• 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.

Bringing Xenosaga to a Higher Dimension: Cosmology

I think this can be apply then?
Per Discussions rules, Tier 1 threads require a larger number of Thread Moderators, Administrators, and Bureaucrats to give their input. Only 2 staff have given approval with 1 disagreeing (me) and 1 neutral.

Additionally, the Reality - Fiction Standards are being revised, so I am unable to give input regarding the Upper Domain at this time.
 
Per Discussions rules, Tier 1 threads require a larger number of Thread Moderators, Administrators, and Bureaucrats to give their input. Only 2 staff have given approval with 1 disagreeing (me) and 1 neutral.

Additionally, the Reality - Fiction Standards are being revised, so I am unable to give input regarding the Upper Domain at this time.
I've been busy to keep bumping this (interesting that others would have done it instead in the meantime) but while I am here, I had replied after your last expressing concerns about the qualifications of the Imaginary Number Domain. What are your thoughts in response to that? Would it help change your POV?
 
It doesn't seem to me that that interpretation would work since otherwise there would be no explanation as to how Lost Jerusalem was perfectly planet sized when it was domain shifted back to the Real Number Domain at the end of the story. As the quote presented in the example goes, the planet became an imaginary domain existence, and it was a planck sized one there when it did.

When it was shifted back to the Real Number Domain it was once more a full on planet. If we operated on the logic that it was permanently shrunk specifically by the process of transfer, and not by the fact that it happens because that's the absolute extent of what the Real Number Domain can access of the Imaginary Number Domain, there would be no reason for the planet to suddenly grow in size and be perfectly habitable as it happened in the end, with the cast setting out on a journey to find them again and KOS-MOS's body drifting closer to it. It would have just stayed a planck length structure.

There would also have been no need to explain that the lower dimensions can only access a Planck Scale of the Higher Ones. Or objects and existences from the Imaginary manifested in the Real Number one having Immeasurable mass as is the case for Abel's Ark, Albedo describing the lower dimensions as lacking and being able to shift the whole dimension. The perfect guide stating that the imaginary domain has no material or physical limitations, the verbatim explanation of the Real Number Domain being a finitely bound realm in constrast to the Imaginary One.

From all that can be gathered from statements, the guide and how it behaves whenever it interacts with normal space, it appears particularly counter-intuitive to disregard them and conclude that these dimensions would be at all similar in scale.
Here.
 
My stance remains largely the same as before.

Imaginary Time might give +1D if it meets our Higher Time Requirements.

At the most, I only see Imaginary Space as being one set of infinity larger than 3-D.
On the bolded part, I'd like to ask why if possible to see if we could come to an agreement there over time. But thanks for the feedback still, while I maintain the stance of 4 since I believe otherwise I'd run into a variety of lore contradictions I can see some of the foundation that you want to reason towards.

About the rest, having searched the forums I couldn't find a standards page for Imaginary Time. Could you tell me what is it that this dimension should fulfill for the standards in these forums?
 
On the bolded part, I'd like to ask why if possible to see if we could come to an agreement there over time. But thanks for the feedback still, while I maintain the stance of 4 since I believe otherwise I'd run into a variety of lore contradictions I can see some of the foundation that you want to reason towards.

About the rest, having searched the forums I couldn't find a standards page for Imaginary Time. Could you tell me what is it that this dimension should fulfill for the standards in these forums?
The prior example of immeasurable mass can give credence to one set of infinity over 3-D, but I have not seen any demonstrable example of being 3 sets of infinity over 3-D for Imaginary Space.

Our higher dimensions of time standard can be found in the Tiering FAQ.
 
The prior example of immeasurable mass can give credence to one set of infinity over 3-D, but I have not seen any demonstrable example of being 3 sets of infinity over 3-D for Imaginary Space.
To summarize, you agree that there's sufficient to conclude the superiority of imaginary space, but also that the imaginary counterpart to the three-dimensional model in the real one would be a single dimension of space. Rather than three corresponding dimensions. Yes?

To which I'd say...sure why not, could roll with that just fine, too. The persistence of the creator to say that there would always be a counterpart to everything every two lines of the guide makes me believe the former is more likely, yet I wouldn't be all that bothered to consider it's 1 amalgamate of space counterpart. While 4 remains my suggestion, I take no particular issue in leaving it to you and everyone to decide on the number.
Our higher dimensions of time standard can be found in the Tiering FAQ.
Moving on to Imaginary Time, then.

It's a second dimension of time with a flow of its own that is superior to the normal one, verbatim based on Stephen Hawking's teachings and theory.
Because of that we have confirmation that it is its own axis of time in the database entry, cannot be perceived by people of the real number domain and thus makes the model of Xenosaga's universe a multidimensional hyper spherical surface. Imaginary Time is also used in the main antagonist's masterplan to eternally reset the Universe as many times as he wants.

It is in fact, two distinct temporal axes with their own flows.
 
Last edited:
To summarize, you agree that there's sufficient to conclude the superiority of imaginary space, but also that the imaginary counterpart to the three-dimensional model in the real one would be a single dimension of space. Rather than three corresponding dimensions. Yes?

To which I'd say...sure why not, could roll with that just fine, too. The persistence of the creator to say that there would always be a counterpart to everything every two lines of the guide makes me believe the former is more likely, yet I wouldn't be all that bothered to consider it's 1 amalgamate of space counterpart. While 4 remains my suggestion, I take no particular issue in leaving it to you and everyone to decide on the number.

Moving on to Imaginary Time, then.

It's a second dimension of time with a flow of its own that is superior to the normal one, verbatim based on Stephen Hawking's teachings and theory.
Because of that we have confirmation that it is its own axis of time in the database entry, cannot be perceived by people of the real number domain and thus makes the model of Xenosaga's universe a multidimensional hyper spherical surface. Imaginary Time is also used in the main antagonist's masterplan to eternally reset the Universe as many times as he wants.

It is in fact, two distinct temporal axes with their own flows.
I mean based on the recent DB crt about "hypertime lines" I'd like to think that having a second time flow thats> the normal time flow be ATLEAST 5D but that's just my opinion.
 
I mean based on the recent DB crt about "hypertime lines" I'd like to think that having a second time flow thats> the normal time flow be ATLEAST 5D but that's just my opinion.
You're fine. We've been discussing how many dimensions to accept, before stablishing the most adequate tiering for the works in these forums. I'm glad that you agree with Imaginary Time qualifying. Think this one will be more straightforward since unlike space, there's no real reason to discuss the number of extra time dimensions (1).

That and the database entry being very ❝in our face❞ about it.
 
Back
Top