• 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.

DOOM - Tier 1 Cosmology Proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, so what, if anything, has been accepted to be applied here exactly?
 
Okay, but what do our staff members here think? They are supposed to evaluate the available information and make the final decisions, and Ultima is one of our most knowledgeable staff members regarding tiers.
 
“Urdak itself exists in an anchor state, utilizing highly advanced dimensional shift technology to allow a static position at a sub-quantum level. This essentially inverts their position in relation to Hell; both planes of existence are fixed outside the bounds of the known universe, a 'lower' and 'higher' reality.”
 
It’s honestly a puzzling statement. That could lead in either direction.
 
Donatien said:
I already proved in this thread all the way back in the original post that grammatically, "dimension" in the quote must be referring to the very concept of dimensionality and not separate realms and such. This is categorically not an issue of "positioning." Due to all of this, "possibly low 1-C" would not be an appropriate tiering for those who scale to Hell since the alternative (whatever grammatically and contextually-incorrect interpretation Eficiente is advocating for) is simply not reasonable at all; rather, only a solid rating of "Low 1-C" would be valid.
Click to expand...
That's wrong. Again, it makes perfect sense to mean as in reality or space, you can't just say that it "must" be referring to that, that's has a massive lack of self awareness to the way of talking DOOM has when talking about its cosmology, since it has a lot, a lot of redundancy, and is not trying to be clear so that everything understands everything well, and in fact says things that can be taken in many ways that are simply a bit more likely to be taken in 1 specific way rather than another. + even w/o that in general the same would be the case in any verse if some serious scientist was saying that. + even meaning dimensionality, being unbound from it makes perfect sense from a place that's not in the same positioning as the universe that uses the word dimensionality.
Firestorm808 said:
I can't say I follow what is used to support Hell being a parallel 4-D Structure.
Click to expand...
I take "Hell itself is a living thing, an entity possessing certain undeniable sentience. Many worlds have fallen to Hell, each now bound to ruin, connected by pathways of darkness transcending space and time." as Hell having universes fused to it (kinda like in Mortal Kombat), but maybe they're not fused and just connected w/o being part of Hell, in which can Hell is just a universe.
Firestorm808 said:
Q: What tier is transcending space and time?
A: If it is specified that they "transcend space and time" in the sense that they exist on some higher level of reality that is qualitatively superior to a spacetime continuum in nature, then they should be put at Low 1-C, assuming the continuum in question is one comprised of four dimensions.

Q: What tier is transcending dimensions?
A: Such descriptors are to be evaluated while taking into account the number of dimensions which the verse has been shown to entertain; for example, a character stated to exist above physical dimensions in relation to a 4-dimensional cosmology would be Low 1-C with no further context.
Click to expand...
So, as we know "qualitative superiority" refers to this, meaning that the first text is pretty much saying something redundant by already having the reality it's talking about as Low 1-C, rather than saying minor things that would make it Low 1-C.

The second q&a I think it's problematic, so I'll see to it later.
Firestorm808 said:
We agree that the infinite timelines are an infinite 4-D structure for 2-A. It's consistently said that Hell is a higher dimension, is timeless, transcends time and space, etc. Based on the descriptions of Hell, it is higher dimensional in the sense it is beyond the aforementioned 4-D structure of time, going into true 5-D Low 1-C territory.
Click to expand...
I already gave reasons above to say why it's not "higher" in the way we care about. Being timeliness doesn't really matter. Same with transcending time and space.
Firestorm808 said:
Hell being a separate 4-D space wouldn't be compatible with the descriptions of being timeless, transcending time, and being unlimited by the boundaries of time. It would need to be a 5-D Low 1-C structure.
Click to expand...
How?
Firestorm808 said:
Additionally, on its own, True Vega being able to hold an infinite 4-D structure in his arms may sound figurative. However, we need to combine it with the descriptions of Hell, Hell being an extension of Davoth, and True Vega being on par with Devoth.
Click to expand...
Being "an extension of" doesn't always have to be something being smaller than your whole and weaker than you, it can be bigger than you and more powerful than you, yet you have part of your identity in those things that are extensions of you (An example it comes to mind is Dream of the Endless' relics in Netflix's Sandman show). So, Hell is an extension of Davoth, that doesn't make less poetic this "As the Father planned his next realm he saw that Davoth would never cease his search for everlasting life for his people, no matter the cost, as he had been created by the Father to care deeply for Jekkad and its children. Foreseeing that Davoth's rule would ultimately grow to threaten all creation, and that Davoth would someday rise to challenge the Father himself, the creator of all things sealed Jekkad off from the myriad dimensions enfolded in his arms."
 
Ultima_Reality said:
That's a pretty large amount of inference from such a vague statement, and a very large stretch of the definition of "boundary" overall, which a quick search on Google can already tell us the meaning of in most contexts: "a line that marks the limits of an area; a dividing line."
Click to expand...
This definition is ruled out by the fact that "dimension" refers specifically to the concept of dimensions rather than realities or anything else. Since these boundaries are boundaries of a concept, it must have the meaning "a limit of a subject or sphere of activity." I know you dispute the fact that the word "dimension" is used in this way, but heres the proof that my interpretation is the correct one and yours is wrong.

"Dimension" being used as an uncountable noun here also doesn't mean anything when uncountable nouns don't even necessarily refer to abstract things; "There is wood here" is a sentence that makes use of an uncountable noun (Wood), for instance, and yet it's obviously not talking about the concept of wood.
Click to expand...
This is a blatant strawman. I never claimed that uncountable nouns must refer to abstract concepts in all cases. I simply pointed out that uncountable nouns are "not something you can quantify." (At least without an additional countable part such as "pounds" or "pieces" which are NOT used here) In this situation specifically, the only definition that can possibly meet this criterion is "dimension" as in the concept of dimensions. The idea that "dimension" in this quote refers to measurements contradicts this criterion (measurements are countable and can be quantified). This means that your interpretation is not just possibly wrong, but simply wrong since it hinges on a definition of dimension that is completely incompatible with its use as an uncountable noun.

Moreover, the thing that Hell is being described as unlimited by is, itself, a countable noun expressing a quantitative term, that being "boundaries."
Click to expand...

Yes, the boundaries themselves are countable, but that does not change the fact that the word "dimension" (what the boundaries are actually boundaries of) is still uncountable.

Space and dimension are themselves synonymous, so I think that's pretty clearly just the text being redundant.
Click to expand...
With the definition that is being used in this quote ("the concept of dimensions"), no they are not. Space does not have the definition of "the concept of dimensions" or rephrasing of that nor is it ever used like that.

Eficiente said:
That's wrong. Again, it makes perfect sense to mean as in reality or space, you can't just say that it "must" be referring to that, that's has a massive lack of self awareness to the way of talking DOOM has when talking about its cosmology, since it has a lot, a lot of redundancy, and is not trying to be clear so that everything understands everything well, and in fact says things that can be taken in many ways that are simply a bit more likely to be taken in 1 specific way rather than another. + even w/o that in general the same would be the case in any verse if some serious scientist was saying that.
Click to expand...
What will it take for you to stop ignoring my grammatical argument? You are entirely ignoring one of my main points (which is a strawman since my argument is much worse without it), and it is really annoying.

+ even meaning dimensionality, being unbound from it makes perfect sense from a place that's not in the same positioning as the universe that uses the word dimensionality.
Click to expand...
Now this is just ridiculous. That's like saying "immortality" can simply be interpreted as "living on a planet where 'death' and other such words are not used." Things exist beyond people using words that refer to them. For an obvious example, sand didn't just not exist until humans started using words to refer to "sand."

So, from all this, the correct interpretation can only be that Hell is unbound by the limits of the concept of dimension, which includes the limit of only having four dimensions, or in other words, having a measure of zero (or an infinitely small measure?) in the fifth dimension. Since it is also unbound by boundaries of space, Hell must also be infinitely 5D. However, this only applies to the boundaries within the already established verse, so we cannot extrapolate this to the 6th dimension onwards.
 
Last edited:
@Eficiente

Is the image below an accurate depiction of your interpretation?

rzegtfB.png
 
Firestorm808 said:
@Eficiente

Is the image below an accurate depiction of your interpretation?

rzegtfB.png
Click to expand...
Yes, but Hell is down and Urdak is up. I'm not sure if the Initial Void covers all that.

I would also throw in arrows from Urdak to smaller circles (Universes) in the Timelines, this arrows would only point from Urdak to the Timelines and not the other way. They would be the highway it has to the universes, but it doesn't matter to add it.
 
Eficiente said:
Yes, but Hell is down and Urdak is up. I'm not sure if the Initial Void covers all that.

I would also throw in arrows from Urdak to smaller circles (Universes) in the Timelines, this arrows would only point from Urdak to the Timelines and not the other way. They would be the highway it has to the universes, but it doesn't matter to add it.
Click to expand...
Davoth was the only existance in the Void, and he created these 4-D Realms within the Void.

Would you say there is viability of the Void and Davoth being 5-D?
 
Well, 4-D stuff can be preceded by more 4-D stuff w/o 5-D stuff even existing. In the way we use them for Dimensional Tiering.
 
Eficiente said:
Yes, but Hell is down and Urdak is up. I'm not sure if the Initial Void covers all that.

I would also throw in arrows from Urdak to smaller circles (Universes) in the Timelines, this arrows would only point from Urdak to the Timelines and not the other way. They would be the highway it has to the universes, but it doesn't matter to add it.
Click to expand...
You still haven't addressed my argument. I refuted what you've said against my position in my last post.
 
Firestorm808 said:
To clarify, are you saying that a space/plane that holds multiple Infinite-sized 4-D realms is still 4-D?
Click to expand...
Ok, I got wonky with what I implied there. 4-D stuff/realms can exist on their own with the stuff/space around being of any dimensionality, even something lower, if it's higher it would very much need proof of it.
 
Donatien said:
This definition is ruled out by the fact that "dimension" refers specifically to the concept of dimensions rather than realities or anything else. Since these boundaries are boundaries of a concept, it must have the meaning "a limit of a subject or sphere of activity." I know you dispute the fact that the word "dimension" is used in this way, but heres the proof that my interpretation is the correct one and yours is wrong.
Click to expand...
This is wrong on multiple level, and clearly this is our personal interpretation of the text, boundary or dimension in here i didn't anything related to concept, stop forcing your interpretation on others
 
Eficiente said:
Ok, I got wonky with what I implied there. 4-D stuff/realms can exist on their own with the stuff/space around being of any dimensionality, even something lower, if it's higher it would very much need proof of it.
Click to expand...
Do we have previous examples of the case of lower dimensionality? I don't recall verses that have that sort of structure.
 
Firestorm808 said:
What is your opinion on the space/plane that holds multiple Infinite-sized 4-D realms?
Click to expand...
Iirc, the thing is, mutiple infinite still just infinite, so something can hold many infinite, multiplied them you still get just infinite...
But do you have more contexts for this Void????, i'm curious
 
Vietthai96 said:
Iirc, the thing is, mutiple infinite still just infinite, so something can hold many infinite, multiplied them you still get just infinite...
But do you have more contexts for this Void????, i'm curious
Click to expand...
When the void first appeared, Davoth was the only one there. He then created numerous Infinite-sized 4-D realms in it.
 
Firestorm808 said:
When the void first appeared, Davoth was the only one there. He then created numerous Infinite-sized 4-D realms in it.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, i don't think this context is enough, but well in my opinion i'm fine with this void being Possibly Low 1-C, since holding multiple infinite-sized 4d realms in it mean it is larger than all of them, larger than countable infinite is uncountable infinite which is 5D, still it lacked direct and specific statements
 
Yeah, a 4D realm can do that. Lots of Series have that and are still just 2-A. It takes more evidence than that to prove the infinitesimal difference on the level needed for Tier 1.
 
I can't say I follow your explanation. If you have multiple infinite-sized 4-D realms, how can they fit in another 4-D realm if it's not 5-D?

Can you give an example of this being applied on the site? I don't recall verses like that.
 
It still can the size needed to fit multiple infinite sized 4D realms inside it while still being 4D, the difference between countable infinity and the uncountable infinity that is the difference between 4D and 5D is much bigger then just a couple of extra infinites.
 
Arceus isn't Low 1-C because of holding multiple infinite multiverse at all, Arceus had been 2-A for like a year (or more) while the Pokéverse had been treated as containing multiple infinite mutliverses inside it. It's Low 1-C for other reasons.
 
Everything12 said:
Agreeing with Ultima and Eficiente here, I don't think this evidence is enough for even a Possibly Low 1-C.
Click to expand...
What about my argument? Ultima and Eficiente are advocating for interpretations that directly contradict the text as I've shown all the way back in the original post.

Vietthai96 said:
This is wrong on multiple level, and clearly this is our personal interpretation of the text, boundary or dimension in here i didn't anything related to concept, stop forcing your interpretation on others
Click to expand...
Did you even read the whole thing about uncountable nouns? It's not a "personal interpretation," it is simply the facts.
 
Last edited:
Bro, chill. Acting like this isn't going to make people agree with you any more because they simply don't view it like you do, and that doesn't make them inherently wrong or right. Not saying you're right, or that they're right, but this is the most condescending way to argue your proposal. Relax some. Getting DOOM to Low 1-C isn't important.
 
Axx is correct. I didn't think much of it at first, but it's starting to get repetitive with the tone of the posts. Please refrain from pushing the topic excessively.
 
Firestorm808 said:
Please refrain from pushing the topic excessively.
Click to expand...
It's not excessive. Eficiente hasn't addressed my points a single time in two whole days, even though he seems to be perfectly fine with making several messages responding to other arguments.

In addition, Vietthai96 is quite literally entirely ignoring large parts of my argument. I've been arguing based on what the grammar and such shows the text is actually saying, while Vietthai96 acts as if I'm simply picking and choosing some random, arbitrary interpretation of the text. I wouldnt have to push my argument like this if people weren't ignoring large swathes of my posts (or even posts) as if they didnt exist. Being a staff member doesnt mean someone can just sweep opposing opinions under the rug.

By the way, I still dont really know: do you agree with my arguments in the first place, or do you only agree with arguing Low 1-C or maybe just "possibly Low 1-C" via entirely different arguments?

Not saying you're right, or that they're right, but this is the most condescending way to argue your proposal.
Click to expand...
What's so condescending about it? I dont understand. I cant improve from this if I dont know what exactly I'm even being criticized for.

But fine, I dont want to get into a separate argument about this that will derail the thread. I just wanted to defend myself and make a request: again, please let my arguments be heard and acknowledged.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ShionAH
  • Locked
The Only Thing They Fear Is... You - DOOM Revisions (Part 1)
2 3 4
Replies
158
Views
12K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
TyphonEX
More DOOM upgrades
Replies
11
Views
2K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
ShionAH
The Only Thing They Fear Is... You - DOOM Revisions (Part 3)
2
Replies
75
Views
5K
Hellscream
Hellscream
ShionAH
The Only Thing They Fear Is... You - DOOM Revisions (Part 2)
2
Replies
73
Views
5K
ShionAH
ShionAH
Spicy78
She Rippin' on my Guts until I Tear - A DOOM Upgrade/Revision CRT
Replies
27
Views
3K
Spicy78
Spicy78
Back
Top