- 15,198
- 6,959
Are you perhaps suggesting that characters who perform infinite speed feats most of the time is an anti-feat for the place being infinite-sized?
Because if we're going this route, then idk what to say.
-
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.
『INFINITE UNIVERSE IN DRAGON BALL SUPER』
- Thread starter LuffyRuffy46307
- Start date
- Status
Because if we're going this route, then idk what to say.
- 197
- 393
Yeah Bulma knows about Afterlife and Demon Realm as well… nah,
- 31,348
- 27,600
You missed my comment where I clarified I was talking about the Universe portion of it, not the afterlife.
- 780
- 281
he's talking about the mortal universe.
- 1,967
- 1,664
let me tell you how it makes sense. if Bulma knew about how vast the universe truly is in scope, Jaco wouldn't specifically mention this fact (considering that Bulma has also crossed a large portion of the universe as well and one point, and should at least know about the observable universe), implying that yes Bulma's knowledge is very limited. if you still don't see the obvious conclusion staring right at you in the face then there's no reason for me to keep on debating you
no one's talking about Jaco's anger here, just his words, which specifically mention the scope of the universe (knowing that he's mentioning this to a genius scientist, who doesn't even fire back or disagree with his words). and no, Jaco absolutely does NOT imply that the distance or galaxies are finite. while uncountable/unthinkable/outrageous doesnt inherently mean infinite, saying that they imply finiteness is just asinine and a conclusion so forced its honestly absurd
- 2,154
- 799
I'm sure you expect me to say no but yes, if it's explicitly stated to have an edge, it would contradict the argument of it being infinite size
- 20,539
- 17,452
I can. But before I do so, can you link a summary post for one/both sides? I can include it in the tag to save time.
- 197
- 393
- 821
- 566
I’m also seeing some problems with spaceships such as the one they used for the Namek trip.
Earth and Namek are on different quadrants of the universe meaning there has to be infinite distance between them and yet the ship which has finite speeds (since Bulma can percieve it traveling from earth to Jupiter) can manage the trip in a few months.
Earth and Namek are on different quadrants of the universe meaning there has to be infinite distance between them and yet the ship which has finite speeds (since Bulma can percieve it traveling from earth to Jupiter) can manage the trip in a few months.
Last edited:
- 3,493
- 1,360
My Arguments are currently:
Bulma's statement of the earth being at the edge of the universe isn't contradicted in the source material (the manga) and regarding her statement as unreliable doesn't make sense. Using the singular line from the guidebooks, "humans can't comprehend the universe" (i am paraphrasing here) shouldn't be taken as undeniable fact when Bulma has shown ability to create technology that require an understanding of the spacetime.
Two of the guidebooks contradict each other, one stating there are infinite galaxies, the other saying there is infinite darkness that light cannot penetrate. The two cannot coexist, and no one has shown any examples in the source materials that positively proves either exists or how both can be true simultaneously.
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,220
- 14,571
why there must be infinite distance between Namek and Earth????, you can have a finite distance between two things in an infinite distance as a whole, this point is completely redundant and pointless.
Anyway, this thread should be closed, and someone need to make a sequel, continue up thread with compiled arguments from both sides, both arguments support infinite universe and against it, address all of them, this thread is a mess, so someone with ability to make a coherent thread should do this, and just vote on that new thread because at this point, all i see is repeated, circular arguments, some arguments have nothing to do with the actual problem of the thread
- 1,967
- 1,664
this is a non-argument
- 1,967
- 1,664
as I said, not really. there are 3 reliable statements (one from the guide, two in the manga) that basically all imply that her understanding of the scope of the universe is very limited (including the fact that her Dragon Radar, that she created, can't even scan the whole thing even if you believe it's not infinite). she's smart but prone to be wrong as well. you or anyone else still has given no reason as to why, despite all this, Bulma's statement has to be taken as absolute fact and nothing else.
how does creating technology that traverses space-time have anything to do with understanding the universe's size?? That's an irrelevant comparison at best. wanna know what's relevant though? her Super Dragon Radar, and hey would you look at that? it can't even scan the whole finite universe, so much for being absolutely correct on its size. that radar demonstrates right there she has neither the technology nor the knowledge needed to create one that could scan the whole thing (if she did, she could create it and then some)
- 31,348
- 27,600
Why would the Super Dragon Radar having limited range be an anti-feat on the scope of Bulma's knowledge of the Universe?
- 1,406
- 641
These two statements don't contradict each other, there'd need to be infinite darkness (infinite space) to hold infinite galaxies.
- 1,967
- 1,664
if her technical know-how is any measure of her reliability (as unanimous implies), then a more relevant metric to use here would be the fact that her radar had limited range, not the fact that she created a time machine. if she did in fact know all about how big the LW is it wouldn't have been difficult for her to build a radar to match that. it doesn't necessarily state that she doesn't know it, on its own (she could just have other technical difficulties, sure), but this along with all other statements that i've mention is enough for me to conclude that her understanding of the universe is quite limited.
of course i didn't actually use this argument before because i don't believe her technical knowledge is very relevant here.
- 3,493
- 1,360
Yes they do. The darkness is described as impenetrable by light. In every image of the universe, we clearly see galaxies meaning there is no darkness and space is illuminated by galactic light. If there are infinite galaxies, then there would be infinite illumination. If the impenetrable darkness was holding the galaxies we wouldn't be able to see the galaxies.
- 31,348
- 27,600
Bulma clarified that she literally couldn't make a Super Dragon Radar with any more range than that.
It's not a matter of "If Bulma really knew how big the living world was, then she'd build a radar to match that."
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,220
- 14,571
the infinite darkness contradict infinite galaxies is bad argument, infinite isn't a number, but size, and via math we know that there are infinite that is larger than other infinites, being infinite isn't absolute, so infinite darkness can be larger than infinite galaxies and hold them, it isn't contradictory, we can have infinite galaxies, and a larger infinite darkness
Also why the hell the radar get bring up again???, what the hell
ngl here, i saw so many bad arguments that, only get brought up in a DB thread while not in other verse threads, the level of nitpicking and scrutiny is just....on another level
Also why the hell the radar get bring up again???, what the hell
ngl here, i saw so many bad arguments that, only get brought up in a DB thread while not in other verse threads, the level of nitpicking and scrutiny is just....on another level
- 1,967
- 1,664
yeah and i merely offered a speculation on why that is the case, simply because unanimous brought up the creation of the time machine as a reason to hold Bulma's word as absolute and irrefutable which is what i said is wrong.
again, that's only a possible speculation to counter a point i don't even believe is very relevant. why else do you think i never used it despite it being brought up in the thread before? and I even stated that she could simply have had other technical difficulties in building it as well.
- 31,348
- 27,600
Okay then.
- 3,493
- 1,360
Are you claiming there to be Aleph-0 number of galaxies and an Aleph-1 amount of darkness?
Also, the darkness is described as impenetrable by light. If the darkness was holding the galaxies we wouldn't be able to see any galaxies as the light couldn't penetrate the darkness. Yet we see numerous galaxies.
- 1,967
- 1,664
what's aleph-1?
has it occurred to you that darkness can merely be referring to space? do you believe galaxies are just packed tightly together with no dark space between them? is that how an infinite universe would be like? that is an absurd idea and no where is it stated to be a qualifying requirement for infinite universes. you're bringing up a non-existent standard, a lot like your Sailor moon threads unironically
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,220
- 14,571
what????, are you serious???, larger than infinite is not necessary uncountable infinite, isn't this shit is talked multiple time in those 2-A to Low 1-C thread via larger than 2-A multiverse already???
do you know that, we look at the verse via watcher/reader point of view???, of course we can see them, but did the in-verse character said anything about this???
- 1,406
- 641
The viewer being able to see something in fiction doesn't mean that an aspect of the universe doesn't exist. Using "we can see the galaxies so there's no darkness" isn't a valid argument because we're not abiding by the rules of a fictional setting, it's the same reason why we can see characters in dragon ball moving even though they're MFTL+ or why 5 minutes in-universe is hours irl. And darkness in an astronomical sense rarely refers to actual darkness (Shadows, absence of light, etc) but rather space, you're interpreting the exaggerating wording in a manner that makes your argument sound correct when contextually, it falls apart.
Again, there's no reason that an infinite amount of light need to be present. We could use the same argument to say, "because we can see the character in DBS move, they must be below subsonic.", it's just an appeal to reality.
- 6,029
- 3,528
look i ain't accusing u of bias or anything but you're arguing against a logical standard used for literally all verses
for infinite galaxies to exist, there must exist an infinite void to contain them, there's void between all atoms, for infinite atoms there's infinite void, please drop this nonsensical argument
for infinite galaxies to exist, there must exist an infinite void to contain them, there's void between all atoms, for infinite atoms there's infinite void, please drop this nonsensical argument
- 53
- 76
But brother, what are you saying? There is no correlation between the edge of the Universe and the edge of the galaxy; let's just say that argument as if it was going to disprove something (or as if it were the eighth wonder). Just saying, bro; don't take it the wrong way.
- 3,493
- 1,360
Uncountable infinite is the only infinity larger than countable infinity. You can't have a bigger countable infinity.
"tens of thousands of light years, hundreds of millions of light years, where not even light can reach"
This is not a logical standard. This is a special attribute that the guidebook is stating.
If the guidebook is correct, then we would not be able to see galaxies if that special impenetrable darkness was holding the galaxies or was between the galaxies.
- 6,029
- 3,528
how does that contradict anything? this would merely affirm that some parts lack galaxies, something we do accept for other verses still, this is not an argument
- 1,967
- 1,664
that's an unproven theorem in Set theory. there's no reason to believe there's no infinity between aleph-0 and 2^aleph-0. regardless, your argument still makes no sense even if you assume the Continuum hypothesis is true. as Vietthai stated, this is the same exact reason why spaces larger than 2-A (countably infinite) arent automatically low 1-C (uncountably infinite). in fact if what you're saying were true, DBZ Toei Afterlife would be low 1-C, but Qawsed stated off-site that it wouldnt be due to the exact same reason as above.
so this is just poor understanding of standards and math on your part, again.
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,220
- 14,571
tell that to the standard, right now it isn't. Also, if we talking about math, rational number actually larger than natural number, but not only the level of real number, which is Aleph-1, or uncountable infinite
my bro, light have finite speed, can it even breach the infinite darkness with light speed???
- 3,493
- 1,360
I'm not doing this. I am not the one who made the claim that the darkness is a bigger infinity. Go ask Vetthai to prove that the darkness is a bigger infinity.
Vietthai96
He/Him- 10,220
- 14,571
why should i need to prove???, you are the one who somehow bring up infinite darkness contradict infinite galaxies, which i counter your argument, bruhh
- 1,406
- 641
For one infinity to contain another, that's just a standard assumption you have to make. I think it's very self-evident and doesn't even need to be proven in this instance.
Hellformer
He/Him- 1,592
- 1,253
Let's consider this scenario:
- There is an infinite number of infinite sized 4-D space-time continuums existing
- We know that there is a realm that exists which the Universes are a subset of. So it's obvious that the space must be bigger than the Universe.
- Now as per Iamunanimousinthat's logic, that higher space should be 5-D because there are no other Infinites between Aleph-0 and Aleph-1.
- But this ends up contradicting this wiki since it has been cleared in the faq that structures bigger 2-A aren't necessarily Low 1-C.
- 6,029
- 3,528
it being a bigger infinity doesn't mean aleph 1
u made a strawman there
being Stronger than 2A isn't 1C for example
also, light has finite speed, the fact that there's void where light can't reach affirms the universe being infinite
- 3,493
- 1,360
We are going off topic, so the last thing I will say is you are wrong. The set of rational numbers has the same cardinality as the set of natural numbers.
- 6,029
- 3,528
this isn't how we do things, simply containing an infinity isn't being aleph 1
- 3,493
- 1,360
- Status
