• 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.

Puella Magi Verse High 1-B Upgrade

1) Slippery Slope
2) I will say it again, just cause fiction contradicts what is deemed as normal doesn't make it invalid under our system (ie bronze age superman screaming at like 10 billion decibels and not creating a black hole that dwarfs the universe many times over)
☠️
 
“contradiction”

I have never came across a work of fiction that tries to incorporate high level physics and science fantasy in a way that doesn’t cause contradiction. It comes to a point where people pick and choose which contradictions to ignore and to rigorously apply.

Oscillating tetrahedrons where each face represents progressing infinite layers of reality does not and cannot exist in real life. Trying to mix fantasy with real world logic and the very basic task of telling a coherent story that people can understand will of course lead to contradictions.

A proper contradiction that should be taken seriously is a major plot point, not a detail that doesn’t change the theme or direction of the story being told or the idea that is being tried to made.
 
“contradiction”

I have never came across a work of fiction that tries to incorporate high level physics and science fantasy in a way that doesn’t cause contradiction. It comes to a point where people pick and choose which contradictions to ignore and to rigorously apply.

Oscillating tetrahedrons where each face represents progressing infinite layers of reality does not and cannot exist in real life. Trying to mix fantasy with real world logic and the very basic task of telling a coherent story that people can understand will of course lead to contradictions.

A proper contradiction that should be taken seriously is a major plot point, not a detail that doesn’t change the theme or direction of the story being told or the idea that is being tried to made.
What do you think is the situation here? You guys still ignore the issues that are not important to you and take into account the issues that are important to you.
 
What do you think is the situation here? You guys still ignore the issues that are not important to you and take into account the issues that are important to you.
I have already stated I am neutral because the acceptance of this is hinged on whether the staff thinks the descriptions of infinity fit the standard for quantitative superiority. Nothing more. Nothing less. I don’t see the importance in arguing with any other details, as they will all still hinder on that valuation.
 
I have already stated I am neutral because the acceptance of this is hinged on whether the staff thinks the descriptions of infinity fit the standard for quantitative superiority. Nothing more. Nothing less. I don’t see the importance in arguing with any other details, as they will all still hinder on that valuation.
I mean, I was talking about this "contradiction" thing.
 
Being 4-D but also high 1-B wouldn't be a contradiction I guess because it doesn't necessarily need to have infinite spatial axes but a cardinality or size which would correspond/equate to high 1-B on our tiering system.
 
I mean, I was talking about this "contradiction" thing.
I already spoken on that. The author most likely had in their mind a rotating tesseract.

In their minds eye, a 4th dimension object is this oscillating object. If you read the description and picture a tesseract, it becomes as clear as night and day.
 
Being 4-D but also high 1-B wouldn't be a contradiction I guess because it doesn't necessarily need to have infinite spatial axes but a cardinality or size which would correspond/equate to high 1-B on our tiering system.
This is achieved by infinite axes with different directions that extend to infinity. You can't reach this size otherwise
 
I already spoken on that. The author most likely had in their mind a rotating tesseract.

In their minds eye, a 4th dimension object is this oscillating object. If you read the description and picture a tesseract, it becomes as clear as night and day.
I don't think so. Because the 4th spatial dimension is explained very well. And likewise, the probability of these infinite differences between the layers to be quantitative is much higher than the probability of them being qualitative.
 
I don't think so. Because the 4th spatial dimension is explained very well. And likewise, the probability of these infinite differences between the layers to be quantitative is much higher than the probability of them being qualitative.
It doesn't? it's just mentioned that the tetrahedron is a 4-D structure but the nature of such dimension is not well elaborated.
 
This is fiction, saying anything is possible here is not the same as something contradicting itself. For example, we don't really scale any character above all the math just because it's fiction.
 
What about a 4-D spatial axis which extends to a mahlo cardinal? Would that not be tier 0? It's basically same argument here but a lesser tier.
It would be the same again Lmao, I think you're confusing "size" and "volume". In fact, such a thing could not even happen. It is a very absurd situation to assume this, especially in a situation where it is not clear whether the infinity between layers is qualitative or not. It is very, very unhealthy to assume that this will happen when there is so much doubt.
 
It would be the same again Lmao, I think you're confusing "size" and "volume". In fact, such a thing could not even happen. It is a very absurd situation to assume this, especially in a situation where it is not clear whether the infinity between layers is qualitative or not. It is very, very unhealthy to assume that this will happen when there is so much doubt.
Regular axes extend to the real number line which is an uncountable infinity. There is nothing to say, you can't have a number line that extends to higher cardinals. In fact there are numerous types of number lines.
 
It would be the same again Lmao, I think you're confusing "size" and "volume". In fact, such a thing could not even happen. It is a very absurd situation to assume this, especially in a situation where it is not clear whether the infinity between layers is qualitative or not. It is very, very unhealthy to assume that this will happen when there is so much doubt.
🗣️

Qualitative is for metaphysical transcendences like R>F or transcending concepts not differences between infinity.

Why is this so unhealthy? Is it only because you personally think it is or is there actual reasoning. If the evidence aligns then it align and infinities dwarfing the last does in fact align.
 
🗣️

Qualitative is for metaphysical transcendences like R>F or transcending concepts not differences between infinity.

Why is this so unhealthy? Is it only because you personally think it is or is there actual reasoning. If the evidence aligns then it align and infinities dwarfing the last does in fact align.
Dude what are you talking about?? Infinity is already a quantitative in the wiki.
 
Then wtf are you talking about????????????????
Ahh... man.

"4 different axes extending as far as Mahlo" would still be 4-D. Because you can extend an axis or line to any length you want, but as long as you extend it in the same direction, it will never give you an extra axis. (Uncountable infinitely or even if you make it longer.) If that's your problem, sure, if that's not your problem, I don't know what you're talking about.

And i don't understand why we are still discussing about things that have already been resolved. Right now I feel like I'm speaking out against a gang trying to upgrade this by force lmao (no offense yourself)
 
Ahh... man.

"4 different axes extending as far as Mahlo" would still be 4-D. Because you can extend an axis or line to any length you want, but as long as you extend it in the same direction, it will never give you an extra axis. (Uncountable infinitely or even if you make it longer)
I don't understand why we are still discussing about things that have already been resolved. Right now I feel like I'm speaking out against a gang trying to upgrade this by force lmao (no offense yourself)
The wiki gives higher tiers for having uncountably infinite amount of universe, for being uncountably infinitely bigger then a universe/multiverse. None of these things equate to higher dimensions. Your point doesn’t make sense.
 
now i understand why barely any staff members want to look at this thread
we have reached 11 pages
 
The wiki gives higher tiers for having uncountably infinite amount of universe, for being uncountably infinitely bigger then a universe/multiverse. None of these things equate to higher dimensions. Your point doesn’t make sense.
You can be this big within yourself and the volume you have. (Wiki already implements this and it was already made clear)

However, a 1-dimensional line that extends uncountably infinitely in the same linear direction will always be a 1-dimensional line. That's what I mean
I feel like I'm talking to an impenetrable steel wall.
I felt this way about 5 pages ago. Yes, you will be crazy like me
 
You can be this big within yourself and the volume you have. (Wiki already implements this and it was already made clear)

However, a 1-dimensional line that extends uncountably infinitely in the same linear direction will always be a 1-dimensional line. That's what I mean
And if the 4D tesseract has uncountably infinitely increasing layers, would it not be H1B?

At this point I'd rather this thread get closed and someone like @ShivaShakti create the thread but since Ultima said he'll comment I guess not.
We gave ultima the necessary posts. That should also be enough for any staff that asks for a summary.
 
At this point I'd rather this thread get closed and someone like @ShivaShakti create the thread but since Ultima said he'll comment I guess not.
It doesn't matter, whether the thread is discussed or not.

Personally, after a while, if the thread is passes, I guess i can make a downgrade in a way that everyone can understand clearly. IDK but this made me tired.
 
Back
Top