Georredannea15
He/Him- 4,726
- 3,122
Therefore, although it is not a direct statements(except some cases), it is expressed through contexts.Because China's novels pursue the so-called aesthetic feeling of language
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.
Therefore, although it is not a direct statements(except some cases), it is expressed through contexts.Because China's novels pursue the so-called aesthetic feeling of language
What? they make it clear that there's an infinite hierarchy of layers in the tetrahedrons. Those layers in the tetrahedrons are both higher dimensional and lower dimensional as they can evolve to become boundlessly large or infinitesimally small proving that there's a boundless difference between the layers and that they are of significant size.Btw here too she is talking about the 3D part of the 4D structure, namely the 3-D axis of 4-D, and this "infinite regression" occurs infinitely within the 4D structure, and this is basically not infinite increase in an infinite dimensional hierarchy. This is something that supports that there is actually no dimensional difference. In fact, They are talking about an infinite descent in 4-D and then an equally infinite ascent in 4-D...
Yep, these are exactly the same arguments I've seen from my bro lmao
No, no, no, my meaning is very clear. If the author wants to mention this thing, the context should at least mention it slightly.If you want to discuss something in Chinese with me, we can talk privately.Therefore, although it is not a direct statements(except some cases), it is expressed through contexts.
In the eyes of the upper level, the infinitely large bottom layer is just an infinitely small point. Why is this infinite level unrelated to h1-b?No, definitely no.
Nothing said here has anything to do with a H1-B hierarchy. The fact that something expands and contracts infinitely as it moves up (or down) in the hierarchy has nothing to do with the qualitative superiority that we are talking about. And don't forget that the hierarchy thing that we are talking about here is only a part of a 4-dimensional thing. It should be specified somewhere before the scans you use. Somewhere in the part about the letter, I believe.
It's a downwards hierarchy not an upwards one and the top of the hierarchy happens to be 4 dimensional.In the eyes of the upper level, the infinitely large bottom layer is just an infinitely small point. Why is this infinite level unrelated to h1-b?
How do you read Scan? Or do you not want to understand? "The 3-dimensional part of the 4-dimensional structure is mentioned" and it is stated that it descends infinitely within this 4-dimensional part.What? they make it clear that there's an infinite hierarchy of layers in the tetrahedrons. Those layers in the tetrahedrons are both higher dimensional and lower dimensional as they can evolve to become boundlessly large or infinitesimally small proving that there's a boundless difference between the layers and that they are of significant size.
What you said is a comment you added. But, as I said before, even if we assume that this is the case, this is not a qualitative superiority because infinite difference or infinity is a quantity. Just look at the page...In the eyes of the upper level, the infinitely large bottom layer is just an infinitely small point. Why is this infinite level unrelated to h1-b?
And this novel contains a timeline in three dimensions.How do you read Scan? Or do you not want to understand? "The 3-dimensional part of the 4-dimensional structure is mentioned" and it is stated that it descends infinitely within this 4-dimensional part.
He makes no statement here about any "higher dimensional hierarchy" or that the difference between layers is like 3-D and 4-D.
Basically what you have is;
3D part within a 4D structure. (That is, all of these events take place in a 4-dimensional structure in the first place, which is an indication that there is no infinite dimensional hierarchy in the first place)
And infinite layers going down infinitely within the 4-dimensional structure. (I have already explained that at the standards threshold there will be no +1 even if there is an infinite difference between layers)
What you said is a comment you added. But, as I said before, even if we assume that this is the case, this is not a qualitative superiority because infinite difference or infinity is a quantity. Just look at the page...
But this novel contains space-time continuum and various timelines in three dimensions.Brother, just look at the scan just had... It is in the context that this infinitely down takes place in a 4-dimensional structure containing a 3-dimensional part... This decline continues infinitely.
Dude, what does any of this have to do with this infinite dimensional hierarchy??? I feel like you're pressing random buttons here right now.And this novel contains a timeline in three dimensions.
This doesn't make it above 4D.There is no evidence that the vertex is four-dimensional, and it is mentioned many times in the book that it transcends the space-time dimension.
This is exactly what I feel when talking with this guy.I feel like you're pressing random buttons here right now.
Does the infinite hierarchy have to be linked to the infinite dimension? I don't think so. And the dimension descriptions of various works are different.Some dimensional descriptions are directly illusory rarity of reality.Dude, what does any of this have to do with this infinite dimensional hierarchy??? I feel like you're pressing random buttons here right now.
Not necessarily, but what you're suggesting is hierarchy, an infinite dimensional hierarchy.Does the infinite hierarchy have to be linked to the infinite dimension? I don't think so. And the dimension descriptions of various works are different.Some dimensional descriptions are directly illusory rarity of reality.
Dude... What are you even saying.Does the infinite hierarchy have to be linked to the infinite dimension? I don't think so. And the dimension descriptions of various works are different.Some dimensional descriptions are directly illusory rarity of reality.
No not really.I think my point is very clear.
And?At the beginning, the space-time continuum collapsed, don't you think?
This doesn't justify 5D or more.Time-space continuum collapses, time series, time axis, which is not normal three-dimensional space for normal people.
So 4D? Ok.On this basis, 3D is only an infinitesimal point at a higher level, but this level is infinite.
So, seeing the scans again... sadly i don't think they can reach such higher tier with the current justification but i feel some other things there can help to other upgrades such as the black hole universes being 2-A in size/countably infinite and the eternal regression too. This would make the Puella Magi verse have more than a single 2-A structure.
Lmfao.So, seeing the scans again... sadly i don't think they can reach such higher tier with the current justification but i feel some other things there can help to other upgrades such as the black hole universes being 2-A in size/countably infinite and the eternal regression too. This would make the Puella Magi verse have more than a single 2-A structure.
What is claimed to be H1-B here is part of a 4-D structure. I mean, really, I still don't understand how we can claim that it is H1-B, especially when it is stated that this letter is 4-D.I think High 1-B is valid actually.
Then the 4-D structure is High 1-B.What is claimed to be H1-B here is part of a 4-D structure.
Putting aside the part that this thing was not H1-B in the first place.Then the 4-D structure is High 1-B.
Infinite x infinite can exist in the same dimension lol.It's a bit incoherent for a "4-D thing" to contain infinitely many things Infinitely larger than eachother, and still be 4-D.
It's not only a downward hierarchy, actually there's a downward hierarchy which are inside the tetrahedron and outside there are a upward hierarchy which creates infinitely many more layers just like the downward hierarchy. So it's not limited to a downward hierarchy.Despite being a "downward hierarchy"
It does seem to be High 1-B.Putting aside the part that this thing was not H1-B in the first place.
You are actually claiming now that what has four spatial axes has infinite spatial axes. I can no longer imagine how many weird things this thread will bring up lmao
No. If something is directly stated as 4-D, then that means that you are misinterpreting the statements. Even if we ignore that what is written there is still not H1-B, you are really talking weird atpIt does seem to be High 1-B.
Infinities that are infinitely bigger than each other are still the same infinity. It is only equal to infinity x infinity, which does not take you to a higher infinity.And yes. Containing Infinitely many infinities that are larger than eachother is pretty far beyond 4-D. The author here seems to just not know how the fourth dimension works.
So kinda like how a 5-D space with a size that corresponds to like aleph-3 would be 1-A?It does seem to be High 1-B.
And yes. Containing Infinitely many infinities that are larger than eachother is pretty far beyond 4-D. The author here seems to just not know how the fourth dimension works.
No, this is not the case, there is an infinite down with infinite layers within the 4-dimensional structure, but then it "rises back up equally infinitely" and returns to what it was before the fallIt's not only a downward hierarchy, actually there's a downward hierarchy which are inside the tetrahedron and outside there are a upward hierarchy which creates infinitely many more layers just like the downward hierarchy. So it's not limited to a downward hierarchy.
1. Or the author just completely doesn't understand the implication of his statement. Authors define mathematical concepts incorrectly all the time. For example the infamous scan where a Marvel abstract says "The set of all odd and even numbers is larger than the set of all even numbers". We go with how its described in the actual prose.No. If something is directly stated as 4-D, then that means that you are misinterpreting the statements. Even if we ignore that what is written there is still not H1-B, you are really talking weird atp
Infinities that are infinitely bigger than each other are still the same infinity. It is only equal to infinity x infinity, which does not take you to a higher infinity.
Yeah.So kinda like how a 5-D space with a size that corresponds to like aleph-3 would be 1-A?