Nasuverse Discussion Board (New Forum)

[NeoZex6399]

 

[Theoretical]

Yeah, Ultima and Agnaa have so far made the best arguments. The main reason I think people agree with DT is cause they agree with his "big claims need big evidence" belief. While that's something easy to agree with, it's also a little weird that people were so okay with statements like "beyond dimensionality" being 1A, but not High 1A even though that has just as much of a logical foundation, if not even more of one.

Ikr but one is higher than the other and considered to be too high for such statements so "nlf applies" the way how nlf is used in the wiki is so arbitrary

Guys, I found a funny thing. Look at this:
「人の身で神に至ったものは数あれど……人の身のまま神を凌駕するものがいようとは。いや、そもそも……何ですかアレ！ 精神構造が超次元立方体でも表せねー！！ 腹ん中に宇宙作ってんじゃねーですよ！」
(“There are many people who have reached the gods with their human bodies, but there are those who surpass gods with their human bodies.
The mental structure can't even be represented by a superdimenshional hypercube! ! You're not making a universe in your stomach! ")

And, well, just look at the description of the Dreamlands:

この世界空間では、何ものも私から逃れることはできない。この場所はいかなる物理現象にも属さない。カルデアが図面に高次元の何かを書き込んで座標を統一しても、通常の空間の法則はこのエフィマリア世界にはまったく削除されない。不可能な領域を作ろうが、異なる法則の世界を見つけようが、複雑な数をいくら増やそうが、この愛の深淵には何の違いもないのだ。
(Nothing can escape me in this world space. This place does not belong to any physical phenomenon. Even if Chaldea writes something high-dimensional on the map and unifies the coordinates, the normal laws of space are not deleted at all in this Efimaria world. It makes no difference in this abyss of love whether we create the impossible realm, discover a world of different laws, or increase the number of intricacies.)

Yog-Sothoth tier 1-A???

Shit where did you get all of this

Could happen if Apophatic Theology was accepted as the new tier 0. Otherwise, Nasuverse doesn't really have much basis for being that high

Tbh hypothetically if you argue Tao which is very consistent representation of the roots nature you can have some argument for that considering how every statement for the root corresponds hyper-literally to Tao statements

So theoretically speaking

Looking at the similarities it all starts with this

the Dao as the root, telling us that "The ten thousand things one by one will return to the root - return to the root and not know why." Yet the root is not the "place" in the sense of what Derrida has rejected, because it is the process of nature that is constantly self-transforming and hence constantly self-displacing. According to Daoist philosophy, fullness is emptiness and, as Laozi points out, one achieves fullness through vacuity/void. The Dao is a non-full, non-simple "origin" as it is in negative theology, and hence it has no onto-theological implications; neither is it an absolute determination of truth.

Everything that comes from the origin/the root is destined to return back to the root which is also said in the source material:

fact that I existed at all fits me. Here lay entropy, the end of all things, a place the living may never observe, but only the dead may enter. I died. And yet I am still alive. I felt my mind about to lose its grip. Two years. An instant, stretched out to an eternity. Both are accurate measures of my time spent in this " ". Here, I touched death. Here, I fought for my life. Here, I awakened.

The dead return back to the root

Furthermore

From above it is not bright;
From below it is not dark:
An unbroken thread beyond
description.
It returns to nothingness.
The form of the formless,
The image of the imageless,
It is called indefinable and beyond
imagination

The constant Tao is ineffable for it is absolutely nothingness beyond descriptions

Which corresponds to the source material:

Beyond and below lay only darkness. This void, lifeless place could only mean one thing: I was dead.

Without anything to even clothe me, I, Shiki Ryōgi, floated, and then sank slowly into the fathomless, lightless sea. There was no end in sight. There was nothing in sight, neither light, and yes, perhaps even darkness. This place was only a hollow, where all meaning ceased to be. A stygian abyss that could not be put into words, and without words it shall remain: a cypher called, simply," ".

I fell deeper into the "", and my naked body slowly acquired the pallor of the grave, and it made me want to look away. In my mind, I knew that everything in this place comes to be the same way.

In the source material as well, the basis for the ineffability of the Root is predicated from it being absolute nothingness even where "swirl of the origin" cannot be used to describe [ ] because it is a name hence seperate and inferior to [ ] which denotes for kara/emptiness.

Then we also have these statements:

!Fung Yu-lan explains the wholeness of the Dao as "the
spontaneity or naturalness of the world." He then contends,
"T(D)aoists often said that Tao is 'nothing,' because it is not
something transcending the world. Yet this 'nothing' is not
equal to zero, since it is the total spontaneity of all things."
(See Fung Yu-lang, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy.) I
think that Fung's explanation of the Dao well fits into
Zhuangzi's understanding of the Dao, yet it neglects the
mystical and metaphysical aspect of the Dao implied in Laozi's
notion of "xuan" we have discussed in this chapter.

Even tho 0 is synonymous with emptiness, zero cannot be used to define tao the absolute nothingness.

Which corresponds to the source material as well:

"Right. The Spiral of Origin, or more simply the Root. Sometimes it's referred to as [ ], the thing for which there can be no reference. It is the source of everything, the 'zero' from which all matter and phenomena flow. Ah, but now that I'm trying to put it into words, I'm realizing that's not a good idea.

And again we have this:

The Tao is hidden permanently and it
cannot be named, so accept this as a fact. You’re not going to find it in a material form; it has no boundaries, and the moment you try to name it, Yet it also contains something that defies boundaries, has no substance, and is infinite and formless.

It is said to be something that has no boundaries that which cannot have a name

In the source material this is said too

Getting into the idea of the akashic records it is an aspect of the Root that exemplifies wholeness containing everything yet still containing everything the root is both everything and nothing.

Which also stems from how Tao works:

Therefore God is both nothing and something: He is nothing
because he is neither the Father, nor the Son, nor the Holy
Spirit. He is something because God exists in everything.
The nothingness in negative theology indicates God as "I am
who I am," God-in-himself, or in Eckhart's word God's "is-ness".

In this seeming paradox of God as both distinct and
indistinct, the distinctions between difference and
identity, transcendence and immanence have been blurred.
According to Eckhart, one should love God "as he is non-God,
a non-spirit, a non-person, a non-image, but as he is a
pure, unmixed One separated from all duality"

Oneness or
unity of God is close to the notion of Oneness in the Daoist
tradition which transcends distinction and non-distinction
altogether.
The dialectical relation of nothing and something in
negative theology is very close to the Daoist understanding
of the Dao as both nothing and everything. In Eckhart's
discourse of oneness, unity should not be understood as a
concept, like any other concepts such as "essence", or
"existence", but a paradox of self-containment and self-negation.

Whilst in the source material this is reiterated too:

The Root of All Things.

It was like looking through a record, an archive so vast yet at the same time there's only "Emptiness". It doesn't have a name because it can't be defined by a name. The power was so overwhelming, I felt like I was going to drown, but I pressed on; I needed to know more! Yet even with all of this power... it still can't grant me my wish.

"My life was spared."

My ears perked up at the sound. Who said that?

"My life was saved, so I'm not going to die that easily!"

I can hear him... maybe, just maybe he can help me...

"I have to live and fulfill my dream, and I can't do that if I'm dead!"

I reach out, trying to get the voice to notice me. To help me, to free me.

"I'm not going to die in a place like this..."

Power begins to flow into me... I feel a connection.

"From someone like you, who kills people for nothing!"

And again:

"And you do it by tapping into the Akashic Record?" I shake my head in disdain as I say it. When Miss Tõko first told me about the Akashic Record, the origin of everything, it seemed such a nebulous concept that I couldn't bring myself to believe it. The fact that she had tried but failed to reach it had only served to help my stance. A collective record of all that has hap- pened, and will happen, given metaphysical being by the combined con- sensus of all humanity, pursued by mages in a quest for ascension

And again but more blatant this time:

"...the Spiral of Origin. The place where all Causes mingle into a whirlpool. It is a place where everything and nothing exists. That, is my true self. Although I am connected to the Spiral of Origin, I am merely part of it. In other words, we are one and the same, aren't we?

This was proposed in the thread, to seperate "swirl of the Root" and "Kara" because despite the term swirl of the Root referring to something indescribable just for the fact that it is a name it can't be ineffable; thus isn't exempt from the ineffability paradox, which is why names cannot apply to divinity even when they are used to refer to it that's how it works in contemporary negative theology but people are practically ignorant so it can't be helped.

In tao this is said as well:

Tao can be talked about, but not

the Eternal Tao.

Names can be named, but not the

Eternal Name.

As the origin of heaven-and- earth, it is nameless; As "the Mother" of all things. it

is nameable. So, as ever hidden, we should look at its inner essence.

Tao can be spoken of that which is spoken off is an aspect of divinity but it doesn't apply to the one that cannot be spoken of which another aspect of divinity which has divine ineffability.

If you really wished to pronounce this term, call it "Kara."

Its meaning varied depending on each. individual's understanding. To put it in simple terms, it was the Spiral of Origin.

However, since the Spiral of Origin was called the Spiral of Origin, it was no longer “”.

Same thing is said in the source material as well

And Again:

"So something about chasing the Vortex of Radix (alternatively, the Root of the Vortex, the Root of Akasha, or the Akashic Root), then."

Bersac's voice was slightly tinged by anxiety. I see. So he does have a correct interpretation of magecraft.

The Vortex of Radix.

Yes. Supposedly the goal of every mage. Then again, the phrase "the Vortex of Radix" is just a convenient name. Putting it as a phrase is wrong in the first place, so sometimes, it's just referred to as [ ] (emptiness,, kara

Terms for example like "akashic records" are used to refer to the same divinity but a different aspect of it, to say it contains every record of existence is correct but it doesn't refer to the aspect that cannot be spoken off as wholeness is a part of divinity just as much as ineffability is which is a different aspect that superscedes its other aspects and is the divinities true form.

Some things can be said about divinity/the root/Tao like it exists beyond dimensions which would apply to some aspect of it but a lesser one that which the true form of it they can't be named would still be separate and superior to it.

As for this (the root apparently being bound by dimensions)

According to occultism, there is a power standing at the apex of the dimensional theory outside of this world. It is considered to be the origin point of everything. The Swirl of the Root is what every Magician desires. It is the seat of God recording and everything in this world. It is the beginning and end of all things.

It only seems to speak about the wholeness aspect of it, of course it would contain all of dimensions and exist at whatever pinnacle of dimensions that exist within the nasuverse but kara would still be above this, it's not even anti feat.

Therefore, whatever is received in the spiritual vessel (emptiness) is not what is in the vessel, but the vessel itself.

Since oneness is beyond distinction and non- distinction, Zhuangzi is ambivalent about the term the "One" or "unity."

Tao exists beyond Dualities, beyond distinction (yin and yang) and non distinction (taiji).

Which in the source material its supported as well, true emptiness being unrestricted from binary oppositions as a territory of freedom (this would include space time because it's part of the distinctions that exist in yin and yang).

What it says ab taiji (source material)

A philosophy originated in ancient China, a graphical representation of the Yin-Yang theory.

It attempts to capture the essence of everything on a conceptual level: those that are active are defined as Yang (white), and the opposite are defined as Yin (black).

The Taiji symbolizes opposing concepts such as day and night, light and darkness, male and female. At the same time, you may also call it a condensed version of the ever- changing, dynamic World.

as day and night, light and darkness, male and female. At the same time, you may also call it a condensed version of the ever- changing, dynamic World.

And then we have this:

"The Dao that can be spoken of is not the constant Dao," the Daoist poets still speak. For Daoists, the language of poetry, with its powerful suggestiveness, its imagination, and openness to one's heart and nature, can transcend the limits of words and non-words, the limits of time and space.

Similar to Tao having negative theology would still allow for you to exist beyond dimensions of your respective reality so the fact that people think this was an anti feat is pretty silly (supported in the source material either way too so).

Now that, that's out of the all of this was just supporting evidence as to how nasu got his inspiration for the root from Tao seems blatantly clear now with all of that being said if you revisit this statement again.

"Infinity is not "". In order to render infinity, one must define limits. Without limits, infinity does not exist. Infinity can be observed because objects possess limits. Ryougi Shiki was immersed in infinity, but found the non-existent limit and severed it.

Of course, limits do not exist within infinity, thus one cannot sever something that does not exist. As a result, escaping from this prison is impossible.

However --- without limits, infinity does not exist. Regardless if a finite wall existed, an limitless world is meaningless before Ryougi Shiki.

If there is no limit, then it is not infinity, but " ". If limits exist, then Rougi would find it and cut away everything.

It relates to Tao's infinity as well works:

What is the Infinite? To define it as other than the finite is to set the infinite apart from the finite, and thereby limit it. To define the infinite, therefore, is to make it definite, and no longer infinite. In fact, to say anything at all of the Infinite, is to actually say nothing about the true Infinite. Like the Tao, the Infinite that can be named is not the true Infinite. The Infinite, then, is ineffable. …Or is it? If we think that the Infinite is ineffable, we have once again defined it by distinguishing it from what is not ineffable. The Infinite is so utterly ineffable that we cannot even say that it is ineffable. Even this, however, is saying too much.

How to define infinity as infinite is to make it definite hence not infinity because infinity is only infinity if infinity is incomprehensible hence [] as they said here.

If there is no limit, then it is not infinity, but " ". If limits exist, then Rougi would find it and cut away everything.

It was directly compared to absolute infinity as well.

The concept of infinity in Western and Eastern philosophies is very similar in some
respects yet different in others. In most Western religions, the Absolute Infinite is referred to as
God. In Taoism, the Infinite is called Tao, or The Way. Another way to think of Tao is as the
source of everything: “We know that life and the universe have a source, but the nature and
depth of that source lie beyond our ken.” (Walker, forward) Even though separated by land, the
ideas of the Infinite in both Taoism and Western religions developed similarly, with the same
attributes and metaphors used to describe it, yet Taoism also has some unique concepts of the
Infinite.

but the direct comparison doesn't matter because I feel like people would still say that's not enough and it's vague; the need for a direct statement is practically nigh useless because the explanation of the infinity being ineffable is a direct comparison in itself, in a sense that absolute infinity also works like that with how it's strong reflection principle works.

here are obvious connections with central themes in theology, especially
with the medieval doctrine that only negative knowlege is possible of God
(apophatic theology). As it stands, it is indeed a negative statement. However it can be given a positive interpretation as follows. Let us provisionally identify the mathematical Absolutely Infinite with the set theoretic
universe as a whole (V). V is unknowable in the sense that we cannot
single it out or pin it down by means of any of our assertions: no true
assertion about V can be made that excludes unintended interpretations
that make the assertion true. In particular—and this is stronger than the
previous sentence—no assertion that we make about V can ensure that we
are talking about the mathematical universe rather than an object in this
universe. So if we do make a true assertion φ about V, then there exist sets
s such that φ is also true when it is interpreted in s.Cantor did not explicitly articulate this line of argument. Yet he was
probably the first one to make use of reflection as a principle motivating
the existence of sets [Hallett 1984].

He argues that the finite ordinals form a set because they can be captured by a definite condition: Whereas, hitherto, the infinity of the first number-class (I) alone
has served as such a symbol [of the Absolute], for me, precisely
because I regarded that infinity as a tangible or comprehensible
idea, it appeared as an utterly vanishing nothing in comparison
with the absolutely infinite sequence of numbers. (Grundlagen einer allgemeinen Mannigfaltigkeitslehre (1883), endnote
to section 4: [Cantor 1932, p. 205])

If the infinity is a collection everything in V then trying to capture it one way or another positively you'll fail because the characterization is satisfied by atleast one large cardinal or certain large sets in V; hence absolute infinity is only absolute infinity if it's ineffable.

The argument for high 1-A can still be achieved

 

[Overlord_Darkness]

Shit where did you get all of this

something wrong?

 

[Migue79]

Snip snap

That's a lot... And kind of interesting. I'll give this a proper read soon.

Also, something I'd like to mention: Why does Ea's page say that the 'sword' operates like Ado Edem's Slash Emperor? I get that the latter says that it shows the truth, but it's moreso the true colors of the planet by dispersing TYPE-PLUTO's blood. It's not by destroying the planet and reverting it back to how it was during the Earth's Genesis like with Ea. I feel like this is just not comparable lol

 

[Tdjwo]

Ikr but one is higher than the other and considered to be too high for such statements so "nlf applies" the way how nlf is used in the wiki is so arbitrary

Shit where did you get all of this

Tbh hypothetically if you argue Tao which is very consistent representation of the roots nature you can have some argument for that considering how every statement for the root corresponds hyper-literally to Tao statements

So theoretically speaking

Looking at the similarities it all starts with this

Everything that comes from the origin/the root is destined to return back to the root which is also said in the source material:

The dead return back to the root

Furthermore

The constant Tao is ineffable for it is absolutely nothingness beyond descriptions

Which corresponds to the source material:

In the source material as well, the basis for the ineffability of the Root is predicated from it being absolute nothingness even where "swirl of the origin" cannot be used to describe [ ] because it is a name hence seperate and inferior to [ ] which denotes for kara/emptiness.

Then we also have these statements:

Even tho 0 is synonymous with emptiness, zero cannot be used to define tao the absolute nothingness.

Which corresponds to the source material as well:

And again we have this:

It is said to be something that has no boundaries that which cannot have a name

In the source material this is said too

Getting into the idea of the akashic records it is an aspect of the Root that exemplifies wholeness containing everything yet still containing everything the root is both everything and nothing.

Which also stems from how Tao works:



Whilst in the source material this is reiterated too:

And again:

And again but more blatant this time:

This was proposed in the thread, to seperate "swirl of the Root" and "Kara" because despite the term swirl of the Root referring to something indescribable just for the fact that it is a name it can't be ineffable; thus isn't exempt from the ineffability paradox, which is why names cannot apply to divinity even when they are used to refer to it that's how it works in contemporary negative theology but people are practically ignorant so it can't be helped.

In tao this is said as well:

Tao can be spoken of that which is spoken off is an aspect of divinity but it doesn't apply to the one that cannot be spoken of which another aspect of divinity which has divine ineffability.

Same thing is said in the source material as well

And Again:

Terms for example like "akashic records" are used to refer to the same divinity but a different aspect of it, to say it contains every record of existence is correct but it doesn't refer to the aspect that cannot be spoken off as wholeness is a part of divinity just as much as ineffability is which is a different aspect that superscedes its other aspects and is the divinities true form.

Some things can be said about divinity/the root/Tao like it exists beyond dimensions which would apply to some aspect of it but a lesser one that which the true form of it they can't be named would still be separate and superior to it.

As for this (the root apparently being bound by dimensions)


It only seems to speak about the wholeness aspect of it, of course it would contain all of dimensions and exist at whatever pinnacle of dimensions that exist within the nasuverse but kara would still be above this, it's not even anti feat.

Tao exists beyond Dualities, beyond distinction (yin and yang) and non distinction (taiji).

Which in the source material its supported as well, true emptiness being unrestricted from binary oppositions as a territory of freedom (this would include space time because it's part of the distinctions that exist in yin and yang).

What it says ab taiji (source material)

And then we have this:

Similar to Tao having negative theology would still allow for you to exist beyond dimensions of your respective reality so the fact that people think this was an anti feat is pretty silly (supported in the source material either way too so).

Now that, that's out of the all of this was just supporting evidence as to how nasu got his inspiration for the root from Tao seems blatantly clear now with all of that being said if you revisit this statement again.

It relates to Tao's infinity as well works:

How to define infinity as infinite is to make it definite hence not infinity because infinity is only infinity if infinity is incomprehensible hence [] as they said here.

It was directly compared to absolute infinity as well.

but the direct comparison doesn't matter because I feel like people would still say that's not enough and it's vague; the need for a direct statement is practically nigh useless because the explanation of the infinity being ineffable is a direct comparison in itself, in a sense that absolute infinity also works like that with how it's strong reflection principle works.


If the infinity is a collection everything in V then trying to capture it one way or another positively you'll fail because the characterization is satisfied by atleast one large cardinal or certain large sets in V; hence absolute infinity is only absolute infinity if it's ineffable.

The argument for high 1-A can still be achieved

That's a lot... And kind of interesting. I'll give this a proper read soon.

Lessgoo

 

[Overlord_Darkness]

Guys, where does Throne of Heroes exists? It is in the same place as the Root?

 

[Tarang123]

Tbh hypothetically if you argue Tao which is very consistent representation of the roots nature you can have some argument for that considering how every statement for the root corresponds hyper-literally to Tao statements

It being like Tao makes sense from what I remember.

 

[Tarang123]

The scan says their mental structure can't be represented by it which means they are above higher dimensions. This was reiterated twice.

That isn't at all what it says. There is quite literally nothing there that warrants a 1A rating without more context

 

[Tarang123]

The entire scan uses "space" which makes less sense compared to dimensions based on how it's description or incomprehensibility by humans. The context for dimensions makes more sense than just space lol. It's even stated that they can't be accessed by higher dimensions

Dimensions are spaces though...so I fail to see the issue. I agree that it's talking about higher dimensions, but using that as an argument for 1A or something is dumb when it outright says that "all possible dimensions" extends only to the 6 directions/dimensions listed out.

 

[Tdjwo]

Dimensions are spaces though...so I fail to see the issue. I agree that it's talking about higher dimensions, but using that as an argument for 1A or something is dumb when it outright says that "all possible dimensions" extends only to the 6 directions/dimensions listed out.

The scan Mr Underlord showed explicitly stated that even higher dimensions aren't enough to access it. Add that statement to Yog-Sothoth being above all possible dimensions then you would understand the context of what it's saying. Not only is it above all possible dimensions, but it's also above higher dimensions in general. That's at least Low 1A.

 

[Tarang123]

The scan Mr Underlord showed explicitly stated that even higher dimensions aren't enough to access it. Add that statement to Yog-Sothoth being above all possible dimensions then you would understand the context of what it's saying. Not only is it above all possible dimensions, but it's also above higher dimensions in general. That's at least Low 1A.

Yeah, and that isn't enough to be 1A anymore. There was an entire revision centered around that. As for the "all possible dimensions", I think we need the raws for that

 

[Tam0n3n]

I'm no expert in japanese, but I've used DeepL to translate it and the result was this:

complex numbers as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_number ? This would be straight up at least aleph 1 (uncountable infinity)

 

[Tarang123]

complex numbers as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_number ? This would be straight up at least aleph 1 (uncountable infinity)

Well no it wouldn't be if they couldn't prove it to be a physical part of it

 

[LehenDuo]

now in your opinion who is best girl in FGO

I'm a big Rin simp, not gonna lie, so Ishtar and Ereshkigal will always be my waifus

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

I'm a big Rin simp, not gonna lie, so Ishtar and Ereshkigal will always be my waifus

Based

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

BTW guys, i do have a proposal to make nasu scaling easier
IMO we should split nasuverse into two different canons- the old canons and the new canon

 

[Tarang123]

BTW guys, i do have a proposal to make nasu scaling easier
IMO we should split nasuverse into two different canons- the old canons and the new canon

It should be split with good reason beyond just making things easier. Is there any other reason why the two canons should be split?

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

It should be split with good reason beyond just making things easier. Is there any other reason why the two canons should be split?

well, how about there being a heck load of differences between the two canons?

 

[Tarang123]

well, how about there being a heck load of differences between the two canons?

I mean, if there are actually that many differences, then I don't have an issue with a CRT to separate them

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

I mean, if there are actually that many differences, then I don't have an issue with a CRT to separate them

anyone else with me?

 

[Maxeez]

I’ve been thinking about it but since Koyanska stated that super-dimensional cubes can’t describe the mental structure, it would entail that any super-dimensional cube also can’t describe/define the Root in its essence since it is beyond even human comprehension and all possible definitions in the verse so that would further support its arguments for 1-A (or Low 1-A, depending on what the currently ongoing thread decides ?)

 

[Overlord_Darkness]

I spent about three hours in order to find some information about the Outer Gods from the event with the Imaginary Number Space. Sooo, here's the Point:
1) Any Foreigner can change, shape and form this space in any way (like Hokusai or Abby or Yang Gufei)
2) The only way Outer Gods can access our world is Servants (however, this rule seems to doesn't apply to Nyarlathotep (who personally manifested himself) and to Yog-Sothoth, who exists as our universe itself).
3) Lesser Outer Gods uses Eldritch Energy in order to increase their powers in Servants. (Like Vulthoom, Cthugha or Crhulhu did)
4) Events that occurred in the Imaginary Scramble was a dream, that makes Dreamlands a thing that should encompass Imaginary Number Space

 

[Grand_Saver_Ritsuka]

 

[Tarang123]

I’ve been thinking about it but since Koyanska stated that super-dimensional cubes can’t describe the mental structure, it would entail that any super-dimensional cube also can’t describe/define the Root in its essence since it is beyond even human comprehension and all possible definitions in the verse so that would further support its arguments for 1-A (or Low 1-A, depending on what the currently ongoing thread decides ?)

it being above all possible definitions wouldn't work if we give 1A to the Root off the very same reasoning. And the rest of that could be satisfied by a single dimensional jump or a few. Getting to 1A off that is a pretty big stretch

 

[Maxeez]

it being above all possible definitions wouldn't work if we give 1A to the Root off the very same reasoning. And the rest of that could be satisfied by a single dimensional jump or a few. Getting to 1A off that is a pretty big stretch

No, what I meant is to take the very same reasoning we are already using to also include any theoretical n-dimensional hypercube to further support it.

 

[Tarang123]

No, what I meant is to take the very same reasoning we are already using to also include any theoretical n-dimensional hypercube to further support it.

Yeah, that still doesn't work as it needs to explicitly mention infinite dimensions or make clear that it applies to infinite dimensions as well, which it doesn't

 

[Regidian]

Shit where did you get all of this

First part come from vitch of darkness dialogue about Kiara.

Second i think it's description of Kiara own reality space. But i don't find this description

 

[Regidian]

Yeah, that still doesn't work as it needs to explicitly mention infinite dimensions or make clear that it applies to infinite dimensions as well, which it doesn't

Not really need infinite dimmension but something that allow it.

hypercube n-dimmensional can go to infinite dimmension

 

[Regidian]

Guys, I found a funny thing. Look at this:
「人の身で神に至ったものは数あれど……人の身のまま神を凌駕するものがいようとは。いや、そもそも……何ですかアレ！ 精神構造が超次元立方体でも表せねー！！ 腹ん中に宇宙作ってんじゃねーですよ！」
(“There are many people who have reached the gods with their human bodies, but there are those who surpass gods with their human bodies.
The mental structure can't even be represented by a superdimenshional hypercube! ! You're not making a universe in your stomach! ")

And, well, just look at the description of the Dreamlands:

この世界空間では、何ものも私から逃れることはできない。この場所はいかなる物理現象にも属さない。カルデアが図面に高次元の何かを書き込んで座標を統一しても、通常の空間の法則はこのエフィマリア世界にはまったく削除されない。不可能な領域を作ろうが、異なる法則の世界を見つけようが、複雑な数をいくら増やそうが、この愛の深淵には何の違いもないのだ。
(Nothing can escape me in this world space. This place does not belong to any physical phenomenon. Even if Chaldea writes something high-dimensional on the map and unifies the coordinates, the normal laws of space are not deleted at all in this Efimaria world. It makes no difference in this abyss of love whether we create the impossible realm, discover a world of different laws, or increase the number of intricacies.)

Yog-Sothoth tier 1-A???

Can you tell me where have you seen the second part?

 

[Tarang123]

Not really need infinite dimmension but something that allow it.

hypercube n-dimmensional can go to infinite dimmension

Not anymore. Now you need genuine proof that this includes infinite dimensional stuff. As for superdimensional shit, we baseline that to just a higher dimension, so this still doesn't work

 

[Regidian]

Not anymore. Now you need genuine proof that this includes infinite dimensional stuff. As for superdimensional shit, we baseline that to just a higher dimension, so this still doesn't work

Nah DT litteraly tell that feat like "adding x number of dimmension would still don't do thing" count as a feat too.

 

[Rakih_Elyan]

Despair

 

[Tarang123]

Nah DT litteraly tell that feat like "adding x number of dimmension would still don't do thing" count as a feat too.

which nasuverse doesn't have

 

[Regidian]

which nasuverse doesn't have

The dreamland count as one if the feat is real

 

[Tarang123]

The dreamland count as one if the feat is real

Scan?

 

[Regidian]

Scan?

Did you read ? "If it's real", which mean i don't have seen this text that underdog have show.

 

[Theoretical]

Guys, where does Throne of Heroes exists? It is in the same place as the Root?

No

That's a lot... And kind of interesting. I'll give this a proper read soon.

Alright

complex numbers as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_number ? This would be straight up at least aleph 1 (uncountable infinity)

It's not always the case actually but it can be.

First part come from vitch of darkness dialogue about Kiara.

Second i think it's description of Kiara own reality space. But i don't find this description

Alright thanks ima look into that.

something wrong?

No I was asking for a source that's all.

It being like Tao makes sense from what I remember.

I thought the root was neoplatonic because it shared similarities to the one from neoplatonism, but my friend recommended me eastern philosophy when he was explaining wuji, taiji and Yin and yang to me. When I looked into I realized it shared similarities to Tao as well so I confused on where the inspiration actually came from, but I realized eastern philosophy in general just shares similarities to western philosophy; they even implement plato's theory of forms in tao but slightly different.

Lessgoo

Oh ye the origin scan doesn't speak of infinity layered concepts it seems to be talking ab "The Flux" from tao as well, which doesn't really layer concepts.

 

[Tarang123]

I thought the root was neoplatonic because it shared similarities to the one from neoplatonism, but my friend recommended me eastern philosophy when he was explaining wuji, taiji and Yin and yang to me. When I looked into I realized it shared similarities to Tao as well so I confused on where the inspiration actually came from, but I realized eastern philosophy in general just shares similarities to western philosophy; they even implement plato's theory of forms in tao but slightly different.

Lots of works like Nasuverse and Masadaverse take influence from those branches of philosophy to begin with so I'm not particularly surprised.

 

[Maxeez]

Yeah, that still doesn't work as it needs to explicitly mention infinite dimensions or make clear that it applies to infinite dimensions as well, which it doesn't

Well the idea of any n-dimensional applies to Koyanska's statement so why wouldn't it work since any amount of dimensions can be added to a hypothetical hypercube ?

The mental structure can't even be represented by a superdimenshional hypercube !

A super-dimensional hypercube doesn't have any set dimensions to begin with, according to its definition.

 

[Tarang123]

Well the idea of any n-dimensional applies to Koyanska's statement so why wouldn't it work since any amount of dimensions can be added to a hypothetical hypercube ?
A super-dimensional hypercube doesn't have any set dimensions to begin with, according to its definition.

We default the term superdimensional to 4D or just any higher dimensional level. It isn't nearly enough to get to that big of a tier