- 3,768
- 2,277
-
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
- 2,630
- 2,446
Afaik, the new revisions don't affect dragonball and ben 10
- 3,768
- 2,277
Nah they actually give DB a layer of protection because the concept of time travel in DB meets the criteria. Really a downgrade would come if the way time travel works was all of a sudden retconned
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,542
- 10,883
Alright, everyone. Please stop derailing, I'm not going to repeat myself.
- 3,768
- 2,277
Yes ma’am
Hasty12345
Username Only- 5,241
- 4,064
I agree FRA
- 11,416
- 2,550
Gentlemen, I believe we could apply this to the cosmology already.
Killerdrone123
He/Him- 2,062
- 1,768
48 hours grace period
- 11,416
- 2,550
How many hours have passed?
Killerdrone123
He/Him- 2,062
- 1,768
For me the thread was open at yesterday 10 pm so 15 or something
- 11,416
- 2,550
About 32 more hours for this to be applied.
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,542
- 10,883
Dread commented and disagreed two hours and 30 minutes ago, which delays the grace period. If any of you don’t want to delay the grace period then I suggest you people to stop derailing the thread and let it sit as it is.
- 11,416
- 2,550
That's not how it works my guy. A single disagreement is not gonna overwrite the many staff agreements.
GarrixianXD
University Enthusiast
Any/AllVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 4,542
- 10,883
It’s still going to stir up another discussion. I might be comprehending it wrong anyways. Just hope that this topic won’t get heat it again.
- 11,416
- 2,550
Do not hope. Do ensure it does not happen.
- 12,451
- 5,641
umm
vsbattles.com
is georr's thread going to affect this upgrade??
Re:evulation of temporal dimension standards
Alr, here we go! I'd like to mention that I obtained permission from @Qawsedf234 🙏 This structure can then be generalized to any number of dimensions, which is why destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather...
is georr's thread going to affect this upgrade??
- 11,416
- 2,550
No. Not in the slightest.umm
Re:evulation of temporal dimension standards
Alr, here we go! I'd like to mention that I obtained permission from @Qawsedf234 🙏 This structure can then be generalized to any number of dimensions, which is why destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather...
is georr's thread going to affect this upgrade??
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 9,073
- 6,000
Yes, in its entirety.umm
Re:evulation of temporal dimension standards
Alr, here we go! I'd like to mention that I obtained permission from @Qawsedf234 🙏 This structure can then be generalized to any number of dimensions, which is why destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather...
is georr's thread going to affect this upgrade??
Hasty12345
Username Only- 5,241
- 4,064
sideways time guy
- 3,229
- 3,560
Couldn't be me for sure.
ShakeResounding
He/Him- 8,785
- 7,705
After all the Tier 1 DB threads I've seen since 2018, I can truthfully say I agree with this revision wholeheartedly. Good job on never giving up, and welcome to Low 1-C.
"The struggle itself towards Tier 1 is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine a DB scaler happy."
"The struggle itself towards Tier 1 is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine a DB scaler happy."
- 1,414
- 3,548
Wow... what's funny is, I mentioned something exactly like this in depth (e.g. the timeline capturing the continuous change of the multiverse) under my original response to the old staff thread, but I completely abandoned that line of reasoning since I messed up the whole "space-time separation doesn't give new axes" stuff. Who knew it still held merit? I don't know where that other thread is going, but yeah. This is textbook Dragon Ball.cap
Re:evulation of temporal dimension standards
So the flow of time in different universes can be very independent while they have the same time axis. So other than R>F where one is fictionalized in depiction, what would count as an orthogonal timestream if even an independent time flow could be within the same axis?
This is textbook DB example. DB isn't getting affected. It's still tier 1.
Carry on DB bois.
Last edited:
Excellence616
He/Him- 6,042
- 4,356
Can't believe am saying this but i agree
- 3,768
- 2,277
Not only does it not hold up against the staff but it’s also been addressed too. One would actually use DDT’s argument to support this upgrade because that’s just exactly how DB works with Time Travel.
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #265
are people going to ignore that geor and pein's arguments are out of spite? i've made at least that very self evident
- 12,191
- 6,130
They are simply ignoring ;-;
Hasty12345
Username Only- 5,241
- 4,064
Even if they’re out of spite, it doesn’t make the logic any more correct/incorrect.
- 1,665
- 1,294
I think what he's getting at is that threads made out of spite are usually closed down immediately
Hasty12345
Username Only- 5,241
- 4,064
Closing it would just postpone the problem
- 628
- 1,158
prove time moves like this in DB if you want this CRT to pass
- 1,414
- 3,548
Also, another thing about Geo’s thread is, I don’t think DontTalk disagrees that an overarching timeline is Low 1-C as long as the lesser timelines are serviced by their own time dimensions. He clearly read the OP, and responded that “the last thread wasn’t meant to change the standards,” so it’s not like he hasn’t seen the current phrasing for that section of the faq. He said multiple times that a time dimension spanning timelines shouldn’t qualify in itself, nothing about spanning time dimensions. I think he’s on the same page as us in that a higher time dimension is orthogonal and inherently a different direction.
I believe that so far, he’s mainly addressing ways to demonstrate higher time dimensions without confirmation of lesser timelines having their own time dimensions: whether it be explaining how different universes having certain flows of time would be indicative of existing under parallel time dimensions (e.g. if time flowing backwards in one universe means something), or how an overarching timeline could be interpreted as having 4-D snapshots and measuring the continuous change of the multiverse (which Dragon Ball has anyways).
I believe that so far, he’s mainly addressing ways to demonstrate higher time dimensions without confirmation of lesser timelines having their own time dimensions: whether it be explaining how different universes having certain flows of time would be indicative of existing under parallel time dimensions (e.g. if time flowing backwards in one universe means something), or how an overarching timeline could be interpreted as having 4-D snapshots and measuring the continuous change of the multiverse (which Dragon Ball has anyways).
- 1,665
- 1,294
You should probably take this to the DBS discussion thread tho, not here
Killerdrone123
He/Him- 2,062
- 1,768
He is clearing things for those who are thinking Geor thread will change this or dt disagreed with us
Georredannea15
He/Him- 4,726
- 3,122
This isn't basically time traveling from one timeline to a different timeline. As you see herecap
Re:evulation of temporal dimension standards
So the flow of time in different universes can be very independent while they have the same time axis. So other than R>F where one is fictionalized in depiction, what would count as an orthogonal timestream if even an independent time flow could be within the same axis?
This is textbook DB example. DB isn't getting affected. It's still tier 1.
Carry on DB bois.
These are very different from the timeline that contains multiverses, to time traveling to a temporal dimension that does not contain anything (including the universe), or something like that. But yeah, we are all waiting for DT
- 9,982
- 10,821
Anyone trying to downgrade based of whatever will have to create his own thread and prove it anyway. So yeah, this thread, as of now, is what it is.
Georredannea15
He/Him- 4,726
- 3,122
So yes. Essentially the old standards and the things old standards rejected were supposed to still be fundamentally valid, but there was a little misunderstanding. Mehh, it's okay.
As stated here, the fact that time flows forward or backward is not evidence of different/extra axis and direction; it can basically occur along the same axis. Other alternative explanations are also here.
And another problem is here that it is necessary to have specific statements for such "4D snapshots". And frankly, I didn't expect this much either.
Anyway, we're waiting for the draft now
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,248
- 14,614
wow, so you want to verse to say directly that, this hypertimeline have uncountable infinite amount of 4D snapshots, lol, that not gonna work
- 3,229
- 3,560
Once he realizes that, it will be too late. Let him rant . Guess some people never learn, after all.
- 3,346
- 1,911
- Thread starter
- #280
the boulder has crushed DB scalers.
- Status
Similar threads
