- 18,393
- 14,323
I am opposed to the thread for the same reasons as @DarkDragonMedeus.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think now it's time to correct everything about the DB and some interpretations about the verse, and put it in its rightful placeI might be thinking of a different blog AKM made then; oh yeah, his blog was more so about the 3-A scaling and it being hundreds of times above baseline.
But yeah, someone should perhaps make a cosmology blog listing the reasons for the tier 2 stuff.
but isn't a more extradiordinary claim then they just not being separated space times? this sounds like a very specific type of timeline, also this does not cover the "they are all affected by time paradoxes" thing, whatever the justification is, it needs to cover thatI think justification for Universes being separate spacetime's should be independent of RoSaT.It's not a better justification regardless how I see it.
Note: We consider Dragon Ball universes to be separate spacetime's despite them being inside the same timeline because a single time Dimension can service many separate bodies of space in a way that those separate bodies of space do not intersect at any point in all of time and space and so not a valid reasoning against them not being a separate spacetime's. Also Whis, Champa's cubes and SDBs crossing the universes as well doesn't disprove universes being separate spacetime's as crossing the universes through physical flight is very well possible even btw separate spacetime's through unordinary means, like whis "warp" ability, a special ability that allows angles to move between even Dimensions and universes, SDBs are quite mysterious even in Dragonball and we lack sufficient information regarding them to claim anything given that it has been consistently established in the verse that travelling between universes is almost impossible W/O having a extraordinary means.
It covers everything. For all of them being serviced by a single time Dimension, whenever time will be affected, it'll affect all of universes. We consider Universes to be separate spacetime's by default, so it shouldn't be a problem.but isn't a more extradiordinary claim then they just not being separated space times? this sounds like a very specific type of timeline, also this does not cover the "they are all affected by time paradoxes" thing, whatever the justification is, it needs to cover that
but if they all have the same time dimension, how would they be separated space times?It covers everything. For all of them being serviced by a single time Dimension, whenever time will be affected, it'll affect all of universes. We consider Universes to be separate spacetime's by default, so it shouldn't be a problem.
Me and me Once againbut if they all have the same time dimension, how would they be separated space times?
but, isn't that more extraordinary assumption in this case since the universe have no statement of being space times?Me and me Once again
If we assume which is what we do that universes are separate spacetime's by default unless proven otherwise and see being inside single timeline as not being concrete proof against it, given the reason above, it should be fine.but, isn't that more extraordinary assumption in this case since the universe have no statement of being space times?
well about that, i was just informed in the tier 2 revision thread that we don't assume that they low 2-C structures if they are all affected by time paradoxes equally, and that they are all considered part of a low 2-C timeline, here so the justification would need more proof that they are space timesIf we assume which is what we do that universes are separate spacetime's by default unless proven otherwise and see being inside single timeline as not being concrete proof against it, given the reason above, it should be fine.
My words > (jk)well about that, i was just informed in the tier 2 revision thread that we don't assume that they low 2-C structures if they are all affected by time paradoxes equally, and that they are all considered part of a low 2-C timeline, here so the justification would need more proof that they are space times
well, I think Reiner is right, it's already been decided that the Universes are low 2-C and the timeline continues as a 2-C structure, so stop trying to downgrade the verse for nothing, anyway, don't comment here anymore if it's not something important for the back, as your concern for lowering the back is working on developing DBwell about that, i was just informed in the tier 2 revision thread that we don't assume that they low 2-C structures if they are all affected by time paradoxes equally, and that they are all considered part of a low 2-C timeline, here so the justification would need more proof that they are space times
Let's calm down and do not fight. The more questions will rise the more it'll be clear that how good the current justification is, it's not like he denied anything but just asked, which is fine.well, I think Reiner is right, it's already been decided that the Universes are low 2-C and the timeline continues as a 2-C structure, so stop trying to downgrade the verse for nothing, anyway, don't comment here anymore if it's not something important for the back, as your concern for lowering the back is working on developing DB
I understand, but there is a very interesting line, where Trunks mentions that having a different story suggests a different flow of timeLet's calm down and do not fight. The more questions will rise the more it'll be clear that how good the current justification is, it's not like he denied anything but just asked, which is fine.
well that is a possibility yes, but this assumption suggested needs more evidence that the cosmology works that way, all that don't talk said was that it is possible, but the normal assumption is the more simple "they are all in the same low 2-C timeline and are not low 2-C structures", if there is evidence of such it should be in the justification, just a reminder that i am not arguing against anything but just trying to make sure that the justification covers everythingHere we go, @DontTalkDT explaination for how several Dimensions can still be serviced by a single time Dimension.
Post in thread 'Universe level CRT Part 2 (Alternate Dimension Edition)' https://vsbattles.com/threads/unive...ternate-dimension-edition.121139/post-3981498
It doesn't because there is literally no verse which explicitly stated that they work this way, it's just that we use this justification for the verses who supposed to have several Dimensions or spacetime branching together in the single timeline. Given that we default universes to be separate spacetime's unless proven otherwise, they're default to work with this mechanism like all other verses out there.well that is a possibility yes, but this assumption suggested needs more evidence that the cosmology works that way, all that don't talk said was that it is possible, but the normal assumption is the more simple "they are all in the same low 2-C timeline and are not low 2-C structures", if there is evidence of such it should be in the justification, just a reminder that i am not arguing against anything but just trying to make sure that the justification covers everything
i mean, they all being affect by time paradoxes is an proof of otherwise, while there is a system that makes multiple space times bring affected by time paradoxes make sense while still being space times, that is not the default assumption since it requires more assumptions, with they not being space times requires less, as said in the tier 2 revision thread, if they are all affect by time paradoxes made in just 1, then we default assume that they are part of a low 2-C timeline, so the justification needs to have improvements on this regardIt doesn't because there is literally no verse which explicitly stated that they work this way, it's just that we use this justification for the verses who supposed to have several Dimensions or spacetime branching together in the single timeline. Given that we default universes to be separate spacetime's unless proven otherwise, they're default to work with this mechanism like all other verses out there.
The only point that was suggesting being affected by single time Dimension as a proof of otherwise in the tier 2 revision has been removed after @Executor_N0 reminded DT of this case specifically. So it really isn't, Pain & DT's thoughts about interpretation of specific cosmology of specific verse can vary and that's the case even with overall standard. As per current standards universes are separate spacetime's and separate spacetime's can be inside single time Dimension. It seems ordinary or non ordinary cannot be claimed given the unordinary cosmology of dragonball, so it's really needs a valid evidence for it to be the case of otherwise.i mean, they all being affect by time paradoxes is an proof of otherwise, while there is a system that makes multiple space times bring affected by time paradoxes make sense while still being space times, that is not the default assumption since it requires more assumptions, with they not being space times requires less, as said in the tier 2 revision thread, if they are all affect by time paradoxes made in just 1, then we default assume that they are part of a low 2-C timeline, so the justification needs to have improvements on this regard
okay, but now i am a little bit confused, what even would be an anti feat for a universe to be a space time then?The only point that was suggesting being affected by single time Dimension as a proof of otherwise in the tier 2 revision has been removed after @Executor_N0 reminded DT of this case specifically. So it really isn't, Pain & DT's thoughts about interpretation of specific cosmology of specific verse can vary and that's the case even with overall standard. As per current standards universes are separate spacetime's and separate spacetime's can be inside single time Dimension. It seems ordinary or non ordinary cannot be claimed given the unordinary cosmology of dragonball, so it's really needs a valid evidence for it to be the case of otherwise.
Those discussion links were about if universes are separate separate spacetimes in dragonball despite being in the single timeline which seems to be the conclusion as well. All that is left is what should be the justification to put on the profile to explain that they're separate spacetime's.Can someone clarify as to what the currently accepted DB cosmology is with the relevant discussion threads linked?
Yeah it is, but what seems to be rejected is that he'll, heaven and mortal realm aren't separate spacetime's.Heaven is also stated to be as big as a universe multiple times. Hell is stated to be even bigger than Heaven, so that would mean it’s as a big as a universe too.
What thread is this in reference to?Yeah it is, but what seems to be rejected is that he'll, heaven and mortal realm aren't separate spacetime's.
This one, @Vietthai96 , @godofice , @LuffyRuffy46307 andWhat thread is this in reference to?
Well, in the last thread it end up in derailing into 10 pages, so this thread was created to make it easier for staff to evaluate if the current db universes are space times or not, since they are all affected by time paradoxes in just one and the standard assumption would be that they are 3-A structures in a low 2-C timeline, but then again, this depends on what the conclusion on the tier 2 revision thread will be,Can someone clarify as to what the currently accepted DB cosmology is with the relevant discussion threads linked? All I see on the main verse page is the following:
Acho que @DarkDragonMedeus , @Firestorm808 e já rejeitei um downgrade da cosmologia de Dragon Ball.
Parece que o tópico original foi concluído e foi decidido manter os Universos como espaços-tempos separados, e então o tópico mudou aleatoriamente para a velha e cansada discussão dos Universos 2-C e tentando escalar a cosmologia canônica para a cosmologia não-canônica. Eu digo que apenas fechamos o tópico.
Eu posso estar pensando em um blog diferente que o AKM fez na época; oh sim, seu blog era mais sobre a escala 3-A e sendo centenas de vezes acima da linha de base.
Mas sim, talvez alguém devesse fazer um blog de cosmologia listando as razões para o material de nível 2.
Em primeiro lugar, o todo, "Múltiplos universos sendo efetuados por um único paradoxo de tempo" não é, na verdade, um contra-argumento contra eles serem superiores a 2-C baixo. Os multiversos/universos de branas são muito mais complexos e algumas cosmologias funcionam de maneira que um único paradoxo de tempo pode realmente criar estruturas inteiras de tamanho 1-A.
De qualquer forma, concordo com Reiner que devemos nos acalmar e tentar manter o foco em encontrar aspectos positivos e não tentar provar os negativos. Embora já tenhamos decidido e o próximo projeto seja fazer o blog para explicar os motivos dos universos de tamanho baixo de 2-C e abordar os contra-argumentos comumente feitos contra eles.
Those discussion links were about if universes are separate separate spacetimes in dragonball despite being in the single timeline which seems to be the conclusion as well. All that is left is what should be the justification to put on the profile to explain that they're separate spacetime's.
Yeah it is, but what seems to be rejected is that he'll, heaven and mortal realm aren't separate spacetime's.
Last topic was rejected, we proved that the Universes have space-time separated from each other, there are dimensional barriers separating and dimensions, the Universes take low 2-C and 2-C timeline with all cosmology take 2-BWhat thread is this in reference to?
I personally in agreement with @DarkDragonMedeus, we shouldn't use non canon things to define canon cosmology. Although, if there is something in manga or canon anime. Then there shouldn't be any problem.I called you over to go take a look if only Universe could take 2-C with GT cosmology which is a canonical line for weakling, according to Akira toriyama, he poses as a dimension different from the manga, also other movies are dimension different from Akira toriyama's manga, that was it for now
even with Akira toriyama revising the entire plot of the movies and anime, and changing the names?I personally in agreement with @DarkDragonMedeus, we shouldn't use non canon things to define canon cosmology. Although, if there is something in manga or canon anime. Then there shouldn't be any problem.
What does that have to do with anything?even with Akira toriyama revising the entire plot of the movies and anime, and changing the names?
To further add to the evidence presented here. The evidence that was provided awhile ago about Hell and Heaven being inaccessible by normal methods of travel.Can someone clarify as to what the currently accepted DB cosmology is with the relevant discussion threads linked? All I see on the main verse page is the following:
The full DB cosmology scales to 2-B due to countless timelines existing within the cosmology. Trunks cites that each action in a timeline creates a new timeline. He states that there’s a timeline where Goku is alive and a timeline where he is dead listing the endless possibilities. (Approved in this thread.) Heaven is also stated to be as big as a universe multiple times. Hell is stated to be even bigger than Heaven, so that would mean it’s as a big as a universe too.
I should note, there is a difference between secondary canon and non-canon. Guidebooks and general statements by Toriyama and other Dragon Ball staff are secondary canon. But GT exclusive statements or Toei Anime filler statements are non-canon.I personally in agreement with @DarkDragonMedeus, we shouldn't use non canon things to define canon cosmology. Although, if there is something in manga or canon anime. Then there shouldn't be any problem.
That’s referring to the countless timelines and that just refers to the 3D size so it doesn’t have any relevance in this topicCan someone clarify as to what the currently accepted DB cosmology is with the relevant discussion threads linked? All I see on the main verse page is the following:
The full DB cosmology scales to 2-B due to countless timelines existing within the cosmology. Trunks cites that each action in a timeline creates a new timeline. He states that there’s a timeline where Goku is alive and a timeline where he is dead listing the endless possibilities. (Approved in this thread.) Heaven is also stated to be as big as a universe multiple times. Hell is stated to be even bigger than Heaven, so that would mean it’s as a big as a universe too.
He said perhaps I wasn’t considered part of the universe because I was in another dimension which implies that it only reached the living realm since there’s not really any other proof it reached any other realmI do want to ask a question, Frieza stated that the dimension wasn't considered part of the "universe" right so wouldn't that mean that dimensions in general are considered outside of the "universe" as well, possibly including stuff like the demon realm
Here you go. xDbruhh, @Zamasu_Chan deleted his blog so i can't use many good thing from it, However @Maverick_Zero_X has his own DBS Cosmology Blog, which i think can be used, just need to update it and release it as a cosmology page
I suppose I can lend a hand if I'm not too busyWould any of you be willing to collaborate with this project?
I think it looks good, if you want information about the dimension that Brolly and Gogeta destroyed I can help
Having the 2 realms as just as big as the observable universe is kinda of a lowball considering afterlife has 2 structures that should been universal size in it so I think that the afterlife should be counted as the size of twice the observable universe and the living realm as well and then kaioshin realm being a tenth of thatbruhh, @Zamasu_Chan deleted his blog so i can't use many good thing from it, However @Maverick_Zero_X has his own DBS Cosmology Blog, which i think can be used, just need to update it and release it as a cosmology page