- 2,714
- 3,501
- Thread starter
- #401
The neutral space is insignificant 5-D, read all the arguments.Any sort or proof that the macrocosms are infinitesmal inside of the neutral space?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The neutral space is insignificant 5-D, read all the arguments.Any sort or proof that the macrocosms are infinitesmal inside of the neutral space?
Yeah sorry was not sure about what's gonna happen now.we are waiting for them to respond to the the updated arguments, which they have not yet.
That is what we are discussing now, i already brought forth the points that the neutral space's temporal dimension would be qualitatively superior to the insignificant 5-D neutral space which is already low 1-C, and it's still under a higher time flow, it can't be less than low 1-C, just waiting for ultima to respond and deagonIf neutral space is 4D I fail to see how the overarching timeline isn’t 5D, but ig that’s a topic for another day
Which means that we have for sure a 5-d structure?That is what we are discussing now, i already brought forth the points that the neutral space's temporal dimension would be qualitatively superior to the insignificant 5-D neutral space which is already low 1-C, and it's still under a higher time flow, it can't be less than low 1-C, just waiting for ultima to respond and deagon
I don't know, i counted 3, but i think that more is needed for that type.of thingDidn't enough staff members disagree with it?
technically only ultima and deagon, but we are waiting for them to respond to the updated arguments, they even told us that they ONLY read the OP and to summarize new arguments.I don't know, i counted 3, but i think that more is needed for that type.of thing
Then I hope an argument gets brought up about this.At the least
And, to my knowledge, I believe we already use the 5-D space reasoning as part of the regular justification for tiers like 2-C and 2-A. It's why the gap between them is treated as "unquantifiable," because, ideally, feats that warrant them involve affecting both the universes and the space between them.
So... 5D spaces is default btw Universes sir @Georredannea15 , that don't make it Low 1-C. It seems.
I mean, wouldn't a 5-dimensional spatial dimension with a universal-sized be Low 1-C? (or even larger than that.) That is, having a universal size , just like in tier 2, is what is necessary for it to scale.So... 5D spaces is default btw Universes sir @Georredannea15 , that don't make it Low 1-C. It seems.
Space btw Universes are 5D here by default, they don't scale anywhere since all multiversal Tier 2 structures have that. That's what it is. Our tiering system is not 100% maths based and we gotta move with it.I mean, wouldn't a 5-dimensional spatial dimension with a universal-sized be Low 1-C? (or even larger than that.) That is, having a universal size , just like in tier 2, is what is necessary for it to scale.
Literally what I’ve been explicating this entire timeWarning: I only read the OP.
So, glancing over this: It doesn't really seem to be anything particularly notable, in the sense that we already assume 4-D spacetimes that exist in parallel are spaced apart across 5-dimensional space. The issue, largely, is whether this 5-dimensional space has anything noteworthy about it to be tiered; it could be a complete void, for instance, and as such have really nothing in it to blow up in the first place.
More than that, it could just not meet our criteria of what a "significantly large" dimensional structure is, and as such be left untiered. Just like we don't instantly grant characters Low 2-C ratings for destroying small spacetimes (Or sections of spacetime). If the space was infinitely large, there'd be something to work with, but if we don't know its size, then, yeah.
And, to my knowledge, I believe we already use the 5-D space reasoning as part of the regular justification for tiers like 2-C and 2-A. It's why the gap between them is treated as "unquantifiable," because, ideally, feats that warrant them involve affecting both the universes and the space between them.
(Also I don't think showing pictures of the universes literally being 3-D objects displaced through 3-D space that are literally literally touching each other really works as evidence that they're totally separated by higher-dimensional space)
If I can find a comment by Ultima I'll quote it, but Ultima implied that such higher-dimensional spaces must have at least universal dimension to give Tier. Or something like that.Space btw Universes are 5D here by default, they don't scale anywhere since all multiversal Tier 2 structures have that. That's what it is. Our tiering system is not 100% maths based and we gotta move with it.
Idk what's there, it's a entire page with no specific thing you pointed out, but one who wrote the page, DT, Pain and dread both have said what I said. So no.If I can find a comment by Ultima I'll quote it, but Ultima implied that such higher-dimensional spaces must have at least universal dimension to give Tier. Or something like that.
I'm a bit busy at the moment, I'll post it later
Btw, a space containing universes with gaps between them is not 5-dimensional by default, it can be in a larger 4-dimensional space as it is said in the link I put here.
Exactly, the neutral space temporal dimension would have to be qualitatively superior to the neutral zone's insignificant 5-D space, which is still below a higher temporal flow. Going to the dentist, will respond if there are any arguments after, but we should just wait for staff.I'm just going to reiterate the argument from what I'm understanding from the op so he can use when explaining:
The argument is that the neutral space has 4 spacial dimensions via containing universal spacetimes and 1 temporal dimension making the spacetime of the neutral space to 5D which itself is below the overarching timeline
If this is what the op is arguing then I am agreeing
well, even Ultima said the neutral space is 5D, just it alone is unqualifiable and thus can't be tiered, so the entire bigger timeline is qualifiable and significant enough to be tiered, no reason for timeline to not be 5D at leastIf neutral space is 4D I fail to see how the overarching timeline isn’t 5D, but ig that’s a topic for another day
That is not what I meant, and there is nothing on the page for Low 1-C.Idk what's there, it's a entire page with no specific thing you pointed out, but one who wrote the page, DT, Pain and dread both have said what I said. So no.
you should summarise said arguments then, instead of just asking for them to see themLets just wait for ultima to respond to the updated arguments.
You don't know how temporal dimensions workLmao 5D dbs? No this can just be a bigger universe holding smaller pocket dimensions/universes.
Yes, the neutral space is insignificant 5-D, the temporal dimension of the neutral zone would give that qualitative superiority to the entire construct making it 5-D low 1-C, the timeline is also a higher temporal dimension since it contains everything apart of its higher time flow, which is technically 6-D. But i just want to make it clear that the timeline should bare minimum be 5-D.So in a nutshell, Neutral space is 5d but not enough information on it to be significant enough to be tiered
Each timeline however, containing the neutral spaces are at least significantly 5D at the barest minimum,or if qualitatively superior to the neutral space, may even be 6D, not even mentioning Zeno's Palace where universes are basically floating orbs
So low 1C timelines
Not sure what time the neutral zone would be if it even goes above 2c
I did, but everyone kept typing, that is why i said to wait for them.you should summarise said arguments then, instead of just asking for them to see them
5 pages in less than 3 days, why am i not surprised?
i thought we agreed the neutral space was insignificant 5d? Either way, the results would still be the same. Oh wait, i see you highlighted the 4d in yellow, is that you essentially saying the same thing?
now we can see that this cosmology map >> grant Morrisons one
no their was an error, i meant to say that the space is 4D but the color changed, also whats insignificant 5D? but eitherway it has the same resultsi thought we agreed the neutral space was insignificant 5d? Either way, the results would still be the same. Oh wait, i see you highlighted the 4d in yellow, is that you essentially saying the same thing?
Insignificant 5-D is saying the space is 5-D but too insignificant to be tiered because its not infinite, but with the temporal dimension, that qualitative superiority is accounted for and is now tier able.no their was an error, i meant to say that the space is 4D but the color changed, also whats insignificant 5D? but eitherway it has the same results
You literally just making a bunch of interpretations what says this isn't just a normal universe with pocket universes in it?You don't know how temporal dimensions work
What? These "pocket universes" are 2-C structures.You literally just making a bunch of interpretations what says this isn't just a normal universe with pocket universes in it?
Because each universe is a universe?You literally just making a bunch of interpretations what says this isn't just a normal universe with pocket universes in it?
Those are some big pocket universes.What? These "pocket universes" are 2-C structures.
I do think a summary is ready as well as a map that sums up the argument made by the op and the other supporters. If a new thread does happen more info than what the op originally had will be provided.This has reached 5 pages long and barely anything of note has happened because of members spamming messages that do not add anything. It makes it very hard for staff and other knowledgeable members to navigate through the posts that do mean something.
It is getting to the point that this may to be remade as a staff-only thread.
I am surprised no discussion moderators have made the effort to clean things up.
A pocket universe or subspace can be any sizeWhat? These "pocket universes" are 2-C structures.
I gave the thread summary hereThis has reached 5 pages long and barely anything of note has happened because of members spamming messages that do not add anything. It makes it very hard for staff and other knowledgeable members to navigate through the posts that do mean something.
It is getting to the point that this may to be remade as a staff-only thread.
I am surprised no discussion moderators have made the effort to clean things up.
This is a pictorial representationSo in a nutshell, Neutral space is 5d but not enough information on it to be significant enough to be tiered
Each timeline however, containing the neutral spaces are at least significantly 5D at the barest minimum, or if qualitatively superior to the neutral space,may even be 6D, not even mentioning Zeno's Palace where universes are basically floating orbs
So low 1C timelines
Not sure what time the neutral zone would be if it even goes above 2c
essentially this. But yes it does have the same result because of the temporal dimension either way.