• 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.
The reasoning used in the blog seems to be reasonable enough, but if the Dimensional Gap is truly dimensionless, wouldn't that mean that it can't really be "infinitely bigger" than the realms it contains, on account of not having genuine size in the first place?

It'd still be able to scale to the maximum extent of the cosmology it contains, but technically speaking a direct quantitive comparison between the two would only be an analogy in that case.
 
The reasoning used in the blog seems to be reasonable enough, but if the Dimensional Gap is truly dimensionless, wouldn't that mean that it can't really be "infinitely bigger" than the realms it contains, on account of not having genuine size in the first place?

It'd still be able to scale to the maximum extent of the cosmology it contains, but technically speaking a direct quantitive comparison between the two would only be an analogy in that case.
Not exactly "dimensionless", closer to a higher dimension, it's beyond everything else. I don't think there's anything exactly against it being infinitely larger.
 
i can understand the only dimensions except for the isolation/creation dimensions for rating games. It’s the same concept with a few that just cause it has stars, we don’t know how big it is for all we know it could just be as big as the anime wants it to be or as big as they only want to make for the game itself. It would be an assumption to assume it’s much bigger then we think
 
i can understand the only dimensions except for the isolation/creation dimensions for rating games. It’s the same concept with a few that just cause it has stars, we don’t know how big it is for all we know it could just be as big as the anime wants it to be or as big as they only want to make for the game itself. It would be an assumption to assume it’s much bigger then we think
Rating Game fields are at most 4-A due to having multiple stars. Isolation Barrier is high 3-A due to its connection to the sacred gear system (Which I forgot to add :3) and its comparison to the Dimensional Gap.
 
Rating Game fields are at most 4-A due to having multiple stars. Isolation Barrier is high 3-A due to its connection to the sacred gear system (Which I forgot to add :3) and its comparison to the Dimensional Gap.
Still wouldn’t be considered as such for the rating games considering we don’t know how big of the dimension it is. There are actually a few series that had the same thing going on for them but it wasn’t accepted cause of the unknown size of the created dimension. That would also be like saying someone blowing up earth is 4-A cause we can see the stars in the sky
 
Still wouldn’t be considered as such for the rating games considering we don’t know how big of the dimension it is. There are actually a few series that had the same thing going on for them but it wasn’t accepted cause of the unknown size of the created dimension. That would also be like saying someone blowing up earth is 4-A cause we can see the stars in the sky
? Rating Game fields mean the dimension containing them, a dimension with a starry sky is 4-A regardless.
 
I said multiple times that you nees to prove those are actual stars bruhh, it is standard
Rating Game fields are recreations of real life places. Example: Volume 2:
[Hello everyone. I am Grayfia, a maid from the House of Gremory and today I will be the arbiter of the Rating match between the House of Gremory and the House of Phoenix.]

School broadcast? It’s Grayfia-san’s voice.

[In the name of my Master, Sirzechs Lucifer, I will be keeping my eye on this match. By using both Rias-sama and Riser-sama’s opinion, we created this battlefield which is a replica of the school, Kuoh Academy, which Rias-sama attends to in the human world.]

What! T-Then this clubroom is a replica? It’s exactly the same! The location of the furniture and even the scratches on the wall is the exact same so it really has a high reproduction of the real thing!
Example: Volume 5:
—At last, the game had begun!


The place we arrived at after jumping through the magic circle was—a place full of tables.

…This was a wide restaurant somewhere? When I thought that and looked at the surroundings, it seemed to be a dining floor, with fast-food restaurants surrounding the tables.

Was this also an exact replica of a real place, prepared in a space for our exclusive use? The power of devils was just as amazing as usual.

Do you have any evidence debunking this? Why wouldn't they be real?
 
YEah, there's no reason to assume they aren't real stars when evidence suggests that the creations within a rating game are in fact real, this isn't SAO where you could argue it'sa skybox
 
YEah, there's no reason to assume they aren't real stars when evidence suggests that the creations within a rating game are in fact real, this isn't SAO where you could argue it'sa skybox
At the same time, there are no reason to assume they are real stars, so.......default assumption will be the lowest, not highest interpretation. SAO have direct anti-evidences, DxD on the other hand, assumption in both way, so at best, if we being lenient, then a possibly rating, not a full-blown. Anymore complain i think you should bring it up in a Q&A about standard, or revise it, if standard change then it is fine by me
 
At the same time, there are no reason to assume they are real stars, so.......default assumption will be the lowest, not highest interpretation. SAO have direct anti-evidences, DxD on the other hand, assumption in both way, so at best, if we being lenient, then a possibly rating, not a full-blown. Anymore complain i think you should bring it up in a Q&A about standard, or revise it, if standard change then it is fine by me
I just provided evidence bro what.
 
At the same time, there are no reason to assume they are real stars, so.......default assumption will be the lowest, not highest interpretation. SAO have direct anti-evidences, DxD on the other hand, assumption in both way, so at best, if we being lenient, then a possibly rating, not a full-blown. Anymore complain i think you should bring it up in a Q&A about standard, or revise it, if standard change then it is fine by me
Okay, but what evidence is there to suggest the stars AREN'T real, like seriously is there anything beyond "The text did not very explicitly state that the stars in the Rating Game Field are real."

We have no evidence to suggest they aren't, and more reason to assume they are real. If I create a pocket dimension and the pocket dimension has stars that came with it, then one would assume I created those stars as well. We're not about to deny the thread on the reason that you think there's no actual stars.
 
YEah, there's no reason to assume they aren't real stars when evidence suggests that the creations within a rating game are in fact real, this isn't SAO where you could argue it'sa skybox
Then yeah u have to find evidence if they are real or not. Same reasoning on how big the rating game dimension is. We can’t just assume it’s as big as a universe or a solar system
 
Then yeah u have to find evidence if they are real or not. Same reasoning on how big the rating game dimension is. We can’t just assume it’s as big as a universe or a solar system
I'm not sure if people can see it or not but did I not literally just provide evidence? Is there an error or something?
 
I'm not sure if people can see it or not but did I not literally just provide evidence? Is there an error or something?
This is happening in the general discussion thread as well where you can't see what I linked, and both instances are me copying text from another site so I'm a bit worried.
 
Back
Top