• 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.

Make Arnos Great Again (MAGA): Hypertimeline

Messages
3,715
Reaction score
2,066
Honestly i'm very busy in rl, but must wank something so the other wankers still think i still able to do wank


Summary:

  • Keeper of time can accelerate time to infinity in a single instant inside his own world's timeline
  • Infinity amount of time mean one whole timeline that make it 4D by default
  • Instant mean infinitesimal interval in time, where two state of the world exactly being seperated or the static state of the world
  • Nature of the time's structure which is always one dimension higher than what it encompasses
  • One frame of timeline can contain the infinity amount of time or the one whole timeline, make this timeline a higher temporal structure

Conclusion:

This world will get 2 time structure, making it 3D spatial + 2D temporal that is 5D
 
bc1aa715fc25d36a4421ed907836b4ec.png
 
Honestly Idk. You dropped this out of nowhere and idk where to start. Ig I'll let others cook you first.
 
Anyway, I disagree since "eternity" there is obviously not literally an eternity/infinite amount of time but hyperbolic language to denote a large amount of time. Also because Anos' lifespan is still finite, so considering the usage of "eternity" there as literal would make little sense either way.
 
Anyway, I disagree since "eternity" there is obviously not literally an eternity/infinite amount of time but hyperbolic language to denote a large amount of time (also because Anos' lifespan is still finite, so considering the usage of" eternity" there as infinite would make little sense either way)
The context in here the keeper literally accelerate time, it prove by author write about a billion ten billion and eternity it was a progressive of time to eternity. It even stated twice that keeper of time accelerate the time to eternity

Yes arnos lifespan was finite, it was the cause he getting erase after taste the infinity of time, i think that was not an argument for debunk the infinity of time
 
The blog pretty much sounds like exaggerating a narrative, I thought it was the other hypertimeline blog that's why I decided to go neutral. I disagree for now
Well the scan speak for it self, i dont add something to the scan for making it missleading, i use the literal meaning of the scan
 
I dont know whats make it too vague

Because infinity of time literally happen in a single instant of another timeline, soo whats that make it too vague?
Infinity have no end, it is not a number, an infinite of time can happen in an instant in single time axis, yet it still belong to that singular time axis. You don't need more time axis in order to have an infinite of time happen in an instant, of course, it could potentially be a supporting evidences for hypertimeline, but it alone is completely insufficient

Also, time being infinitesimal in timeline is.......very normal, due to real number, the gap between each number is actually infinite, so you can say that each moment is an infinitesimal part of the whole timeline, accelerate time to instant is meaningless in this whole picture

Tbf, it is hard to explain
 
As for my opinion on the OP, I don't think it fits the accepted "Hypertimeline" standard that was previously used for other verses. I don't really see an overarching timeline here.
 
Infinity have no end, it is not a number, an infinite of time can happen in an instant in single time axis, yet it still belong to that singular time axis. You don't need more time axis in order to have an infinite of time happen in an instant, of course, it could potentially be a supporting evidences for hypertimeline, but it alone is completely insufficient

Also, time being infinitesimal in timeline is.......very normal, due to real number, the gap between each number is actually infinite, so you can say that each moment is an infinitesimal part of the whole timeline, accelerate time to instant is meaningless in this whole picture

Tbf, it is hard to explain
Well infinity in fiction can have a "end"

If it was finite it was fine to consider it can happen in singular time axis, but it was not if it was infinite

In Real Number the value of per-decimal in number are consider as 1

I mean if we take 1,00003000... the number 3 (and 0) in here are consider as 1 value not infinite. By say infinite become infinisimal, it mean changing the value of all number to infinite. I mean will like 1,0000infinite0000.., so by default this decimal will contain more element than default decimal

Per-frame in a default timeline contain a 3D object, but if the infinite amount of time that is 4D can be contained in all frame of other timeline it mean this timeline was 5D, using the same logic
 
Last edited:
Well infinity in fiction can have a "end"

If it was finite it was fine to consider it can happen in singular time axis, but it was not if it was infinite

In Real Number the value of per-decimal in number are consider as 1

I mean if we take 1,00003000... the number 3 (and 0) in here are consider as 1 value not infinite. By say infinite become infinisimal, it mean changing the value of all number to infinite. I mean will like 1,0000infinite0000.., so by default this decimal will contain more element than default decimal

Per-frame in a default timeline contain a 3D object, but if the infinite amount of time that is 4D can be contained in all frame of other timeline it mean this timeline was 5D, using the same logic
Of course infinite in fiction have an end but that isn't matter, in math term, you could multiplying infinite in every way you want, still infinite unless we talking about infinite^infinite. So having infinite time being infinitesimal in another time doesn't remotely make said another time being its own different time axis

All and all, time isn't space, time is 4D simply because it multiplying 3 spatial dimensions within it uncountable infinitely, make it 4D via set theory
 
Hypertimelines need another direction of time. Where's the second direction?
The standard already explain this, you dont need a statement that there was a other dimensional axis of time, if there was a infinite amount of time that is consider as one whole timeline encompassed inside a frame of other timeline it was hypertimeline by default

The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something akin to the frames of a movie placed side-by-side. Basically, the time-like direction may be thought of as a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the whole universe at any given moment, with the set of all such events comprising the totality of spacetime.

This structure can then be generalized to any number of dimensions, which is why destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather than 3-A or High 3-A).

A spacetime continuum with two time axes, instead of just one, could likewise be visualized as a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the entire regular timeline with 3 space and 1 time dimension. It would hence be one uncountably infinite level above a timeline and as such baseline Low 1-C. Similarily, adding even more time dimensions would add one level of dimensional superiority each time.

Outside of explanations which state that multiple time dimensions exist it is difficult to show that a work of fiction has more than one. The key point that has to be established is that there is a kind of time that flows in a different direction than the past or the future or any of the spatial directions.

Things like timelines having time that passes at different rates would not qualify, as even the theory of general relativity already establishes that with just one regular time dimension time can flow at different rates in different places. Time flowing backwards in another universe would also not qualify it to have an additional time dimension, as it would still use the same directions of past and future as regular time, just with events playing out in reverse. For the same reasons, statements about independent time streams or of separate kinds of time, which could flow parallel to the original time, would not qualify.
Neither would dimensions that are timeless voids or are described as beyond spacetime in general qualify. Unless they contradict themselves, these realms should not have a time dimension at all, with change in them happening according to other principles. If they, on the other hand, do contradict themselves, the statement of them not having regular time would inherently not be reliable, making the idea equally unusable.

Of particular consideration are instances in which timelines as a whole are changed, such that there is a timeline (or multiple timelines) before they were changed and after they were changed or created / destroyed. As the timelines as a whole are changed, the before and after in this context can't be the past and future the timelines usually use, but should be a separate direction.

However, caution is necessary. As explained above, we require that the additional time dimension is "a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points." If new versions of timelines are only created if they are changed, due to time travel for example, then the number of "snapshots" of the timeline would be far more limited. The amount of snapshots would be one more than the times the timeline was changed. So, for example, if the timeline is rewritten 2 times, there would be 3 snapshots of the timeline: the original, the timeline after the first rewrite and the timeline after the second rewrite. That are far less than the required uncountably infinitely many.

Aside from direct statements, the easiest way to confirm that the line is comprised of uncountably infinitely many points/"snapshots" is to show that the development of the timelines is time-like. I.e. typically one would want a statement indicating that the alteration of the timelines is subject to its own flow of time, or that special time travel can go to prior versions of the timelines instead of the past. The keyword in the latter case is time travel, as that specifies that the action happens through movement through something like time. Note that such statements can be considered contradicted if the fiction specifies that new versions of the timeline, i.e. additional snapshots, are only created when the timeline is altered or similar.
One other pitfall to consider is the case of branching timelines, where one can return to a past with fewer timelines by just going back to a point in the regular past that was before the split happened. In such cases one has to decide based on context if that is meant or if a prior version where the splits also didn't exist in the regular future is meant. The former case doesn't qualify for an additional time dimension, while the latter might if it meets the other outlined criteria.
 
Of course infinite in fiction have an end but that isn't matter, in math term, you could multiplying infinite in every way you want, still infinite unless we talking about infinite^infinite. So having infinite time being infinitesimal in another time doesn't remotely make said another time being its own different time axis

All and all, time isn't space, time is 4D simply because it multiplying 3 spatial dimensions within it uncountable infinitely, make it 4D via set theory
First
The problem is if we make all decimal's value a infinite the entire set of decimal number will be infinite^infinite

Like:
1,11111... if we make every decimal in here are infinite it will like:
1,infinite infinite infinite... making this are infinite multiply by two (infinite*2)
And we list all number with just 2 number with that, for example:
1,211.. 1,1211.. 1,2121.. 1,2121.. 1,2112..
If we use the same logic that changing every decimal to infinite it alone was equal to infinite multiplied by infinite (infinite*infinite)

And if we list all the decimal it will be equal to infinite multiplied by infinity until infinity (infinite*infinite*..infinity) that was equal to infinite to the power of infinite (infinite^infinite)

And if we see the standard infinite amount of time are consider as one whole timeline or yeah 4D because it are uncountable infinite of 3D, that mean this already a uncountable infinite number of something inside other uncountable infinite number

.
.

Second
Yes, now it multiply the one whole timeline. By the standard infinite amount of time already enough to say this timeline was a whole timeline and we rating it low 2C meaning it already a 4D construction. And this 4D are contained in other uncountable infinite set. Meaning this set was 5D
 
Last edited:
The standard already explain this, you dont need a statement that there was a other dimensional axis of time, if there was a infinite amount of time that is consider as one whole timeline encompassed inside a frame of other timeline it was hypertimeline by default
A timeline within a timeline isn't inherently 5-D, otherwise all multiverses would be on a significant 5-D scale (despite this not being the case). A timeline within a timeline is just another way of saying a space-time within a space-time, which is just a normal multiverse
 
A timeline within a timeline isn't inherently 5-D, otherwise all multiverses would be on a significant 5-D scale (despite this not being the case). A timeline within a timeline is just another way of saying a space-time within a space-time, which is just a normal multiverse
I dont say it was a timeline within a timeline (that will just make it parallel to each other), i say the timeline can be contained within one frame of this timeline that make it 5D, because time by default are 4D because it contain 3D inside every frame of it that was what the standard say
 
First
The problem is if we make all decimal's value a infinite the entire set of decimal number will be infinite^infinite

Like:
1,11111... if we make every decimal in here are infinite it will like:
1,infinite infinite infinite... making this are infinite multiply by two (infinite*2)
And we list all number with just 2 number with that, for example:
1,211.. 1,1211.. 1,2121.. 1,2121.. 1,2112..
If we use the same logic that changing every decimal to infinite it alone was equal to infinite multiplied by infinite (infinite*infinite)

And if we list all the decimal it will be equal to infinite multiplied by infinity until infinity (infinite*infinite*..infinity) that was equal to infinite to the power of infinite (infinite^infinite)

And if we see the standard infinite amount of time are consider as one whole timeline or yeah 4D because it are uncountable infinite of 3D, that mean this already a uncountable infinite number of something inside other uncountable infinite number

.
.

Second
Yes, now it multiply the one whole timeline. By the standard infinite amount of time already enough to say this timeline was a whole timeline and we rating it low 2C meaning it already a 4D construction. And this 4D are contained in other uncountable infinite set. Meaning this set was 5D
You can place multiple space-time universes within a timeline and it is 4D overall, because a single time axis and service multiple space-time within it, or all time dimensions of those space-time is just a part of singular time axis of the timeline, still 4D, of course space-time within space-time with enough evidences can be qualified as hypertimeline, but alone it is not enough
 
You can place multiple space-time universes within a timeline and it is 4D overall, because a single time axis and service multiple space-time within it, or all time dimensions of those space-time is just a part of singular time axis of the timeline, still 4D, of course space-time within space-time with enough evidences can be qualified as hypertimeline, but alone it is not enough
Yes if you place it not within per frame of the timeline. If you place it within the one frame of other timeline, the space time would being uncountable infinitely many

I mean this a simple logic, in the standard time was consider 4D because it contain 3D in every one frame or instant of it. Now we just change the 3D to 4D, it will making this timeline as 5D using the same logic
 
Back
Top