- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #41
That would be countlessly above baseline.
-
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.
Infinitely above baseline 2-A Ben 10 cosmology and Alien X
- Thread starter Greenshifter
- Start date
- Status
- 12,436
- 4,562
No, take 2 multiverses with n timelines, you just get 2 * n timelines.
This applied to any finite number n is multiplied.
Now take infinite * the finite number, you get just infinite timelines, as there's aren't infinite timelines that are multiplied, but just a finite number of them, that will become just infinite
This applied to any finite number n is multiplied.
Now take infinite * the finite number, you get just infinite timelines, as there's aren't infinite timelines that are multiplied, but just a finite number of them, that will become just infinite
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #43
I can see where you are coming from and there have been threads about this but currently characters like Sonic the Hedgehog (Archie Pre-Genesis Wave) are trillions of times baseline, which wouldn't be possible if what you said is true. There are also other characters who are countlessly above baseline 2-A for the infinite * finite I think.
- 12,436
- 4,562
They are countless times above Baseline for scaling, so your point is invalid
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #45
They still multiply finite amount of emeralds with infinite timeline-destruction, but regardless this shouldn't be brought up here. If countlessly above baseline becomes relevant then I'm sure that staff will say whether it exists or not.
- 541
- 59
again, the same logic about it being impossible to reach infinity through multiplying finite numbers was applied in this thread and rejected because fiction doesnt always abide by real life logic.
- 5,466
- 12,475
Using your hypothetical example as a basis for your math, the only thing you proved here was that 2^t isn't the largest number of timelines and that 2^(t+1) is bigger. How you got that to mean there suddenly isn't a finite number of worlds anymore, but infinite ones, is entirely beyond me. This only means 2^(t+1) is an even bigger expansion of finite worlds than what would be given to us from 2^t. Not that it suddenly jumps from finite to infinite.
I suppose I should explain Greenshifter's argument a bit more in-depth (or at least my understanding of it), hopefully it'll clear out some confusion.
Basically, the math he wrote down is pretty much supposed to be a proof by contradictio, where the validity of a proposition P is to be proven by showing that the the opposite assumption (P is false) leads to a contradiction, and thus making us default back to the scenario where P holds as a valid proposition.
In this case, the infinite timestream (t) is assumed to have only a finite number of parallel timelines branching off of it, the number of which is identified by 2^t (the set of all possible permutations (branches) of the timestream.) The contradiction here would be that, if the timestream is infinite, then 2^t (under the assumption that it is finite) would not truly be the set of all variations each moment can take, as there would always be another moment (+1) which can branch off into another possibility, and endless moments after that one as well. Thus, 2^t being a finite set is a contradiction, and we then head back to the proposition that it is infinite.
In plain english, it basically boils down to the argument that a timeline that is infinite in length can't have a finite number of possible permutations which each event in it can take.
However, my issue with this argument is that it seems to be making an a priori assumption that all possible timelines that branch off from the primary timestream are already instantiated into existence in the first place, instead of timelines constantly separating from the main universe in a successive manner ad-infinitum (on and on).
Greenshifter compared the counterarguments against a 2-A multiverse to saying the set of all prime numbers can't be infinite because each prime number is finite. I'd say that's kind of a shady comparision, since number sets are conceptualized as collections that are already completed from the start, as opposed to ones that are comprised by continuous additions of members. For instance, the integers aren't constantly popping into existence when we address the set which contains them, they are all already there.
What Ben 10 describes would be closer to the idea of "potential infinity", if anything, as the timelines are constantly multiplying in number instead of all possibilities already existing simultaneously, as I've saidand there's also the fact this would be Low 1-C if legit, not 2-A, but we're not gonna talk about that
I suppose I should explain Greenshifter's argument a bit more in-depth (or at least my understanding of it), hopefully it'll clear out some confusion.
Basically, the math he wrote down is pretty much supposed to be a proof by contradictio, where the validity of a proposition P is to be proven by showing that the the opposite assumption (P is false) leads to a contradiction, and thus making us default back to the scenario where P holds as a valid proposition.
In this case, the infinite timestream (t) is assumed to have only a finite number of parallel timelines branching off of it, the number of which is identified by 2^t (the set of all possible permutations (branches) of the timestream.) The contradiction here would be that, if the timestream is infinite, then 2^t (under the assumption that it is finite) would not truly be the set of all variations each moment can take, as there would always be another moment (+1) which can branch off into another possibility, and endless moments after that one as well. Thus, 2^t being a finite set is a contradiction, and we then head back to the proposition that it is infinite.
In plain english, it basically boils down to the argument that a timeline that is infinite in length can't have a finite number of possible permutations which each event in it can take.
However, my issue with this argument is that it seems to be making an a priori assumption that all possible timelines that branch off from the primary timestream are already instantiated into existence in the first place, instead of timelines constantly separating from the main universe in a successive manner ad-infinitum (on and on).
Greenshifter compared the counterarguments against a 2-A multiverse to saying the set of all prime numbers can't be infinite because each prime number is finite. I'd say that's kind of a shady comparision, since number sets are conceptualized as collections that are already completed from the start, as opposed to ones that are comprised by continuous additions of members. For instance, the integers aren't constantly popping into existence when we address the set which contains them, they are all already there.
What Ben 10 describes would be closer to the idea of "potential infinity", if anything, as the timelines are constantly multiplying in number instead of all possibilities already existing simultaneously, as I've said
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #48
@Ultima thank you for clarifying my case and your elaborate reply. The thing is that when Professor Paradox's Chrono Navigator destroys all timelines throughout all of time, he also destroys all future timelines similar to how Ben 10000 who is 30 years older than Ben got wiped out by the Chronosapien Time Bomb. The time stream is also set in stone and only becomes fluid during a time war, however there most likely was a time war going on in the episode of "Ben Again" when the Chrono Navigator was used so if that means the time stream is fluid and thus my logic can not be used then I will accept that. However the time war does take place in a time loop (from the beginning of time to 2012), implying everything is actually set in stone.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #49
Also if the timestream is not set in stone, would this yield higher results of 2-B then was previously established or not?
- 5,466
- 12,475
The thing is that when Professor Paradox's Chrono Navigator destroys all timelines throughout all of time, he also destroys all future timelines similar to how Ben 10000 who is 30 years older than Ben got wiped out by the Chronosapien Time Bomb
Does it really, though? The closest thing to that which I recall is Professor Paradox comparing the Multiverse to a tree with several branches, and saying that Vilgax cut down the tree itself by using the Time Bomb; nothing suggesting he destroyed the multiverse across past, present and future or something like that.
Isn't Ben 10,000 just Ben from the future, though? Even disregarding him, there could always be alternate versions of Ben that are further up in the timeline than the Ben from the primary universe, like Ultimate Ben for example, that doesn't mean they are from "future timelines" that haven't branched off yet.
Also if the timestream is not set in stone, would this yield higher results of 2-B then was previously established or not?
I don't think so, considering the profiles are already based off of the assumption it is fluid, so things would be unchanged.
Does it really, though? The closest thing to that which I recall is Professor Paradox comparing the Multiverse to a tree with several branches, and saying that Vilgax cut down the tree itself by using the Time Bomb; nothing suggesting he destroyed the multiverse across past, present and future or something like that.
Isn't Ben 10,000 just Ben from the future, though? Even disregarding him, there could always be alternate versions of Ben that are further up in the timeline than the Ben from the primary universe, like Ultimate Ben for example, that doesn't mean they are from "future timelines" that haven't branched off yet.
Also if the timestream is not set in stone, would this yield higher results of 2-B then was previously established or not?
I don't think so, considering the profiles are already based off of the assumption it is fluid, so things would be unchanged.
- 541
- 59
>nothing suggesting he destroyed the multiverse across past, present and future or something like that.
The Chrono Navigator was stated by Paradox to destroy " all of time and causality itself" and " all of existence" in episode "Ben Again", if anyone but him were to use it. What you are talking about was the Timebomb, an entirely different weapon.
There are 2 diffenret Ben 10000, only 1 of them is his actual future self This was mentioned in Ben 10 Ultimate episode "Ben 10000 returns" where it is explained that the first Ben 10000 wasnt main timeline Ben's future self, it was an alternative future.
The Chrono Navigator was stated by Paradox to destroy " all of time and causality itself" and " all of existence" in episode "Ben Again", if anyone but him were to use it. What you are talking about was the Timebomb, an entirely different weapon.
There are 2 diffenret Ben 10000, only 1 of them is his actual future self This was mentioned in Ben 10 Ultimate episode "Ben 10000 returns" where it is explained that the first Ben 10000 wasnt main timeline Ben's future self, it was an alternative future.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #53
@Ultima
"Yes, but in anyone else's hands but mine it could cause irreparable damage to the time-stream or destroy all of time and causality itself"
"Eon wants nothing less than absolute power over everything all timelines, all alternate realities everything."
"Stop this now or all of existence will be destroyed!"
Also there is another statement regarding Alien X being able to erase all of existence which has nothing to do with a time war so the time stream would be set in stone at said point. So my question is, would the time stream be the following: 2-A regularly (due to being set in stone), 2-B during Time Wars?
Also Ultimate Ben does not exist anymore I think, within Ben 10 it is possible to overwrite one timeline I think and things become fluid on such a moment most likely since time travel is always involved. With alternate timelines, time travel is not involved.
"Yes, but in anyone else's hands but mine it could cause irreparable damage to the time-stream or destroy all of time and causality itself"
"Eon wants nothing less than absolute power over everything all timelines, all alternate realities everything."
"Stop this now or all of existence will be destroyed!"
Also there is another statement regarding Alien X being able to erase all of existence which has nothing to do with a time war so the time stream would be set in stone at said point. So my question is, would the time stream be the following: 2-A regularly (due to being set in stone), 2-B during Time Wars?
Also Ultimate Ben does not exist anymore I think, within Ben 10 it is possible to overwrite one timeline I think and things become fluid on such a moment most likely since time travel is always involved. With alternate timelines, time travel is not involved.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #55
@FRIMI I think it was explained that every time Ben and future Ben meet, his future changes. If time travel does not affect a current timeline but only shifts people to a different timeline then there is no point in Paradox even saving Ben from being stopped in time or the earth getting destroyed by a black hole in "Let's Do The Time War Again". Paradox also explained that the Ben from his second attempt at saving the earth will go back to the future to his third attempt and replace third-attempt Ben, thus keeping the memories of second-attempt Ben.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #56
- 1,712
- 248
yeah thats actually a good point. The way I had understood it was that every time ben meets his future self, his future changes, but there would still exist a timeline wherein he doesnt meet his future self, and that'd be the timeline where Ben becomes whichever future ben he met. this would also explain why the ben 10,000 with the biomnitrix consistently exists despite the amount of time travel he did including meeting present ben a few times.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #58
But why don't we meet the true Ben 10000 then?
Also MoA stated that Biomnitrix Ben 10000 is Ben's true future sooooo
Also MoA stated that Biomnitrix Ben 10000 is Ben's true future sooooo
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #59
@Kukui I'll address the Generator Rex stuff tomorrow.
- 541
- 59
they did but that doenst make any sense, why would Ben 10000 say the opposite then in ultimate alien? and it was even explained in the Ultimate alien episode "Ben 10000 returns" that the reason Ben 10000 back in the original series didnt remember Ben and Gwen going to the future, is because they are not fromr the sime timeline.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #61
Was it explained that OG Ben 10000 doesn't remember Ben and Gwen? Cause I know Ultimate Ben does, I'm not sure how useful this information is for the thread tho so I suggest we discuss it somewhere else.
- 541
- 59
edit: moved discussion
- 541
- 59
@FRMI discussion about Ben 10000 movedto this thread to not derail the thread
- 5,466
- 12,475
Yeah, I was mainly referring to the claim that the Time Bomb also wiped out all possible future timelines in that post.
- 29,959
- 31,050
Looking through the thread, I agree with Ultima Reality.
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #68
Yeah all right I agree as well, thanks a lot for your input Ultima because you saved us a lot of trouble ƒæì. Now onto Gen Rex (in a few).
- 10,276
- 4,388
- Thread starter
- #69
Pocket dimensions and time travel are entirely different from studying the existence of parallel universes.
The time travel came as an extension of Breach's powers. Sure but none of the characters in Ben 10 ever put a limit on the amount of dimensions that there are, we already know that there are at least a 100 due to Azmuth's statement of Dagon conquering 100 dimensions which btw was made centuries before Ben was even born and as we all know, the timestream branching only began when Ben first got the Omnitrix since that is where Paradox travels to when rebooting the timestream. Proving that for once and for all, timelines and dimensions are NOT the same thing in Ben 10.
If your asking if "infinite universes, realities, dimensions, etc." needs to be blatantly stated in order to reach 2-A, it does. And most 2-A's who are rated here generally have that qualification filled. Why do you think things like "countless", "not limited", or even "endless" don't count as 2-A here?
Infinite dimensions is blatantly stated, you were just acting as if it meant Ad-infinitum with that interpretation having 0 proof to back it up.
Pocket dimensions aren't alternate universes (emphasis on universes) and if Rex being in an alternate universe was wrong then...there was no point in mentioning that. That only helps me more if anything.
The statement from Holiday does not solely have to be about universes, we just know due to Rex's universe, Ben's universe and Dagon's universe all being parallel dimensions that a certain percentage of the dimensions Holiday mentions are universe-sized which still results in infinite universe-sized dimensions. (There is also the possibility all of them, such as the Null Void and Ledgerdomain, are universes due to many-worlds theory and Holiday's statement but I'm not sure if we can assume that or not) Rex's statement most likely comes from season-2-episode-19-lions-and-lambs (08:19) this happening in the previous episode where he seems to be outside the universe (?)
Its less a contradiction and more that Generator Rex in general is not knowledgeable, experienced or credible enough to speak on the subject of alternate universes. Let alone being able to judge the size of another franchise's cosmology when they never do that for their own verse.
Well this is them also judging their own verses' cosmology, they just didn't deal with alternate timelines but deal with this instead.
Uh, what? By that logic, if my college math professor calls me smart for getting an A+ on my exam, im suddenly in the same range of intelligence as him?
Who knows maybe one day you can replace him/her. With same range I mean that if Caesar is top-extraordinary genius then Holiday would be low or mid-extraordinary genius, she also has the feats to back it up. (Mostly her making those cures for a planetary pandemic, the nanites)
Okay? Just because Generator Rex's world is much more advanced than ours doesn't mean such theories on parallel worlds canonically exist there.
My point was that it wouldn't be hard for Doc Holiday to figure it out due to the high-technological nature of the verse.
Which is, again, very last minute theorizing to come to the conclusion about such things. And like I said before, last minute theorizing is laughably weak evidence to use for such a high tier as 2-A when any other verse would be required to give far more credible evidence than this to get it.
That's not last-minute, having half a day is a dream in Gen Rex. She made a cure that Rex needed right away for a certain type toxin just by being given a blood sample digitally.
Especially when Holiday was initially in denial about such concepts for majority of the whole crossover.
She made one statement at the beginning about parallel worlds being a theory and said theory being shaky and that's it, that's not being in denial of concepts. That's her not trusting Ben's explanation since he is just a rando who got her love-interest injured and seems like he uses alternate universes as an excuse to get free. I would also agree with you that Holiday's statement is not enough evidence if we didn't already see parallel universes in Ben 10 and thus we went from one-space time continuum to infinite, but that is not the case and Holiday only gives a "number" to something that is already established.
This is flat out cherry picking. You cant pick out one part of an already less than serious answer for a fan who was spamming the author with vs debating questions about Celestialsapiens being Complex Multiversal to suit your own argument. That's the epitome of using it when its convenient for your argument.
This is the question: "Sir,did celestial sepian rebooted only one universe or the Multiverse?how big could be Ben 10's Omniverse? And are celestial sepians top tier complex multiversal character?"
This is the answer: "I don't believe the entire multiverse was rebooted. The Omniverse is infinite. Omniverse and multiverse really mean the same thing in my eyes."
There is no mention of Complex Multiversal in the answer so the writer chose to ignore it so why should it matter here? The writer gave a serious answer to question 1 and 2 and ignored 3.
The time travel came as an extension of Breach's powers. Sure but none of the characters in Ben 10 ever put a limit on the amount of dimensions that there are, we already know that there are at least a 100 due to Azmuth's statement of Dagon conquering 100 dimensions which btw was made centuries before Ben was even born and as we all know, the timestream branching only began when Ben first got the Omnitrix since that is where Paradox travels to when rebooting the timestream. Proving that for once and for all, timelines and dimensions are NOT the same thing in Ben 10.
If your asking if "infinite universes, realities, dimensions, etc." needs to be blatantly stated in order to reach 2-A, it does. And most 2-A's who are rated here generally have that qualification filled. Why do you think things like "countless", "not limited", or even "endless" don't count as 2-A here?
Infinite dimensions is blatantly stated, you were just acting as if it meant Ad-infinitum with that interpretation having 0 proof to back it up.
Pocket dimensions aren't alternate universes (emphasis on universes) and if Rex being in an alternate universe was wrong then...there was no point in mentioning that. That only helps me more if anything.
The statement from Holiday does not solely have to be about universes, we just know due to Rex's universe, Ben's universe and Dagon's universe all being parallel dimensions that a certain percentage of the dimensions Holiday mentions are universe-sized which still results in infinite universe-sized dimensions. (There is also the possibility all of them, such as the Null Void and Ledgerdomain, are universes due to many-worlds theory and Holiday's statement but I'm not sure if we can assume that or not) Rex's statement most likely comes from season-2-episode-19-lions-and-lambs (08:19) this happening in the previous episode where he seems to be outside the universe (?)
Its less a contradiction and more that Generator Rex in general is not knowledgeable, experienced or credible enough to speak on the subject of alternate universes. Let alone being able to judge the size of another franchise's cosmology when they never do that for their own verse.
Well this is them also judging their own verses' cosmology, they just didn't deal with alternate timelines but deal with this instead.
Uh, what? By that logic, if my college math professor calls me smart for getting an A+ on my exam, im suddenly in the same range of intelligence as him?
Okay? Just because Generator Rex's world is much more advanced than ours doesn't mean such theories on parallel worlds canonically exist there.
My point was that it wouldn't be hard for Doc Holiday to figure it out due to the high-technological nature of the verse.
Which is, again, very last minute theorizing to come to the conclusion about such things. And like I said before, last minute theorizing is laughably weak evidence to use for such a high tier as 2-A when any other verse would be required to give far more credible evidence than this to get it.
That's not last-minute, having half a day is a dream in Gen Rex. She made a cure that Rex needed right away for a certain type toxin just by being given a blood sample digitally.
Especially when Holiday was initially in denial about such concepts for majority of the whole crossover.
She made one statement at the beginning about parallel worlds being a theory and said theory being shaky and that's it, that's not being in denial of concepts. That's her not trusting Ben's explanation since he is just a rando who got her love-interest injured and seems like he uses alternate universes as an excuse to get free. I would also agree with you that Holiday's statement is not enough evidence if we didn't already see parallel universes in Ben 10 and thus we went from one-space time continuum to infinite, but that is not the case and Holiday only gives a "number" to something that is already established.
This is flat out cherry picking. You cant pick out one part of an already less than serious answer for a fan who was spamming the author with vs debating questions about Celestialsapiens being Complex Multiversal to suit your own argument. That's the epitome of using it when its convenient for your argument.
This is the question: "Sir,did celestial sepian rebooted only one universe or the Multiverse?how big could be Ben 10's Omniverse? And are celestial sepians top tier complex multiversal character?"
This is the answer: "I don't believe the entire multiverse was rebooted. The Omniverse is infinite. Omniverse and multiverse really mean the same thing in my eyes."
There is no mention of Complex Multiversal in the answer so the writer chose to ignore it so why should it matter here? The writer gave a serious answer to question 1 and 2 and ignored 3.
- 16,927
- 4,844
I'll make a response here soon.
- 8,821
- 9,404
I missed a lot, but I'm just here to say that infinite dimensions having infinite timelines branching from them is just baseline 2-A.
- 8,821
- 9,404
I think the infinite dimensions statement from Generator Rex is enough.
- 16,927
- 4,844
And of course, a never before seen user whos literally joined just today with 0 history immediately comes to "FRA" an upgrade. Typical.
Anyway, i'll be making my reply to Green later today.
Anyway, i'll be making my reply to Green later today.
- 541
- 59
yea i dont see why a user being new to this site matters, you and everyone else were new yourself on this wiki at some point, doesnt mean you coudlnt participate in discussions.
- Status
