How does Outerversal work?

[Reiner04]

I know this, didn't by description of it explain it well? And again, how does this relate with dimensionality?

Okay, this is all I can do, Think of as 1D lines as "countable infinities" and 2D axis as "uncountable infinite".

No matter how many 1D line you'll take, same as no matter how many countable infinities you will take, it will always have 0d within 2D plane since it doesn't have length in 2D axis. Unless uncountable infinite amounts of 1D which will be so large that it will get the length. Ig that's imaginable? That's the kind of thing happening here

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Okay, this is all I can do, Think of as 1D lines as "countable infinities" and 2D axis as "uncountable infinite".

No matter how many 1D line you'll take, same as no matter how many countable infinities you will take, it will always have 0d within 2D plane since it doesn't have length in 2D axis. Unless uncountable infinite amounts of 1D which will be so large that it will get the length. Ig that's imaginable? That's the kind of thing happening here

Ok I think I understand now, I'll be good if I just watch one more vid (I think.)
But to keep it short, is transcending High 1-B really enough for Low 1-A? And is Low 1-A what the tiering system is referring to when it says that Outerversal is unaffected by any form of heriachy?

 

[Reiner04]

Ok I think I understand now, I'll be good if I just watch one more vid (I think.)
But to keep it short, is transcending High 1-B really enough for Low 1-A? And is Low 1-A what the tiering system is referring to when it says that Outerversal is unaffected by any form of heriachy?

Low 1-A = uncountable infinite amounts of high 1B or aleph 1 high 1B structures. It means if Low 1-A is 2D then high 1-B is 1D for it (the difference here is this big). Powerset of high 1-B.

1-A = aleph 2 amount of dimensions or uncountable amount of Low 1-A structures. Power set of Low 1-A. If 1-A is 2D here than Low 1-A is 1D. and then it has layers of it like aleph 3 amount of dimensions, aleph 4, aleph 5,... etc. Same as high 1B has infinite amounts of dimensions.

High 1-A = inaccessible cardinal or K, if there exist "a" such that a < K then 2^a < K. K is inaccessible cardinal which cannot be reached by below even with countable or uncountable number of them. It's logical framework is beyond the 1-A and Low 1-A relation. 0-inaccesible.

Tier 0 = inaccessible to High 1-A in the same way High 1-A is inaccessible for 1-A. 1-inaccesible.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Wait I thought you can just achieve aleph 1 by just transcending high 1-B?

Not always. You need to be Inaccessibly higher.

What do you mean infinite set composed of infinite arrays

An array is a set of numbers in different orders. Which is an Aleph-1, a set composed of all natural sets.

Then what is dimensionality used for in boundless tiering?

A strong Inaccessible cardinal.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Low 1-A = uncountable infinite amounts of high 1B or aleph 1 high 1B structures. It means if Low 1-A is 2D then high 1-B is 1D for it (the difference here is this big). Powerset of high 1-B.

1-A = aleph 2 amount of dimensions or uncountable amount of Low 1-A structures. Power set of Low 1-A. If 1-A is 2D here than Low 1-A is 1D. and then it has layers of it like aleph 3 amount of dimensions, aleph 4, aleph 5,... etc. Same as high 1B has infinite amounts of dimensions.

So basiclly transcending high 1-b is low 1-a and transcending infinite layers into low 1-a is 1-A?

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Not always. You need to be Inaccessibly higher.

can you give an example to how transcending high 1-B isn't low 1-A?

A strong Inaccessible cardinal.

How does that differ from actual dimensionalty

 

[Qawsedf234]

can you give an example to how transcending high 1-B isn't low 1-A?

Characters or objects that can affect structures with a number of dimensions greater than the set of natural numbers, meaning in simple terms that the number of dimensions is aleph-1 (An uncountably infinite number, assumed to be the cardinality of the real numbers themselves), and therefore that such objects fully exceed High 1-B structures, which have only a countably infinite number of dimensions. More information on the concept is available on this page.

Note that, if the High 1-B structure in question is a hierarchy of levels of existence, then simply being at the top of such a hierarchy does not qualify a character for this tier without more context, and an additional layer added on top of the "infinity-th" level of this hierarchy is likewise not enough. To qualify as an equivalent of the above description, they need to surpass the hierarchy as a whole, and not simply be on another level within it.

Q: How do cardinal numbers relate to tiering?
A: Firstly, it should be highlighted that asking about the tier of a cardinal number is effectively a meaningless question when the quantity which it is denoting is not specified in the question as well, and makes as much sense as asking "What tier is the number 8?"

Let's take the smallest infinite cardinal (aleph-0, or ℵ0, the cardinality of countably infinite sets) as an example in this case: A set comprised of a countably infinite number of 0-dimensional points is itself a 0-dimensional space under the usual notions of dimensionality, being thus still infinitely small. Meanwhile, a countably infinite number of planets is High 3-A, a countably infinite number of universes 2-A, and countably infinite dimensions High 1-B.

We then move on to the power set of ℵ0, P(ℵ0), which is an uncountably infinite quantity and represents the set of all the ways in which you can arrange the elements of a set whose cardinality is the former, and is also equal to the size of the set of all real numbers. In terms of points, one can say that everything from 1-dimensional space to (countably) infinite-dimensional space falls under it, as all of these spaces have the same number of elements (coordinates, in this case), in spite of each being infinitely larger than the preceding one by the intuitive notions of size that we regularly utilize (Area, Volume, etc)

On the other hand, an P(ℵ0) number of universes is Low 1-C, and a similar number of spatial dimensions/layers of reality is Low 1-A

However, the same does not necessarily apply when approaching sets of higher cardinalities than this (Such as P(P(ℵ0)), the power set of the power set of aleph-0), as they would be strictly bigger than all of the spaces mentioned above, by all rigorous notions of size, regardless of what their elements are. From this point and onwards, all such sets are Low 1-A at minimum.

Do note, however, that these infinities must specifically refer to elements that physically exist within a verse's cosmology. Them existing as in-universe mathematical concepts is not sufficient for anything to scale to them, unless there is a direct comparision that allows scaling
to be made.

It's about power sets. Being stronger or a layer higher than High 1-B isn't enough. You have to transcend it in a way that you're comparable to a power set of infinite dimensions.

How does that differ from actual dimensionalty

A Inaccessible cardinal is the larger aspect of set theory. It has nothing to do with dimensionality other than a way to theoretically count dimensional space

 

[KingNanaya]

I should be taking notes fr fr

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

It's about power sets. Being stronger or a layer higher than High 1-B isn't enough. You have to transcend it in a way that you're comparable to a power set of infinite dimensions.

example in fiction cuz I'm confused

A Inaccessible cardinal is the larger aspect of set theory. It has nothing to do with dimensionality other than a way to theoretically count dimensional space

isn't that dealing with dimensionality?

 

[Qawsedf234]

example in fiction cuz I'm confused

The Warp

The Warp is a strange and terrible place. You might as well throw a traveller into a sea of sharks and tell him to swim home as send him through the Warp unprotected. Better it is not to let common man travel through the stars. Better still, let him not know such a thing is feasible.Fra Safrane...

vsbattles.fandom.com

isn't that dealing with dimensionality?

The tiering system is a counting set of the number of dimensions something had from Tier 2 on. But set theory is just how you can organize numbers.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

The Warp

The Warp is a strange and terrible place. You might as well throw a traveller into a sea of sharks and tell him to swim home as send him through the Warp unprotected. Better it is not to let common man travel through the stars. Better still, let him not know such a thing is feasible.Fra Safrane...

vsbattles.fandom.com

How is that a good example?

 

[Qawsedf234]

How is that a good example?

The warp can have multiple independent sections that have infinite dimensions that are contained in a still infinitely larger space. So Low 1-A.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

The warp can have multiple independent sections that have infinite dimensions that are contained in a still infinitely larger space. So Low 1-A.

So, after thinking about it. Is this explanation correct?

Countably infinite spatial dimensions is High 1-B, through this it is established through ℵ0, and aleph 1 can contain an infinite array of Aleph-0 Dimensions, and transcends all notions of a High 1-B hierarchy in the sense it encompasses all of it, and this doesn't work simply by transcending High 1-B, an example of this is this

the first layer should scale to High Hyperversal because infinte spatial dimensions and since the second layer of reality transcends that, that makes the second layer Low Outerversal

Here the second layer of reality is literally just an additional layer above the pre existing infinite hierarchy, which is still high 1B. You need to prove the entire infinite hierarchy and all of its extensions are encompassed within the second layer, which would pretty much make the second layer an aleph-1 hierarchy of layers which is low 1A.

Is this correct?

Also going back to +1 thing of being beyond concepts. I just saw stuff like "being beyond dimensions" to just be considered a NLF and +1 dimension, what about the concepts? When was tht ever stated

 

[Qawsedf234]

Also going back to +1 thing of being beyond concepts. I just saw stuff like "being beyond dimensions" to just be considered a NLF and +1 dimension, what about the concepts? When was tht ever stated

Yeah

Do note, however, that these infinities must specifically refer to elements that physically exist within a verse's cosmology. Them existing as in-universe mathematical concepts is not sufficient for anything to scale to them, unless there is a direct comparision that allows scaling to be made.

Q: Is predating the concepts of space and time an 1-A feat?​

A: No. As said above, predating a certain concept does not necessarily imply any form of superiority over it, especially not to the degree where it warrants an 1-A rating.

Transcending a concept on a universal/multiversal scale is like being above time or dimensionality. It's just cosmology +1.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Do note, however, that these infinities must specifically refer to elements that physically exist within a verse's cosmology. Them existing as in-universe mathematical concepts is not sufficient for anything to scale to them, unless there is a direct comparision that allows scaling to be made

How does this support concepts being transcended? And does the transcending dimensions stuff support this? How?

Q: Is predating the concepts of space and time an 1-A feat?​

A: No. As said above, predating a certain concept does not necessarily imply any form of superiority over it, especially not to the degree where it warrants an 1-A rating.

Same thing, also you didn't respond to my explanation for High 1-B and Outer, does that mean you agree?

 

[Qawsedf234]

How does this support concepts being transcended?

Because they're elements within a franchises cosmology. Concepts are not 1-A or higher in the wiki. They only go as high as you can prove it, which is why being beyond a concept is just +1 with no additional reasoning.

Same thing, also you didn't respond to my explanation for High 1-B and Outer, does that mean you agree?

Generally speaking that's correct. Or at least correct to my understanding.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Because they're elements within a franchises cosmology. Concepts are not 1-A or higher in the wiki. They only go as high as you can prove it, which is why being beyond a concept is just +1 with no additional reasoning.

Yes but that doesn't say anything about concepts being transcended, same with other scans, they just mention "transcending dimensions is not outer"

 

[Qawsedf234]

Yes but that doesn't say anything about concepts being transcended,

I'm going to tell you then as an Admin who's been involved with these threads before.

Concepts are not special.

Transcending a concept is more or less equivalent of transcending space or dimensions as long as its on a universal scale. You're not 1-A for transcending a concept unless the concept itself is Low 1-A/High 1-B and being above a concept is +1 unless you have a lot more to it.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

I'm going to tell you then as an Admin who's been involved with these threads before.

Concepts are not special.

Transcending a concept is more or less equivalent of transcending space or dimensions as long as its on a universal scale. You're not 1-A for transcending a concept unless the concept itself is Low 1-A/High 1-B and being above a concept is +1 unless you have a lot more to it.

But people are going to ask for poof, what do I give them? I can't just say that because then they will say "proof?"
These are the only scans I found to prove it, but they just pertain to dimensions, not even dimensionality, let alone concepts.

 

[Qawsedf234]

But people are going to ask for poof, what do I give them?

Its the stuff I linked above. Just replace time/space/dimensions/whatever with concepts. They're working off the same argument.

 

[Aaaaa11112222]

Its the stuff I linked above. Just replace time/space/dimensions/whatever with concepts. They're working off the same argument.

First of all, isn't that just blatanty making up something by replacing it with concept instead of space-time? The proof is gonna be skeptic

Second of all, is this good too?

Type 2: Characters whose nature is defined by lacking spatiotemporal features and being superior to them in nature. These characters aren't necessarily superior to spacetime on every level, but just within the scope which they are shown. Due to transcending this spacetime they are immune to Spatial Manipulation and Time Manipulation of it. They furthermore inherit any benefits of Type 1.

Such a character would be assume to be one level of qualitative superiority higher than the tier that destroying all planes of existence would receive. It would usually not be considered to cover planes of existence that are not known to exist, as we do not know the practical limits of how many there could be and the statement itself is not clear whether 'all planes' includes realms beyond those that exist. If it is clarified that theoretical dimensions are included then it comes down to how many are known to be considered in the theoretical framework.

For this to be a quantifiable feat, it must first be confirmed that the character meets either the creation or stabilization feat standards. If that is the case, the character's tier is determined by the amount of dimensions that verse is actually known to have.

 

[Qawsedf234]

First of all, isn't that just blatanty making up something by replacing it with concept instead of space-time?

No, because that's how we treat other concepts like Space, Time and Dimensionality. Concepts governing what an apple is wouldn't be different from any of those.

Second of all, is this good too?

Its an accepted aspect of BDE and the FAQ page. So yes.