Megaton Rainfall 1-A upgrade

[TiltedFN]

Alright, this should be simple because Ultima said yes on discord (might be one of the most straight forward R>F tbh)



The justifications are already in the profile, but if I need to provide the the screenshots again just say so. Here's what we know about the higher entities

• There are a countless to infinite amount of them: "Each entity is inside the mind of an even higher entity, and so on, across the branches of the tree which exists beyond time and space, it is the tree of existence, whose roots lie in a white, infinite emptiness."
• Each entity views the entity below them as nothing but a dream "A dream can look real when you are in someone else's dream. Everything you see (the universe) is inside the mind of a higher entity. That entity is inside the mind of an even higher entity" This should fulfil the R > F requirements as each entity views the entity below them as nothing but a dream

To prove the higher entities reality cannot be reached by a lower entity, we have statements straight up saying that it is impossible

• They cannot be seen by someone below them, and they can manipulate lower realities, however those on a lower reality cannot change the even higher entity: "The higher entities can see you, but you can't see them, the higher entities can change your reality at will, but you can't change them. One of those higher entities is called the signer."
• A higher entities world is so maddingly different from the ones below them, so much so that anyone from a lower world that even tries to think about it would instantly go mad: "I live in a world so different from yours, that any being from your universe who contemplates it, would instantly go mad. Just like you, I looked up, trying to figure out what exists in the roots of the tree of existence. How can you see something towards which you cannot look?"
• In a higher entities mind lies concepts beyond the comprehension of the world below them "my mind is vast and inscrutable, and therein lies concepts beyond your comprehension"

TLDR; There is a hierarchy of countless "higher entities" that view the ones below them as nothing but a dream; each entity is inside the mind of an even higher entity. A lower entity cannot comprehend the world above theirs, and even if they tried they would instantly go mad, and it is impossible for someone on a lower world to manipulate the world above theirs, but the higher ones can manipulate the ones below.


All the scans are here. When you watch the video, you'll see why screenshotting and saving them would be extremely tedious, the text is so quick to come and go, so it would be better to just listen.



The only thing that can I would argue is that it should be infinite as opposed to countless higher entities, because in my view, what really is the difference between countless higher beings and infinite higher beings when you reach this kind of tier, but that's up to the staff, I won't argue. It would either be 1-A or 1-A+

Thread requested by, @Zenkaibattery1

Agree: DarkDragonMedeus, Ultima_Reality, Elizhaa, Planck69

Disagree: Deagonx, Agnaa

Neutral:

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Thanks for posting it!

Just to add, as said at the bottom, at this tier I personally think the line between countless and infinite is very blurry, so if it is accepted that there is an infinite number of them, then it'd be 1-A+ Also to note, I don't care to much for this verse, but I found it pretty blatant for R > F, so yeah, if it isn't accepted I won't be arguing that much.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Honestly I won't even bother putting this one in the backburner. This is just insanely straightforward, so, yeah. As far as I see, this is legitimate. Though, seeing as there is no "last member" of this hierarchy, it is just arbitrarily high into 1-A.

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Honestly I won't even bother putting this one in the backburner. This is just insanely straightforward, so, yeah. As far as I see, this is legitimate.

Haha yeah, we talked about this before as well

Do you think it should be 1-A or 1-A+ though? Definitely at least countless of them, but yk, countless and infinite at this tier and the wording itself

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Do you think it should be 1-A or 1-A+ though? Definitely at least countless of them, but yk, countless and infinite at this tier and the wording itself

Look at the edit.

 

[DMUA]

You cannot fathom the jumpscare that was seeing Megaton Rainfall on the Tiering Revision thread, in the brief moments before I remembered that the higher entities exist and do have a bunch of tierbabble throughout the signs

But yeah from what I remember it's definitely coded to this kind of thing

 

[Everything12]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't their something about one of the Higher Entities wanting to use Math to understand the tree of existence? What is the full context behind this?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Honestly I won't even bother putting this one in the backburner. This is just insanely straightforward, so, yeah. As far as I see, this is legitimate. Though, seeing as there is no "last member" of this hierarchy, it is just arbitrarily high into 1-A.

Seems reasonable.

 

[deonment]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't their something about one of the Higher Entities wanting to use Math to understand the tree of existence? What is the full context behind this?

Because mathematics is a constant across the various levels of existence, such as multiplication always being commutative, and the value of Pi being the same

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't their something about one of the Higher Entities wanting to use Math to understand the tree of existence? What is the full context behind this?

In one of the last few signs, the entity that left the sign for the MC, stated that although all the higher entities worlds are different, with concepts beyond the comprehension of the lower one, etc, the one thing that remains the same is the answer for mathematical problems, and because of that, he thinks a way to figure out the tree of existence is a mathematical problem, but that's just his theory, and he believes the best course of action is to let intelligent people develop, and maybe they can figure it out themselves and when they do he'll nuke them

Got ninjaed by @deonment

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

bump

 

[Ryzen7900X]

Because mathematics is a constant across the various levels of existence, such as multiplication always being commutative, and the value of Pi being the same

nope

 

[Minos_the_Judge]

Isn't this High 1-B?

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Isn't this High 1-B?

Proper R>F is 1-A now.

 

[Minos_the_Judge]

Proper R>F is 1-A now.

Damn...

 

[Greatsage13th]

Mhm

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Alright, again:

@DarkDragonMedeus @Qawsedf234 @Elizhaa @DarkGrath @Everything12 @Deagonx @Planck69

Input here would be appreciated.

 

[Planck69]

I think 1-A is fine. And yeah, any given Entity would just be a certain finite number of levels above baseline, even if the hierarchy itself goes on forever.

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Well, is that enough to apply? Wouldn't take that long, the justifications pretty much already on the current profile.

Was wonderng if I should do "1-A, higher with even higher entities" since its a hierachy

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Looks good.

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

Awesome, could

The Higher Entities profile be unlocked

 

[AKUTO123]

So seems to endless layer into 1A

 

[Agnaa]

Because mathematics is a constant across the various levels of existence, such as multiplication always being commutative, and the value of Pi being the same

So it's not about the structure of the tree itself, but about something which happens to operate in the same way in the constructs which emanate from the tree?

I think this is a very important distinction to nail down when talking about things which qualify for 1-A. If the structure which underpins that is mathematical, it shouldn't qualify. The underlying basis of it should be one of quality, not quantity.

@Ultima_Reality @DarkDragonMedeus Please actually investigate this first.

EDIT: Okay nvm, I just watched the scans myself, starting from here is the relevant part.

The fundamental basis of this stack of realities is mathematics ("The problem of what lies in the root of the Tree of Existence is a mathematical problem." "What lies in the root of the Tree? ... And the only way to achieve it is Mathematics. Mathematics describes landscapes. Exploring the results of a mathematic function is no different than exploring an extrasolar planet." "Now I know that the root of the Tree of Existence is described somewhere within those landscapes. I've found a marvelous formulation of this problem, but it's too big to fit in this sign."), and mathematics cannot change between them ("Although every Universe on the Tree is maddeningly different, all of them have one thing in common. Mathematics. In every Universe, the sum is commutative, and the value of Pi is always the same").

I think it's weird to treat each jump as beyond mathematics, when the fundamental root of that structure is mathematics, which is the same in every universe.

With that, all that's left is "beyond time and space", which applies to the structure of the tree as a whole, not to any individual jump. That, plus the vague wording, makes me think Low 1-A is unsuitable there.

So ig I think it should just keep the current tier.

 

[Zenkaibattery1]

At least one of the higher entities is trying to figure out what lies in the roots of the tree of existence, which exists beyond time and space, and he figured out that in all the universes, the value of pi is the same, and that the sum is commutative, and because of that his theory is that the roots of the tree of existence is a mathematical problem and they can't figure that out. However, in the final "sign", he says nonetheless he hasn't managed to figure out the answer of the tree of existence after belieiving it was a mathematical problem and his next solution is to allow smart beings to develop and have them figure it out instead. (The video from 8 minutes to the end is the entire dialogue regarding the maths)

I showed Ultima the script before, including the mathematical stuff, and he agreed with it regardless so i'd be surprised if his opinion changed here, but yeah would be nice to see if he has changed his thoughts.

 

[Agnaa]

and he figured out that in all the universes, the value of pi is the same, and that the sum is commutative

From the way that was presented, those sound like two examples of how mathematics is the same in every universe, not like those are the only two things that are shared across all those universes.

and because of that his theory is that the roots of the tree of existence is a mathematical problem and they can't figure that out.

He seems to present it a bit more confidently as that; he repeats it multiple times, and says he knows it to be true.

I don't say the stuff about the difference being dream-like, and the stack being endless, is a "theory" despite it having similar backing (in fact, it has less; he spends a lot less time on those things).

However, in the final "sign", he says nonetheless he hasn't managed to figure out the answer of the tree of existence after belieiving it was a mathematical problem

This makes it sound like he no longer believes it's a mathematical problem. It does not indicate that at all, he still refers to it as "the problem" and believes it can be solved. In fact, he's only dedicating a part of his mind to the alternative approach you detail below; implying that a good part of it is approaching it as he was before.

and his next solution is to allow smart beings to develop and have them figure it out instead.

This doesn't really change stuff. It's a big thing he has trouble figuring out, so he's trying to pawn it off onto others who can approach it from other angles.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

EDIT: Okay nvm, I just watched the scans myself, starting from here is the relevant part.

The fundamental basis of this stack of realities is mathematics ("The problem of what lies in the root of the Tree of Existence is a mathematical problem." "What lies in the root of the Tree? ... And the only way to achieve it is Mathematics. Mathematics describes landscapes. Exploring the results of a mathematic function is no different than exploring an extrasolar planet." "Now I know that the root of the Tree of Existence is described somewhere within those landscapes. I've found a marvelous formulation of this problem, but it's too big to fit in this sign."), and mathematics cannot change between them ("Although every Universe on the Tree is maddeningly different, all of them have one thing in common. Mathematics. In every Universe, the sum is commutative, and the value of Pi is always the same").

I think it's weird to treat each jump as beyond mathematics, when the fundamental root of that structure is mathematics, which is the same in every universe.

Yeah, I've already seen this. I don't think this is particularly problematic, since we, for example, already accept it as a feasible possibility for higher R>F layers to have their own concepts of dimensionality, which look the same as lower ones save for whatever it is that makes them the concept of "This layer, and not that one." If a higher layer is portrayed as being exactly like a regular world in all ways, save for the fact that it's "higher," "more real" and "vaster" than the fictional world, that wouldn't be a disqualifier. This doesn't seem much different; if a higher layer can look the same in all respects save its hierarchical position, then a higher layer looking the same in only a single respect (Mathematics) isn't a problem either.

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah, I've already seen this. I don't think this is particularly problematic, since we, for example, already accept it as a feasible possibility for higher R>F layers to have their own concepts of dimensionality, which look the same as lower ones save for whatever it is that makes them the concept of "This layer, and not that one." If a higher layer is portrayed as being exactly like a regular world in all ways, save for the fact that it's "higher," "more real" and "vaster" than the fictional world, that wouldn't be a disqualifier. This doesn't seem much different; if a higher layer can look the same in all respects save its hierarchical position, then a higher layer looking the same in only a single respect (Mathematics) isn't a problem either.

This isn't just them appearing to have the same systems despite them ultimately being unique, instead, it seems shared across all layers. Plus, the root of all of these realities is repeatedly asserted as mathematical.

What is the point of the "can't be equivalent to mathematics" disqualifier if you allow unsubstantiated excuses like that? Even if someone says "This realm which sees us as fiction has a size of aleph-4" you could just say "Oh well it's only aleph-4 from their perspective, and is beyond mathematics from the lower one".

 

[Ultima_Reality]

This isn't just them appearing to have the same systems despite them ultimately being unique, instead, it seems shared across all layers. Plus, the root of all of these realities is repeatedly asserted as mathematical.

What is the point of the "can't be equivalent to mathematics" disqualifier if you allow unsubstantiated excuses like that? Even if someone says "This realm which sees us as fiction has a size of aleph-4" you could just say "Oh well it's only aleph-4 from their perspective, and is beyond mathematics from the lower one".

That comparison is a pretty shoddy one, since "I have a size of aleph-4" is problematic when it says something about the actual composition of the being in question. It's problematic when it informs how many spatial points the character has. But if the character says, for example, "There are 2 of us here," that's not problematic even though it invokes numbers (Mathematical things)

Same deal here. The mathematics mentioned here don't seem to impute any cardinality or composition to the entities' inner substance whatsoever. The examples given are "Multiplication is always commutative" and "The value of Pi is always the same." Neither of those imply anything about them being dimensionally composed. The only other math-related thing that is brought up, from what I see, is functions, but these aren't problematic for the same reason numbers aren't.

 

[Agnaa]

While I do think my other points are cogent and defensible, I think the most important one is one that you keep ignoring:

The fundamental basis of this stack of realities is mathematics ("The problem of what lies in the root of the Tree of Existence is a mathematical problem." "What lies in the root of the Tree? ... And the only way to achieve it is Mathematics. Mathematics describes landscapes. Exploring the results of a mathematic function is no different than exploring an extrasolar planet." "Now I know that the root of the Tree of Existence is described somewhere within those landscapes. I've found a marvelous formulation of this problem, but it's too big to fit in this sign.")

I think it's weird to treat each jump as beyond mathematics, when the fundamental root of that structure is mathematics, which is the same in every universe.

Plus, the root of all of these realities is repeatedly asserted as mathematical.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

While I do think my other points are cogent and defensible, I think the most important one is one that you keep ignoring:

Yeah, and that also falls into the point I've made, so I wouldn't say I ignored it, no. "Mathematics" in some vague abstract sense doesn't impute dimensional composition on an entity. If the entity there actually talked about dimensional spaces and volumes as relevant to the structure of the tree, I would agree. But "mathematics" in a broad sense needn't revolve around that at all (Unless, as said, you think something as harmless as a prospective 1-A speaking of themselves and their brethren in numerical terms is problematic)

 

[Agnaa]

For one thing, "beyond dimensions within mathematics" is Low 1-A, while "beyond mathematics as a whole" is actually 1-A.

For the rest of it, I'll just refer you to what I said earlier:

From the way that was presented, those sound like two examples of how mathematics is the same in every universe, not like those are the only two things that are shared across all those universes.

I hope you can see why I consider "Mathematics underpins reality, and is the same in all of existence" to be a more relevant anti-feat than casually mentioning 3 beings existing.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

For one thing, "beyond dimensions within mathematics" is Low 1-A, while "beyond mathematics as a whole" is actually 1-A.

Depends on what is meant by "mathematics." 1-A transcends mathematics insofar as its substance transcends composition and therefore is internally inexpressible by quantity. But if you say, "1-A is beyond the number 2, where 2 includes not only a tuple of points in an unified mathematical structure but any doubles of things," then it does not do that, no. Your argument basically leads you to a position closer to the latter.

I hope you can see why I consider "Mathematics underpins reality, and is the same in all of existence" to be a more relevant anti-feat than casually mentioning 3 beings existing.

I cannot, no. If a verse has an infinite hierarchy of R>F, and then a Platonic World founding this hierarchy, where the Form of aleph-0 is grounds the infinitude of the layers, then that's a case of a verse where mathematics underpins reality, without imputing composition or any problematic aspect on the 1-A things.

 

[Agnaa]

Depends on what is meant by "mathematics." 1-A transcends mathematics insofar as its substance transcends composition and therefore is internally inexpressible by quantity. But if you say, "1-A is beyond the number 2, where 2 includes not only a tuple of points in an unified mathematical structure but any doubles of things," then it does not do that, no. Your argument basically leads you to a position closer to the latter.

The former ofc.

I cannot, no. If a verse has an infinite hierarchy of R>F, and then a Platonic World founding this hierarchy, where the Form of aleph-0 is grounds the infinitude of the layers, then that's a case of a verse where mathematics underpins reality, without imputing composition or any problematic aspect on the 1-A things.

Using a Platonic World in your example inherently implies something different. A formless place which can happen to contain mathematical forms, alongside other distinct things inexpressible in such terms.

In this case, it seems like the world founding this hierarchy is mathematical. And it seems like, in line with that, mathematics doesn't vary between these layers.

Would you still have no issue if it was in more explicit terms? If the root of existence was said to be ZFC, would you still say that each layer is a beyond-compositional jump surpassing all reasonable extensions of ZFC?

On another note, I don't personally find this too relevant, but if you really want terms invoking space, how do you feel about the comparison of mathematics to landscapes? Saying that exploring the results of a mathematical function is no different from exploring a planet.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Using a Platonic World in your example inherently implies something different. A formless place which can happen to contain mathematical forms, alongside other distinct things inexpressible in such terms.

In this case, it seems like the world founding this hierarchy is mathematical. And it seems like, in line with that, mathematics doesn't vary between these layers.

"The world founding the hierarchy is mathematical" would need some qualification to actually be problematic. The impression I've gotten from the character's monologues is that mathematics as an abstract thing describes and defines reality. In which case, there's no issue at all, since the "mathematical" nature of that substrate doesn't have the factors we'd consider to cause issues.

Would you still have no issue if it was in more explicit terms? If the root of existence was said to be ZFC, would you still say that each layer is a beyond-compositional jump surpassing all reasonable extensions of ZFC?

On another note, I don't personally find this too relevant, but if you really want terms invoking space, how do you feel about the comparison of mathematics to landscapes? Saying that exploring the results of a mathematical function is no different from exploring a planet.

For the first: Not inherently. ZFC is just a bunch of axioms dictating how objects in a set interact, after all. There's a difference between generalizations of compositional space describable by ZFC and "ZFC" in the abstract. The latter basically falls under the broad definition of "Mathematics" that I gave as the second option up there.

As for the second: Don't see that as an issue, either. The function describes the planet, but obviously it's an abstract mathematical object and not something with the actual concrete characteristics of the planet. The function holding true for the higher layer (As in, an entity from there could run the numbers in its mind and obtain the same results that someone from a lower layer would get) doesn't mean there's some structure with these corresponding characteristics in said layer.

 

[Agnaa]

"The world founding the hierarchy is mathematical" would need some qualification to actually be problematic. The impression I've gotten from the character's monologues is that mathematics as an abstract thing describes and defines reality. In which case, there's no issue at all, since the "mathematical" nature of that substrate doesn't have the factors we'd consider to cause issues.

If you can mathematically define all of reality, there's no room for qualitative distinctions between parts of reality. If this weren't true, then typical Type IV multiverses and encompassing all of ZFC wouldn't be capped at Low 1-A.

Since I think we've pretty much run through our points, I'll ping some others @DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @Deagonx

 

[Deagonx]

I'll try to find some time to sift through this tomorrow or Saturday.

 

[Deagonx]

This is relatively short for a 1-A thread so I took the time to read through it. I am sympathetic to Agnaa's view here. It isn't merely the fact that math exists in some form in a higher realm, but moreso that mathematics is expressly described as an all encompassing concept, to such an extent that the problem of the tree of existence is mathematical. This does seem to be a noteworthy roadbump if the proposal is that each level completely transcends mathematics.

 

[Elizhaa]

I also see arbitrary into 1-A as fine, from Ultima's points; I agree math seems more of an idea in this context.