- 1,414
- 3,548
It's described in the daizenshuu, and we composite the cosmologies regardless.
-
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.
(DB Tier 1) We must imagine a DB scaler happy.
- Thread starter BasedNecoScaler69
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dragon ball tier 1
- Status
- 1,665
- 1,294
Oh, I see. thanks
- 2,630
- 2,446
It’s accepted as part of the cosmology via comp cosmology
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #86
Please, dont comment about scaling in this thread.
Serlock_Holmes
He/Him- 3,651
- 1,554
This. Please for the love of god don't bring up other subjects. Anything else can be discussed in the general thread.
Magicomethkuon
They/Them- 1,308
- 1,424
The thing is that no one is arguing that. At least, talking for myself, my point is that alternate space-times don't mean multiple time dimensions by default (and if this has indeed become a new standard of these forums, where having alternate space-times or multiverses implies Low 1-C cosmology must be happening, then I have a number of question marks in my mind which, if brought here, then would be actual derailing hence those will be left for another opportunity).
Connected or not to each other, every last one of them could be partaking of the same time dimension. The very same note that you are directing people towards mentions events of a timeline encompassing another. And 2-C.
This is literally the same reason why this thread was rejected in the past. Spatio-Temporal separation does not need to introduce new time dimensions, smaller than universal space-times having different rules and dimensions of time does not mean nearly as much for a cosmology at large than a full on macrocosm adopting those different rules.
It is fine if you disagree, but I suggest instead that you try and understand what people are bringing about and where their doubts lie before making comments like this one. If I were actually arguing what you keep calling derailing, I wouldn't need to ask for pieces of evidence to prove a different dimension of time, rather than multiversal separation.
You can say that it's derailing, but I think rather than someone bringing up questions that explain the very thread at hand, what is very tiresome and derailing is to have someone, in this case myself, asking about one thing and have to explain multiple times over why I was arguing, and how it had nothing to do with what the opposition says I was arguing about.
- 6,135
- 4,213
Good Work Boys - Mainline Tier 1 DB achieved.
- 2,714
- 3,501
I really just don't understand, "why didn't you just call the staff that disagreed"? Maybe because we can't ping staff and qawsed was the only staff actively participating at the time? We can have them called any moment, in fact, we we're cooking up counter arguments for that exact reason. Stop with these accusations, reiner changed the standards because they didn't make sense and multiple staff who participate in tier 1 threads agreed with it. Also agree.
- 20,541
- 17,454
It doesn't. Even if you have an infinite amount of different space times you would need to provide evidence that they have independent temporal axis to get Low 1-C. Most universes aren't going to meet that standard. Especially any universe that uses the "Variation of choice" ruleset.
- 20,541
- 17,454
I mean, why not just PM me then?
It probably doesn't mean anything but it was still weird to list a bunch of staff and not include some of the people who actually showed up last time like me or Deagon.
- 2,714
- 3,501
I wasn't actually aware of this thread's existence.
- 20,541
- 17,454
So what did you mean by this comment:
EDIT: Actually its a whatever topic at this point. It was just a weird move to list staff members and not include people who showed up last time.
- 3,768
- 2,277
He’s saying he wasn’t aware of this thread being open but I agree with you if anyone was aware bringing to you specifically should have been done
Magicomethkuon
They/Them- 1,308
- 1,424
Reading this is a relief. If by any chance a misconception is later proven to be happening, I'd much rather it be coming from a franchise needing a revision than tackling a site-wide standard.
- 6,632
- 6,816
I also agree with the proposal.
Also let's not celebrate too early guys, things can quickly change.
Also let's not celebrate too early guys, things can quickly change.
- 12,826
- 2,603
Well at the very least if this passes, and even if the standards change again. Our rule count discussion ban counter will reset at the very least.
- 3,493
- 1,360
Simple question: where is the scan confirming the existence of this hyper timeline?
- 7,550
- 7,738
It seems you have met the requirements for the new standard.
- 3,493
- 5,191
Could you elaborate?
- 3,493
- 1,360
The only scans posted are scans confirming the existence of parallel timelines. Is there a scan that specifically talks about the hyper timeline?
- 3,493
- 5,191
The timeline contains places with their own temporal dimension, and can branch off with the same exact cosmological structure. There are statements for different time dimensions, but no specific statement calling the overarching timeline a “hypertimeline.” I don’t know why that’s relevant though.
- 3,493
- 1,360
No need for it to be specifically called a hypertimeline. But a scan showcasing or mentioning the overarching timeline would suffice.
- 3,493
- 5,191
It’s literally in the op.
- 2,580
- 1,478
Each timeline contains 12-18 macrocosms of these
- 2,714
- 3,501
It's in the OP.
- 3,493
- 1,360
I went through the scans posted in the OP, none of them mention an overarching timeline. All of them mention the existence of multiple timelines and parallel worlds.
Perhaps I missed it, but which scan mentions the overarching timeline?
- 3,493
- 5,191
- 3,493
- 1,360
Nowhere in that scan is it mentioned that all these parallel timelines/universe exist inside another timeline.
KingNanaya
He/Him- 3,075
- 4,240
you almost sound proud
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #113
there's an invidiual time dimension for each universe, HOWEVER there is also an additional time dimension that services the entire multiverse, hence, hyper timeline
- 3,493
- 1,360
Yes, but where is the scan that confirms the existence of this additional time dimension? The ones posted so far don't mention it at all.
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #115
The scan with zamasu references the time dimension that services all the universes.
- 3,493
- 1,360
Can you post the link? it doesn't seem to be in the OP unless its in one of those pages with the other links and I missed it.
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #117
- 3,493
- 1,360
I have already seen that. And again, it mentions the existence of parallel timelines and universes, but there is no mention of an overarching timeline or this time dimensions you've just mentioned involving zamasu.
- 2,714
- 3,501
well there isn't much more to say then.
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #120
universe 7 has its own time dimension, so the fact that zamasu traveled to universe sevens past even though he's from universe 10 implies another time dimension.
- Status
Similar threads
