IS THIS COUNTED AS AN BEYOND DIMENSIONAL EXISTENCE?

[HakutoRei000]

"The place is very large but complex in simple terms. When 'He' entered the place in question, the native beings there said, 'Here, there are no directions—no up, down, left, right, or any direction that indicates orientation or location. We use anchors to determine direction and location in our place.'"

 

[Kubo423]

It seems to only lack spatial features, so I guess there is no BDE here.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Type 1 BDE.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

"The place is very large but complex in simple terms. When 'He' entered the place in question, the native beings there said, 'Here, there are no directions—no up, down, left, right, or any direction that indicates orientation or location. We use anchors to determine direction and location in our place.'"

Yes.

At Ieast BDE1, but I can sIightIy see BDE from the Very Iarge and determine Iocation in our pIace. The term Iocation can onIy be aIIocated to something that can contain coordinates, aka, that can contain dimensions.

A BDE1 construct is just so smaII that, it is smaIIer then even 0-DimensionaI things, strictIy speaking of quaIitative sense, of course. Thus, from the perspective of a, Iets say, X-DimensionaI being where X is not 1-A or has BDE1 himseIf, the BDE1 pIace wouId exactIy be Nothing, so smaII that it doesnt even exist, which wouId mean it aIso cannot contain any Iocation or pIace per say, as it is quaIitativeIy smaIIer then those aspects.

And if we extend the very Iarge part enough, might just be BDE2.

Furthermore, keep in mind that Type 2 Beyond-Dimensional Existence (In particular the latter variant) is not simply a combination of a non-dimensional state of existence and greater raw power than all dimensional structures in a cosmology – Though that is a necessary condition to qualify for it, it is not a sufficient one. Instead, the non-dimensional state of existence must be the direct cause of the character/realm's superiority over dimensions. A simple example being voids of nothingness that lack space, time and physicality entirely, but are nonetheless "vaster" than physical reality in some way, with common imagery being the universe as a small object encompassed in such a backdrop.

 

[Eclipso]

"The place is very large but complex in simple terms. When 'He' entered the place in question, the native beings there said, 'Here, there are no directions—no up, down, left, right, or any direction that indicates orientation or location. We use anchors to determine direction and location in our place.'"

In any sufficiently odd topological space(say, the cofinite topology on R.), there isn’t really in general a notion of direction(nor position, if there isn’t an origin). Tons of spaces would satisfy this criteria and still have dimensions.

 

[Eclipso]

At Ieast BDE1, but I can sIightIy see BDE from the Very Iarge and determine Iocation in our pIace. The term Iocation can onIy be aIIocated to something that can contain coordinates, aka, that can contain dimensions.

If a space doesn’t have a specific origin, there wouldn’t be any associated coordinates. Even if you did have an origin point, you’d need a metric on it too to define them, and some notion for angles, which not all spaces have. And this is presupposing that there is, in fact, a metric that can even be applied to it. Non-metrizable spaces don’t have any associated metric, and it wouldn’t make sense to apply one.

Non-metrizable spaces do have an associated notion of dimensions, by the way. You don’t need coordinates for that.