• 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.

Dragon Ball: Infinite Universe

Status
Not open for further replies.
He never said that he agrees tho, he organizing doesn't mean that automatically
He haven't said that many times in the past and when I asked him off site or smth he told me, Wasn't it obvious that I agree when I am supporting the arguement? Also it's just end up on samething, he agrees and it's pretty clear from what I have seen for long (I don't want to make it a point of debate now).
This is why it was agreed to make both sides to make summaries and made an exclussive staff thread to evaluate both sides fairly, too bad that promise was broken
It's fine, you presented a counter to the OP, it'll be taken into account.
 
im not being such. I've read every thread nd you steadily been debunked over nd over about the same points. You had no real counter, even to this thread. All I said earlier was the truth nd you proved my point in prime fashion. Ima stop tho cus ion wanna hurt anymore feelings✌🏿.
I could say that this is not an argument, but okay, i will stop too
 
The visuals depictions literally doesn't mean anything over statements. Here, universes are shown to be smaller than humans and zeno palace.
Plus they're the same visuals that don't show the Kai realm either and just depict the universe as a big af galaxy, which we know isn't accurate. These are clearly not to be trusted.
 
He haven't said that many times in the past and when I asked him off site or smth he told me, Wasn't it obvious that I agree when I am supporting the arguement? Also it's just end up on samething, he agrees and it's pretty clear from what I have seen for long (I don't want to make it a point of debate now).
I just want to be safe, asking him to clarify doesn't hurt

It's fine, you presented a counter to the OP, it'll be taken into account.
This is why i am happy that it is you doing this, you are reasonable and not condescending, thank you
 
This part was accepted as not being inacurate i another thread by me
That was only for the macrocosm map calc
Exept when we see the universe from outside and there is a bound in form bubles around the universes


The point is there there is an edge, bulma is talking about the area she has to scan in search of the super dragon balls, if the universe was infinite changing position wouldn't matter for scaning the entire area since the distance would be the same since it would be infinite



This one of king kai is not talking about any "observable universe" anywhere, it is only talking about "the universe" in general, no where in the scan it says what you said




no, it says that it is talking about "the whole world" there, so it is talking about the entire universe, so it is a contradiction


This says that both light and darkness are infinite





This was discussed in the thread about gt, cosmology does not scale due to MWI, all possibities become real, so all possibilities for cosmology also become real, so this is not relevant here

"Also about Bulma statement that they live at the edge of the Universe is kinda being overused and ignoring all the previous statements, also that it seems highly unlikely for eartg or milky way galaxy to be at the edge, it is more reasonable that Bulma is talking about observable Universe"

Why it is "unlikely"? The statement itself never says anything about it taling about only an specific part of the universe

Here is my summary from the earlier thread, it was agreed to have a new thread to be created after both sides made summaries, kind of dishonest that the promise wasn't kept

The counter argument being used for the universe having an edge is that it is the edge of the "observable/light part" of the universe and that after that there is an infinite darkness that is infinite in size, but when we see the universe from an outside perspective we see no greater darkness surrounding a light part of it, which would disqualify this said darkness from even being a thing at all, some brought up how we don't see the other dimensions of the macrocosm, but since they are other dimensions they would be in other planes of existance and wouldn't be seeable from an outside perspective, plus the model used to say that they would be seeable is never used in the dbz manga and dbs anime so the series depiction takes precedence over it anyway,
it says
that it is talking about any observable universe in place of the entire universe, and we have no reason to believe that it is talking about an specific part of it, which is further corroborated by the fact that the whole point of bulma wanting to go to the center of the universe in the first place was to be able to scan the entirety of space to search for the super dragon balls

the statement itself never specified



Dude stop bringing Brazilian scans everytime, they have no value here, bring only translation from japanese


If the argument is about the darkness being the infinite thing, then why are we bringing scans about the supposed "observable universe"?


That is also a valid point i feel


Firestorm didn't agreed

(a lot of these were answered in the op)

(Also I’m pretty sure we’re shown countless planets and only like 28 have life on them so 70% of the planets with life also make sense)
 
Guys, you all know arguing endlessly like the last time won't give anything? It's just us asserting our Opinion on other opinions, I already answered things that hasn't been in the OP, such as seeing the Universe from Outside. Everything else is same as previous thread arguement and counters which doesn't have to be repeated numerous times. I am talking to both sides.
 
When was this stated in Dragon Ball?


That would clear up my issues with Super Shenrons light though should provide a source for this in the OP that links to this standard.

As for other stuff brought up in other comments like infinite expansion. I wouldn't say that contradicts the whole universe already being infinite, just that the observable universe is expanding across the infinite space since their is shown to be space beyond it and if you add in guides they say their is infinite darkness beyond it so you could say the entire universe is infinite while the observable universe is constantly expanding throughout it so statements like them being at the edge could just refer to the observable universe like the OP mentioned.

I guess you can switch me to the agreeing side for right now. I was neutral because I was waiting for some solid counter points but until those show up I don't have any major issues at this time.


It's a pretty controversial topic that has been discussed before so I'm not surprised if people want to remain neutral until all things are properly discussed.
Well, here it is said to be a dimension, soon in the anime we see that there are several galaxies during the super Shenron, about the dimension of the lights,explained on the website where it is claimed to be superdimensional, and in the anime comics Brolly suggests the same thing

Interview source on DB's official website
 
Guys, you all know arguing endlessly like the last time won't give anything? It's just us asserting our Opinion on other opinions, I already answered things that hasn't been in the OP, such as seeing the Universe from Outside. Everything else is same as previous thread arguement and counters which doesn't have to be repeated numerous times. I am talking to both sides.
Also Firestorm is in agree twice. Skim through quickly and one might think 2 mods agreed instead of one.
 
That was only for the macrocosm map calc

(a lot of these were answered in the op)

(Also I’m pretty sure we’re shown countless planets and only like 28 have life on them so 70% of the planets with life also make sense)
About the 28 planets, they are talking about beings that have reasoning, these are the only planets with reasoning and acceptable intelligence, said in the anime, soon I will bring the scan of that statement.
 
But anything in GT can just be labeled non canon as it pertains to DBS. It's stupid as if something applies to GT it should apply to DBZ which in turn applies to DBS but it is what it is.
Not anymore, GT has been accepted to be canon to DBZ/super as alternate branched Timeline, written in the dragonball main page.
 
About the 28 planets, they are talking about beings that have reasoning, these are the only planets with reasoning and acceptable intelligence, said in the anime, soon I will bring the scan of that statement.
As I mentioned earlier, only beings that have reason and mortals, according to Kaioshin he mentions planets that have mortals.

Chapter 30

There are not just 28 planets, but countless planets, according to Moro.


During the Zamasu saga we have more or less an idea about the planets, Zamasu citing that there are millions of planets

 
Last edited:
That was only for the macrocosm map calc
yeah, which also included the part about how the dbs anime doesn't use it at all, but i think that id we start to argue this here we will go off topic really fast


(a lot of these were answered in the op)

(Also I’m pretty sure we’re shown countless planets and only like 28 have life on them so 70% of the planets with life also make sense)
i read the said "top" and i disagree with on that, i concede on the number of planets thing

Should votes be classied in two catagories? One for Infinite Universe Toei and the other for super
absolutely, me for instance agree with infinite universe toei

Both are alternate branched timelines. So one scan from one directly affects another.
not really, cosmology between the two doesn't scale, MWI makes it so that every possibility for cosmologies comes true, so since we have no evidence of them sharing cosmology, we don't use one to the other, that was already decided the moment gt was dubbed an alternate timeline
 
not really, cosmology between the two doesn't scale, MWI makes it so that every possibility for cosmologies comes true, so since we have no evidence of them sharing cosmology, we don't use one to the other, that was already decided the moment gt was dubbed an alternate timelin
No, alternate Timelines, especially in MWI are literally mirror images of each other branching off from same timeline, so, it would require evidence that Cosmology was ever different than current one across the timeline of DBS or there are reasons that DBGT timeline has done some interference to the cosmology after being branched.

Being branched via possibilities doesn't mean it's branching off illogically to any possibility, that kind of multiverse is Type 4 multiverse, Type 3 hangs over main Timeline.
 
yeah, which also included the part about how the dbs anime doesn't use it at all, but i think that id we start to argue this here we will go off topic really fast



i read the said "top" and i disagree with on that, i concede on the number of planets thing


absolutely, me for instance agree with infinite universe toei


not really, cosmology between the two doesn't scale, MWI makes it so that every possibility for cosmologies comes true, so since we have no evidence of them sharing cosmology, we don't use one to the other, that was already decided the moment gt was dubbed an alternate timeline
According to your argument, Each possibility is a reality, and GT/Super are branches of the same timeline. Then the possibility of them having the same cosmolgy is equal to them bot having the same cosmolgy. But the fact that both have the same lay ouy structer [4 quadrants, After life and kaioshen realm etc...] The possibility of them having the same size is more likely. So your argument really....doesn't make sense.
 
According to your argument, Each possibility is a reality, and GT/Super are branches of the same timeline. Then the possibility of them having the same cosmolgy is equal to them bot having the same cosmolgy. But the fact that both have the same lay ouy structer [4 quadrants, After life and kaioshen realm etc...] The possibility of them having the same size is more likely. So your argument really....doesn't make sense.
If its likely is not his point. If you cannot PROVE that they are the same then his point stands. Whether or not the stats will end up correlating to his argument? Only time will tell.
 
According to your argument, Each possibility is a reality, and GT/Super are branches of the same timeline. Then the possibility of them having the same cosmolgy is equal to them bot having the same cosmolgy. But the fact that both have the same lay ouy structer [4 quadrants, After life and kaioshen realm etc...] The possibility of them having the same size is more likely. So your argument really....doesn't make sense.
It's not even the point since DBGT is a alternate timeline that has been branched off from same timeline, so saying cosmological structure differs is like saying I was at the age of 10 was not human but later on I was. MWI has misconception of overusing possibility thing when it's just referring to number of possible actions a person would take, there is no reason to change the entire cosmological structure unless it's proven that cosmological structure was indeed different at some point in time in the past for Cosmology of alternate Timeline to differ, also we already accepts scans from alternate timeline in other verses for cosmology such as Anur phaetous in ben 10 being a alternate spacetime.
 
According to your argument, Each possibility is a reality, and GT/Super are branches of the same timeline.
every timeline branches since the vary begining of creation of said timelines, aka every possibility for how said creation went also becomes real, we don't know when gt's branched, to say that it branched off the super timeline is baseless

Then the possibility of them having the same cosmolgy is equal to them bot having the same cosmolgy.
which is why we don't scale them, to be safe

But the fact that both have the same lay ouy structer [4 quadrants, After life and kaioshen realm etc...] The possibility of them having the same size is more likely. So your argument really....doesn't make sense.
i don't see how any of what you just said leads to the conclusion you just said, could you explain more?

No, alternate Timelines, especially in MWI are literally mirror images of each other branching off from same timeline, so, it would require evidence that Cosmology was ever different than current one across the timeline of DBS or there are reasons that DBGT timeline has done some interference to the cosmology after being branched.

Being branched via possibilities doesn't mean it's branching off illogically to any possibility, that kind of multiverse is Type 4 multiverse, Type 3 hangs over main Timeline.
if every possibility becomes real, then the different cosmologies also become since they are "possibilities", it branches of the same timeline sure, but that doesn't mean much for the point, how these branches developed, how they change in laws of physics and what not, how their cosmologies develop differently, all of that still happens independently of them being branched of the same timeline, since it branches since the very begining, since before any planet or realm or anything else really was created

Yeah GT is confirmed to have the same cosmology as Z, and Z has the same cosmology as Super.
gt has the same cosmology as TOEIVERSE Z, not manga Z
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top