-
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.
GetBackers AP rather small revision.
- Thread starter Firephoenixearl
- Start date
- 10,502
- 11,574
Because it would imply the existence of an infinite path with both a beginning and an end. To use your example to demonstrate why that doesn't work:Firephoenixearl said:
I get up is v_1.
I go to school is v_2.
Between v1 and v_2 is a path that passes through all events (vertices) that happen in between. You say between any event on this path and v_2 there is another event.
Now, per definition of a path ending in v_2, there must be exactly one edge ending in v_2. In which vertex does this edge start, though? Let's assume v_3 is that vertex. So {v_3,v_2} is an edge on the path. However, between any event and v_2 is another event on the path. So there exists a vertex that is between v_3 and v_2 on the path. Therefore v_3 can't have an edge to v_2 on the path. Contradiction to the assumption that {v_3,v_2} is an edge on the path.
Since v_3 was arbitrarily chosen we gain the same contradiction no matter which vertex we take.
Hence assuming there is a path between v_1 and v_2, with a vertex between any vertex and v_2, leads to contradiction and can hence not be the case.
However, if no path exists between v_1 and v_2, then the graph is not connected and hence by definition not a tree. So either there is a path with finite vertices between and v_1 and v_2 or it isn't a tree.
"World" is a term that can apply to many things. E.g. a timeline. You can, for instance, say the world is built from 3 dimensions of space and one dimension of time.
- The context: This was Ginji's mom talking about how Ginji (who died in the real world which is what lead to her creating the virtual world) is a byproduct of the world's events and can never be the same ginji, just a biological clone at best. So she was talking about how the people are "built".
About the multiple events existing simultaneously it would still leave the entirety with infinite events.
Not necessarily more than countably infinite many, though.
- 15,918
- 2,681
I agree with the OP, seems to make way more sense than DT.
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #45
I will rather avoid the first part of the debate as if we keep arguing on that level, we will just be digging a rabbit hole for no reason, somehow assuming the author is a scientist rather than a story teller.
I don't see how that contradicts things. If it's a general explanation of how the world, and its people, are build it doesn't need to apply specifically to the past to have relevance.
It's because she is talking about a dead person. Her "ginji" is already dead and she's talking about how replicating him is impossible. She's talking about the past in there because the context was a dead person being unable to be perfectly replicated.
Not necessarily more than countably infinite many, though.
I mean, i am not arguing for uncountably infinite possibilities though.
Yes but even in your example, the world is "built", it is already built from those, it is not being build in 4 dimensions, it's a state that already exists currently due to having been achieved in the past therefore it is an already completed action for the present. And precisely that is why "the world is built on infinite coincidences" indicates 2-A, as it doesn't say it will eventually lead to infinity, it's saying it currently has infinity.DontTalkDT said:
I don't see how that contradicts things. If it's a general explanation of how the world, and its people, are build it doesn't need to apply specifically to the past to have relevance.
It's because she is talking about a dead person. Her "ginji" is already dead and she's talking about how replicating him is impossible. She's talking about the past in there because the context was a dead person being unable to be perfectly replicated.
Not necessarily more than countably infinite many, though.
I mean, i am not arguing for uncountably infinite possibilities though.
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #46
Bump
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #47
Bump
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #49
Bump
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #51
I already asked DT, i am unsure if Agnaa would be willing to help out though. He has expressed that he would rather avoid debating with me. But i'll ask him either way.
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #55
Outside of the ones that have already commented i don't think so.
LordGriffin is usually reliable regarding GetBackers, but he already commented and agreed on the first 2 (which i'd say are already agreed as changes seeing as DMUA and several others have agreed) and stated that he is not knowledgeable on the 3rd (since it regards more the tiering system than it regards GB as there is no context past the statement that's already in the OP).
Ionsite already commented agreeing with the 3rd topic. There is DT who is not answering leaving the debate on a bit of confusion as his last post stated that he disagreed for "more than countably infinite" which was never the argument.
So i am unsure as to who else i could ask. I also posted this CRT on the discord server several times too.
LordGriffin is usually reliable regarding GetBackers, but he already commented and agreed on the first 2 (which i'd say are already agreed as changes seeing as DMUA and several others have agreed) and stated that he is not knowledgeable on the 3rd (since it regards more the tiering system than it regards GB as there is no context past the statement that's already in the OP).
Ionsite already commented agreeing with the 3rd topic. There is DT who is not answering leaving the debate on a bit of confusion as his last post stated that he disagreed for "more than countably infinite" which was never the argument.
So i am unsure as to who else i could ask. I also posted this CRT on the discord server several times too.
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #57
About the 3rd i feel like i should continue debating with DT...if he ever comes back.
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #59
Yes if possible. This is because the 3rd point has nothing to "apply", as it is just how high into 2-A. So it's more a thing for debates rather than something for the profiles. So yes i'd like to apply them. Pages that need to be updated:
Ginji Amano
Ban Midou
Akabane Kuroudo
Der Kaiser
The Witch Quee
The Voodoo King
Ginji Amano
Ban Midou
Akabane Kuroudo
Der Kaiser
The Witch Quee
The Voodoo King
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #61
Ok i believe i am done. You can remove my rights. (Sounds a bit weird out of context)
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #63
Bump
- 13,731
- 3,682
The 2-A stuff in the OP seems to make sense
- 20,504
- 1,587
- Thread starter
- #65
Bump
- 15,918
- 2,681
The third one hasn't been rejected tho, it's still being discussed. Or rather, would still be discussed if DT cared to answer.Antvasima said:
