already a discussion rule about this topic. I'm not really for it.
What's your stance here? Do u completely disagree with the upgrade? I think even if goes either way having discussion rule against smth shouldn't be ultimate denial if staffs who has been participated in previous Ben 10 threads finds it sufficient. Also, once my friend asked DT if Contimelias statement is enough for HDE and he said it looks enough.

Is there no ground for possibly rating as well iyo?
 
Man. I think we already have enough discussion about it.

What's your stance here? Do u completely disagree with the upgrade? I think even if goes either way having discussion rule against smth shouldn't be ultimate denial if staffs who has been participated in previous Ben 10 threads finds it sufficient. Also, once my friend asked DT if Contimelias statement is enough for HDE and he said it looks enough.

Is there no ground for possibly rating as well iyo?
HDE= Just axis.


A cosmology that will scale to HDE and AP is completely different.
 
At what point will there be enough evidence to support this? This upgrade literally marks all the checkpoints in describing what is meant by, "dimensions" and even elaborated on the size of them as well. This is all extra stuff that apparently needs to be proven to stop this upgrade, how specific does it have to be? Asking, "what is the nature of these dimensions" and of the sorts is weird, because it literally tells us what it means lol. We humans can perceive 3 dimensions, obviously talking about spatial dimensions, and not like parallel universes or something similar. It goes onto say there are literally 26 dimensions at least.
 
What's that got to do with what I said? I can't figure it out.

Lmao if you don't trust the admins here(or other members), see other threads like this one or the quotes above.
 
What's your stance here? Do u completely disagree with the upgrade?
I think one statement from one episode saying there's 26 "relevant" dimensions with nothing else isn't really enough for an upgrade.

In addition her statement about 26 that matter don't make much sense, as if it's about geometric dimensions all souls equally matter since they rely on each other for axis to work correctly.
Also, once my friend asked DT if Contimelias statement is enough for HDE and he said it looks enough.
He says with no context it looks enough and before hand gave a few examples of characters with HDE not fitting qualifications for it.

possibly rating as well iyo?
Maybe?
 
In addition her statement about 26 that matter don't make much sense, as if it's about geometric dimensions all souls equally matter since they rely on each other for axis to work correctly.
Maybe the rest of the dimensions are just empty, there’s no planet with a 27th-D component for instance?
 
Maybe the rest of the dimensions are just empty, there’s no planet with a 27th-D component for instance?
But the 27th Dimension would still matter, since it would be the fundamental background of the lower dimensions and what they're defined against.

It would by like saying the first dimension isn't important, when it's a factor in any/all dimensional coordinates in some capacity.

But idk I guess I might just be obstinate. Possibly probably works but a straight upgrade just doesn't have much for it in my view. Especially when it's inevitable going to be used for a bunch of upgrades.
 
In addition her statement about 26 that matter don't make much sense, as if it's about geometric dimensions all souls equally matter since they rely on each other for axis to work correctly.
What did u meant here. If it's about only 26D that matters, it might mean that others are not inhabitable or empty for living beings? Or way beyond even their grasp of things?
He says with no context it looks enough
Yeah for what was said he said it looks enough but context many times happens to change things differently but we know that there's no contradictory statement regarding it.

If we take the interpretation to be spatially, which most of ppls here seems to take (even a guy who proposed discussion rule) with mods goes further down to say it's kinda straightforward. I think that it being spatial does hold just fine. It was really due to paradox mentioning string theory that insignificant dimensions discussion rule was proposed.
 
But the 27th Dimension would still matter, since it would be the fundamental background of the lower dimensions and what they're defined against.
It doesn’t matter for lifeforms, since there are no lifeforms which are moving across said 27th dimension at any point. Is more what I was going for.
 
Also Bobsical, the guy who proposed the discussion rule agreed with the thread. So clearly he did not intend for this revision to be halted by said discussion rule when he proposed it.
I didn't agree to it, I find the premise reasonable but I'm still holding up my vote given the way the discussion is going and some vagueness going by what has been discussed so far.

If there's new points provided the discussion rule shouldn't be used against any consideration of the topic whatsoever.
 
I didn't agree to it, I find the premise reasonable but I'm still holding up my vote given the way the discussion is going and some vagueness going by what has been discussed so far.
Yeah I edited my comment before I saw this message, my bad.
If there's new points provided the discussion rule shouldn't be used against any consideration of the topic whatsoever.
Ok, thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top