- 12,524
- 3,492
Infinite dimensional is High 1-B. 1-A is transcending the very concept of dimensions. There doesn't necessarily need to be infinite dimensions in the verse to be 1-A.Immortalgodd said:
-
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.
Er-gen verse, 1-A downgrade discussion.
- Thread starter Ricsi-viragosi
- Start date
- Status
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #242
I mean, essence contains all shapes and space, but has no shape nor does it take up any space, so that would imply that it is beyond it.
But at the very least it is the conept of it, which would make transcending it 1-A still.
But at the very least it is the conept of it, which would make transcending it 1-A still.
- 9,528
- 1,825
Does the essence contain the concept of dimensions or does it just contain infinite dimensions
Deleted member 2530
Guest
Wow this is fun
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #246
I mean, it's counless dimensions, not infinite.Paul Frank said:
And the former.
And I'll have you know that transcending the latter is 1-A regardless.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #247
No. With that descritpion, it will be 1-B at least.Eganergo said:
- 2,029
- 317
I will elaborate.
All shapes and space means a universe with every creation inside it. has no shape nor does it take up any space mean the concept inside like space-time.
This description alone only qualify for low 2C, a 4 Dimensional universe. Transcending this concept would mean 5 Dimensional aka High 2A, unless the description specify spatial dimension which mean 1A.
All shapes and space means a universe with every creation inside it. has no shape nor does it take up any space mean the concept inside like space-time.
This description alone only qualify for low 2C, a 4 Dimensional universe. Transcending this concept would mean 5 Dimensional aka High 2A, unless the description specify spatial dimension which mean 1A.
- 9,528
- 1,825
Transcending infinite dimensions is not 1-A
Transcending the concept of dimensions is evidence for 1-A, what quotes specifically show that the essence contains the concept of dimensions
Transcending the concept of dimensions is evidence for 1-A, what quotes specifically show that the essence contains the concept of dimensions
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #250
So you are just going to ignore the 200 comments explaining how it is indeed spatial dimensions that "space" refers to?
- 1,900
- 484
Eganergo said:
We already covered the fact that there are a "countless/limitless" amount of dimensions, not just 4/5 lol.
- 32,359
- 20,299
This.Eganergo said:
- 1,900
- 484
Paul Frank said:
to quote Qawsedf: The "simplest" way would be to transcend a multiverse with infinite geometric dimensions. Marvel and Dungeons and Dragons are 1-A for that reason.
So yes, that counts. The issue is that we can only make a case for 1-B, not high 1-B, because countless/limitless =/= infinite
- 1,900
- 484
How is "it has countless spatial dimensions" so hard to comprehend?Eganergo said:
@Matt dont just say "this". You never bothered making any points past those 2 opening statements, which we all covered. Elaborate or think of something new!
- 638
- 64
*Give the quote* intesifies.Matthew Schroeder said:
- 32,359
- 20,299
Clueless, please stop being so aggressive. I argued heavily throughout the whole first thread. Nothing proves spatial dimensions beyond a literalist read of the term "dimensional spaces" which blatantly refers to parallel dimensions when you look at the scans.
- 20,623
- 17,631
To just, quote the section on the tiering page
Note that all tier 1-A characters have qualitative superiority over dimensional structures and concepts. Also, mere capability to exist in a beyond dimensional domain does not qualify a character as a beyond dimensional being.
There are two options in order to qualify for this tier: There should either be a qualitative superiority over infinite dimensions; or the superiority over the concept of dimensions (in general) should be clearly explained.
The former is much easier to prove/explain. Just be above ∞ dimensions. The latter is harder since transcending the multiverse doesn't always equal to being above the concept of dimensions.
Note that all tier 1-A characters have qualitative superiority over dimensional structures and concepts. Also, mere capability to exist in a beyond dimensional domain does not qualify a character as a beyond dimensional being.
There are two options in order to qualify for this tier: There should either be a qualitative superiority over infinite dimensions; or the superiority over the concept of dimensions (in general) should be clearly explained.
The former is much easier to prove/explain. Just be above ∞ dimensions. The latter is harder since transcending the multiverse doesn't always equal to being above the concept of dimensions.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #262
Don't you go ninja'ing me, Flower.
And I think you missed the part where essence can be used to change somethings dimensionality Ega. Or the part where "Space", which as pointed out is "countless" dimensional, is part of essence.
And I think you missed the part where essence can be used to change somethings dimensionality Ega. Or the part where "Space", which as pointed out is "countless" dimensional, is part of essence.
- 1,900
- 484
Aggressive? Me? Where? Pls bold that part for me, so I can see it. By now I am laughing about all of this xDMatthew Schroeder said:
Edit: We still dont know where you would get the idea from, that those are parallel universes. You'd need A LOT of imagination to read that, completely disregarding the context on top of that xD
- 1,154
- 659
Qwas : "I didn't say it was valid, just that saying "We debunked it" won't really get anywhere. To my understanding the majority of the mods that have commented here agree with the 1-B rating, so they should at least be that level.Matthew Schroeder said:
1-A is a different story, but I think 1-B has some solid bases."
And Matt, we also argued heavily thro both thread, and countered your.............arguments. So if you use nothing new it's gonna be at least 1-B.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #265
No. You are blatantly wrong.Matthew Schroeder said:
It physically cannot be alternate universes because Meng could neither see outside of the universe he was within, adding a universe to a circle doesn't make it a sphere, "each of different sizes" makes no sense when there are infinite parallel dimensions each = to the other, and the best part, because by your logic width, lenght and height are universes.
But please, please for ******* god's sake, quote that dammned scan that you didn't even understand half of when you started this revisions, I'm sure we just all missed it.
- 32,359
- 20,299
Now people are just insulting me, specially Clueless. The more this goes on the less I see a serious debate happening and more just attempts to stonewall me and bury me through group effort.
Deleted member 2530
Guest
The parallel universe should refer to other multiverses apart from Vast Expanse that existed in a higher plane than it.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #268
Your opinion doesn't matter on it's own.Matthew Schroeder said:
The facts supporting your opinion do.
Facts that you do not give. After asking you over and over to give the nebolous scan that apparently proves us all wrong, you fail to give us, and you plain out ignoring our arguments, acting shocked by hostility either paints you as extremely naive or really disingenuous and trying to pull a "I'm just sharing my opinion but everyone is a bully". I tried to be amicable with you, and I told others to not be aggressive. You ignored me.
So Matt, since you apparently protected your opinion extremely well, then quote those defences. Maybe the wiki bugged out and I didn't see them.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #269
Vast Expanse is never even mentied there.Immortalgodd said:
- 8,953
- 9,491
Matt, with all due respect, youre not helping this thread at all. If your contribution to this thread continues to only consist of vague "I dont see it"'s and "no its not"'s it would be really better if you withdraw for now.
The opposition asked multiple times for you to elaborate what the problem with their evidence is. But instead of actually elaborating, youre dropping one liners that do not contribute to the topic at hand at all. Do you actually want this topic to be concluded without another full thread or do you just want to shove your opinion down everyones throat and force your view on this verse onto the wiki with no one else (Like you know, people who actually read the series) being able to at least discuss it out properly?
I know i know, youre probably really busy with so many things on wiki and of wiki. But if thats the case then let this one rest, wait till youre actually ready to debate it out. If you being stressed leads to you calling the other side as stone walls just because they want an actual discussion then just stop participating. Especially when youre the actual stone wall in this discussion.
I dont say that your opinion is invalid or anything. I believe that if you actually discuss we would reach to a satisfying conclusion. Ant dosnt values your opinion so highly for nothing. But as it stands now, i dont see any of that here.
The opposition asked multiple times for you to elaborate what the problem with their evidence is. But instead of actually elaborating, youre dropping one liners that do not contribute to the topic at hand at all. Do you actually want this topic to be concluded without another full thread or do you just want to shove your opinion down everyones throat and force your view on this verse onto the wiki with no one else (Like you know, people who actually read the series) being able to at least discuss it out properly?
I know i know, youre probably really busy with so many things on wiki and of wiki. But if thats the case then let this one rest, wait till youre actually ready to debate it out. If you being stressed leads to you calling the other side as stone walls just because they want an actual discussion then just stop participating. Especially when youre the actual stone wall in this discussion.
I dont say that your opinion is invalid or anything. I believe that if you actually discuss we would reach to a satisfying conclusion. Ant dosnt values your opinion so highly for nothing. But as it stands now, i dont see any of that here.
- 32,359
- 20,299
I don't think I'm a stone wall. All I ever ask here is for clear evidence for the points, but all I'm treated to are the same, same, same handful of quotes everytime, which are treated as being self-evident, when nobody really bothers to answer my original gripes with them. Shall I just copypaste my OP and hope people notice it now? Because otherwise I don't think it gets anywhere.
Plus, the severe, repeated, tiring attempts to shut me down completely and steamroll through me are awful. I've never seen a fanbase so aggressive on this wiki before.
Plus, the severe, repeated, tiring attempts to shut me down completely and steamroll through me are awful. I've never seen a fanbase so aggressive on this wiki before.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #272
Matthew Schroeder said:
- 1,154
- 659
Matt, if multiple mods are rebutting you, you should begin to realise you're actually "some" of the problem, no offense. We gave you clear evidence that basically every mod here agrees on. And if you don't agree? No problem man, this is what a debate is : Just give us a reasonable explanation and rebuttals instead of headcanons and "I don't see this". Ric asked you fourtee times now, no wonder even the super polite him almost went mad as well.
- 1,900
- 484
1. YES! PLS COPY ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS HERE! THATS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR!Matthew Schroeder said:
2. What? You are the guy, who complains that the verse isn't downgraded yet, with every 2nd post he makes lol You try to push a downgrade like crazy and whenever we bring a new quote/try to explain it, you just go "Nope!"
- 8,953
- 9,491
Everyone else:
Stop this instantly. No side should start to throw Ad homiens at each other over such a silly thing as online debates. Stay civil. You aint getting your points across by grouping on Matt and repeating yourself over and over again. It just clutter the read.
I have an idea. One or 2 of you of your choosing and Matt will debate this calmy and slowly in this thread. Every supporter goes to the respective sides wall and input there.
Matt clearly feels buried under by the sheer amount of people he has to adress so you should do him the courtesy and respect that.
Try to get every point you want to make in a single post to not clutter this already way to big thread with more. Adress each others post point for point.
No spamming, no snarky comments, no one liners. Calmy and civil like god damn adults ok?
Stop this instantly. No side should start to throw Ad homiens at each other over such a silly thing as online debates. Stay civil. You aint getting your points across by grouping on Matt and repeating yourself over and over again. It just clutter the read.
I have an idea. One or 2 of you of your choosing and Matt will debate this calmy and slowly in this thread. Every supporter goes to the respective sides wall and input there.
Matt clearly feels buried under by the sheer amount of people he has to adress so you should do him the courtesy and respect that.
Try to get every point you want to make in a single post to not clutter this already way to big thread with more. Adress each others post point for point.
No spamming, no snarky comments, no one liners. Calmy and civil like god damn adults ok?
- 12,524
- 3,492
- 32,359
- 20,299
Also.
"A normal Universe is all time and space, and the energy and matter contained therein. A space that encloses all matter and radiation. Also includes all living creatures and all things. So, 3-D plus space-time make a 4-D. And as it's proven there are infinite similar Universes 5-D then there is also the time-axis so 6-D. Then there is is the infinite dimensional spaces which copy all of this 7-D. Vast Expanse containing it all and being a superior realm is 8-D plus it another great qualitative change going beyond it. So, Vast Expanse is an 8-D Multiverse."
There is so much wrong with this claim from one of the revision threads that I don't even know where to beign. You don't get 6D just by having infinite universes with different space times. And adding infinite more parallel dimensions won't get you there either. The Vast Expanse containing this all only has to be 5D. That's all that's necessary.
Funnily enough, going by the same Content Revision, the highest layer of reality in the verse is simply described as so large that the Vast Expanse is just a seed inside it.
So really, ISSTH is only Low 1-C from what I'm seeing.
Also I'm seriously doubting the whole "Spatial Dimensions" feats given everything I see in the series proper via the scans treats them as parallel realities.
And how the hell does any profile from such an obscure series get away with little to no scans proving any of the hundreds of abilities the guy supposedly has?
"A normal Universe is all time and space, and the energy and matter contained therein. A space that encloses all matter and radiation. Also includes all living creatures and all things. So, 3-D plus space-time make a 4-D. And as it's proven there are infinite similar Universes 5-D then there is also the time-axis so 6-D. Then there is is the infinite dimensional spaces which copy all of this 7-D. Vast Expanse containing it all and being a superior realm is 8-D plus it another great qualitative change going beyond it. So, Vast Expanse is an 8-D Multiverse."
There is so much wrong with this claim from one of the revision threads that I don't even know where to beign. You don't get 6D just by having infinite universes with different space times. And adding infinite more parallel dimensions won't get you there either. The Vast Expanse containing this all only has to be 5D. That's all that's necessary.
Funnily enough, going by the same Content Revision, the highest layer of reality in the verse is simply described as so large that the Vast Expanse is just a seed inside it.
So really, ISSTH is only Low 1-C from what I'm seeing.
Also I'm seriously doubting the whole "Spatial Dimensions" feats given everything I see in the series proper via the scans treats them as parallel realities.
And how the hell does any profile from such an obscure series get away with little to no scans proving any of the hundreds of abilities the guy supposedly has?
- 32,359
- 20,299
Maybe best not to make a profile like this out of the blue if that was the case.
Also, if you look at the context, the scan which supposedly proves spatial dimensions is just the guy being awed at the size of a multiverse. He's specifically talking about how big everything is, not about dimensional axis.[
The context is talking about the Vast Expanse, which is described as being made of "many worlds and realms". Other scans talk about it being "filled with possibilities".
So yes, it seems far more likely that ambiguity arrived through the Chinese - English translation than the author actually going for spatial dimensions.
Also, if you look at the context, the scan which supposedly proves spatial dimensions is just the guy being awed at the size of a multiverse. He's specifically talking about how big everything is, not about dimensional axis.[
The context is talking about the Vast Expanse, which is described as being made of "many worlds and realms". Other scans talk about it being "filled with possibilities".
So yes, it seems far more likely that ambiguity arrived through the Chinese - English translation than the author actually going for spatial dimensions.
- 26,160
- 3,654
- Thread starter
- #279
I can agree to that, yes.
If he actually takes my responses and responds to each part, it would be peachy.
If he actually takes my responses and responds to each part, it would be peachy.
- 1,900
- 484
I nominate Ricsi then. Who wants to be the other debater?
- Status
Similar threads
