- 8,858
- 4,133
This is getting goofy, it is literally explained how they are greater than dimensions, and you are saying that R>F is based on...Dimensions?
-
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.
(Gurren Lagann 1-A/ H1-A+ upgrade) Don’t believe in yourself. Believe in the upgrade that believes in you!
- Thread starter Wankbreaker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 1-a gurren lagann high 1-a+
- 12,468
- 5,656
- 20,087
- 10,877
@Livinmeme In what way is that expanded upon, because a statement like that isn't enough for 1-A without elaborations on what they mean by being greater. It's the same reason why we don't automatically assume being greater than time is enough for immeasurable speeds unless elaborated that they're capable of literally moving through time itself.
You mean the same R>F stuff that has a 2-D to 3-D world being verbatim stated as a reference? The same thing that's literally defined under dimensions itself? Because unless you can prove that what GL's definition of dimensions does not correlate with what our definition of spatial dimensions are (which doesn't seem to be the case given literally the entire blog explaining the franchise's High 1-C stats says as much), this is flimsy evidence for 1-A, and especially High 1-A+ as barely any of this has any evidence to being on that level.
You mean the same R>F stuff that has a 2-D to 3-D world being verbatim stated as a reference? The same thing that's literally defined under dimensions itself? Because unless you can prove that what GL's definition of dimensions does not correlate with what our definition of spatial dimensions are (which doesn't seem to be the case given literally the entire blog explaining the franchise's High 1-C stats says as much), this is flimsy evidence for 1-A, and especially High 1-A+ as barely any of this has any evidence to being on that level.
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #124
I’m looking at the faq, and such statements are automatically at least low 1-a, when anti feats exist barring them from 1-A.
- 11,617
- 10,815
I am neither in favor of disfavor of the OP, but trying to use the galaxies and other "official" measurements to say that TTGL/STTGL are some measurable things is pretty stupid.
The galaxies are not even real galaxies. They're meant to represent entire universes, and they're within an (at least) 11-dimensional space.
And measurements are just blatantly stupid for many reasons. If they are bigger than literal universes within an 11-dimensional space then they just make no sense and can be dismissed quite easily as a result. You could also just make the argument that these are measurements from the perspective of these (at least) higher-dimensional entities.
This was a similar argument to the one that was made in one of the Last Boss threads as well.
The galaxies are not even real galaxies. They're meant to represent entire universes, and they're within an (at least) 11-dimensional space.
And measurements are just blatantly stupid for many reasons. If they are bigger than literal universes within an 11-dimensional space then they just make no sense and can be dismissed quite easily as a result. You could also just make the argument that these are measurements from the perspective of these (at least) higher-dimensional entities.
This was a similar argument to the one that was made in one of the Last Boss threads as well.
- 8,858
- 4,133
You can't be greater than something while stile operating on that something, is like living in a house which you is smaller than you are (also, you know very well than that is just supporting feat for the r>f feat)
- 11,617
- 10,815
For 1, this is possible with 11-dimensional powers. This doesn't necessitate a R>F relationship. If I have 11-D power then naturally I could create 2-D worlds beneath me.
For 2, the fact that they are relating these gaps to dimensionality differences, in a verse where "dimension" is actually used in the (relatively) proper manner, serves as a big anti-feat.
This is not good evidence.
Uh, no.
If the TTGL is only 11-D, then the force that holds it together would be 11-D as well. If a cosmology is 2-A, then its source would be "2-A." Not really understand this jump you're making.
You need to first prove that holding the "universe" and "life forms" together necessitates a 1-A energy source. To do that you'd need to prove the universe/life-forms are 1-A, or at least something like Low 1-A, to where you can argue that the source is qualitatively beyond its resultants.
At best would be Low 1-A but you'd need to provide a good reason to take this as literally as possible given the other context of the series.
Same as above.
Hyperbole.
Gurren Laggan exist within a probabilistic multiverse. The probabilities only extend up to the scale of the series itself. So if the verse is 1-A, then there are infinite 1-A parallels. If the verse is 11-D, as it is currently accepted, there are infinite 11-D parallels (This is was is currently accepted for their scaling).
You are super extrapolating the statements.
- 2,737
- 1,620
As much as I’d love to see Simon fighting Galactus, The “10th and 11th dimensions” statement is a big anti-feat here, meaning it contradicts pretty much everything here.
I disagree
I don’t think that applies when anti-feats, hyperboles, inconsistencies, etc are around. Otherwise there would be a bunch of verses that would be Low 1-A by now
I disagree
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #129
If they were traditional dimensions, you can’t be “between” a dimension. That makes no logical sense
- 2,737
- 1,620
Things in fiction rarely make logical sense to begin with
Even if they weren’t traditional dimensions, that still doesn’t prove to be anything close to Low 1-A.
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #131
Except… being “between” a dimension CANNOT exist under a spatio-temporal framework. how do you even get half of time? Or half of depth?Things in fiction rarely make logical sense to begin with
How so?
The anti spiral has both a a-dimensional nature, and superiority to those things.
- 20,550
- 17,466
Brane dimensions are membranes holding smaller spaces. If it's between them it just means s it's jumping between those layers afaik.
- 2,737
- 1,620
It’s a brane cosmology dude
There are spaces In between encompassed dimensions
- 12,468
- 5,656
'set of dimensional axes' straight up denies any 1-A
- 2,737
- 1,620
Anyway, there are already 2 staff that disagree with this, so from what I remember I think this can be closed.
@Wankbreaker ^^^
'set of dimensional axes' straight up denies any 1-A
- 2,737
- 1,620
1-B is nowhere close to Low 1-A, let alone 1-A, especially when it’s made pretty clear that Gurren Lagann runs under brane cosmology.
Kirbonic_Pikmin
He/Him- 3,480
- 6,935
This statement was pulled from my blog which was treating Otoko Simon’s home universe and everything above it as an Outerversal realm, due to him creating a universe through the process of creating a fictional story through spiral energy. And thus it being the force that creates universes and binds them and their lifeforms together thus would be a 1A energy source. It obviously wouldn’t be a 1A energy source on its own if it was not forming a 1A realm and only an 11D realm.
I think some people are having misunderstandings / misgivings with some of the things in OP as they’re functionally looking at small snippets of the greater blog they’re being pulled from, but it is what it is. I would suggest people who are arguing against the OP to at least read the full blog it attached. I have no issues with people disagreeing with the foundations of the feat itself I suppose but I at least want there to be an understanding of the full arguments
Kirbonic_Pikmin
He/Him- 3,480
- 6,935
Also ultimately shouldn’t this thread be getting locked and held off until Ultima can look at it rather than immediately being clogged with 4 pages of conversation?
- 2,737
- 1,620
“Greater power than dimensions and time” Doesn’t mean anything on its own. It’s either extremely inconsistent with all the current scaling or is a hyperbole. Neither of them lead to Low 1-A lolI already addressed the WoG here. Nakashima said that the understanding of the multiverse changes with time, from 4D when the writers were kids to 11D by the time they were adults. Besides, Nakashima was the one who also wrote the Otoko series of Drama CDs where we got the 20D statements.
As for them being "constrained by dimensions", the novelization disproves that.
Kirbonic_Pikmin
He/Him- 3,480
- 6,935
And regardless of what goes on with Outer and above arguments, I think the verse should get a pretty simple and easy upgrade to 20D/Hyperversal due to the Otoko Simon stuff. In no way is the verse locked / tied to 11D by any means, and I think the greater cosmology being 20D should be blatant enough.
- 11,617
- 10,815
I have read through Kirbonic Pikmin's entire blog.
I can see where the arguments for 1-A come from, personally, but it's uncertain whether or not they would qualify.
The biggest issue, which Pikmin hasn't addressed, is the "2D" terminology used to refer to the fictional world.
The problem is that every time dimensionality is brought up, it is used in a literal sense. It even references string/brane cosmology and mathematical axes. Your very own blog brings this up.
This is a massive thorn in the side of the 1-A argument, because now you have to prove that they aren't just using the "fiction" aspect of this 2D world the wrong way.
You practically have to disregard the mathematical-ness of the dimensional statements, which are far more supported, in favor of the far less supported viewpoint required to make each dimension a R>F gap.
If you can address is somehow, I would be in favor of a possibly rating.
If not, then I must disagree.
I can see where the arguments for 1-A come from, personally, but it's uncertain whether or not they would qualify.
The biggest issue, which Pikmin hasn't addressed, is the "2D" terminology used to refer to the fictional world.
The problem is that every time dimensionality is brought up, it is used in a literal sense. It even references string/brane cosmology and mathematical axes. Your very own blog brings this up.
This is a massive thorn in the side of the 1-A argument, because now you have to prove that they aren't just using the "fiction" aspect of this 2D world the wrong way.
You practically have to disregard the mathematical-ness of the dimensional statements, which are far more supported, in favor of the far less supported viewpoint required to make each dimension a R>F gap.
If you can address is somehow, I would be in favor of a possibly rating.
If not, then I must disagree.
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #146
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #147
The statement you sent actually supports 1-A
- 521
- 893
I mean aren't like fractional dimensions a thing?
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #149
not that I’m aware of.
- 12,851
- 2,608
You mean like "6.5-D" or what? (Elaborate further plz)
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #151
Also, again, the opposition kindly presented to us that the higher layers operate under a completely DIFFERENT SET OF DIMENSIONS,which is one r>f feat cited in the blog.
- 20,087
- 10,877
@PonePoster Marvel literally has dimensions that are 6.2 and others that are just fractional and treated to be higher infinities, so yeah those do exist in fiction (as silly as it sounds).
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #153
the difference is those are implied to or directly exist within the fiction. TTGL does not have that (also see the above, I would like your thoughts on that.)
- 20,087
- 10,877
Doesn’t matter if TTGL doesn’t spell it out that they have fractional dimensions, it’s still something that can exist in fiction and existing between the 10th and 11th dimension for the anti spiral universe already implies such a concept exists for the series.
- 2,737
- 1,620
No it doesn’t. You are ignoring the fact that brane cosmology literally can’t be Low Outerversal-Outerversal. At best it Goes to High 1-B which isn’t the case for gurren lagann either, since the highest we’ve actually seen it go is 11-D and MAYBE 20-D if you think the statement brought up by Batman is valid (Which I’m not sure if it is, even for WoG bringing up things like out of the blue seems a bit iffy, especially when a strict cosmology was already established previously)
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #156
the layers are still directly said to have a entirely different set of dimensional axes,which is directly stated on the wikis r>f blog to be a 1-A feat,as they have no dimensional relation. no ifs or buts about that.
Dimensions not being actual “dimensions” isn’t new, see DC.
- 2,737
- 1,620
If they still have a set of dimensional axes AT ALL they aren’t Low 1-A, let alone 1-A. Nuff said
- 1,061
- 842
- Thread starter
- #158
- 8,858
- 4,133
Capshit is to inconsistent to be used to introduce standards, I mean, they can't even be consistent between itself.
- 2,737
- 1,620
