- 75
- 10
Something has been on my mind for a while and that is a question I have about what makes a verse possible 2-A material. A 2-A character is from my understanding one that has the power equal to or greater than infinite 4-D universes--or they're 5 dimensional beings or beyond.
However, what determines the validity of an infinite multiverse? I am asking this because there are plenty of verses or stories out there that operate under infinite timelines where each action leads to a different outcome, giving birth or leading to a different timeline. Since actions are bound to being possible to be taken in the first place, would that not suggest that the amount of actions leading to different timelines is finite therefore the seemingly infinite multiverse is a finite multiverse but one that has so many worlds you just cannot count them normally?
Can an infinite multiverse only be considered infinite when it is literally infinite as in "everything has happened, happens and/or will happen"?
For instance, when I stumbled upon Serge (Chrono Cross)'s profile it stated that the Chrono Cross verse contains a multiverse embodying infinite timelines. However, by the logic of infinity, would that not mean that in those many timelines there are ones that the bad guy i.e. Time Devourer (Lavos) wins and stops Serge's efforts--or worse, even consume him alongside the Chrono Cross? But that would obviously contradict the events and very outcome of Chrono Cross, so that cannot be possible. But if a "multiverse possessing infinite timelines" excludes certain scenarios or possibilities, can we really call them an infinite multiverse?
Mind you I am not here trying to challenge the cosmology of Chrono Cross specifically--I am using its cosmology as a case example of the question I am struggling with because there are arguably several other fictional works where the authors or characters talk about "infinite upon infinite universes" yet there are certain definitive outcomes that have to exclude the possibility or fruition of a different outcome--especially if said outcome is what would endanger or prevent the heroes from saving the world/multiverse/reality to begin with (example: the villain plans to destroy all of existence in a multiverse that is stated by the author to be infinite but is thwarted by the heroes, which means there CANNOT be a seperate timeline or outcome in which the villain does win because that would mean the heroes failed in saving the multiverse in the first place or were incapable in saving the multiverse to begin with).
However, what determines the validity of an infinite multiverse? I am asking this because there are plenty of verses or stories out there that operate under infinite timelines where each action leads to a different outcome, giving birth or leading to a different timeline. Since actions are bound to being possible to be taken in the first place, would that not suggest that the amount of actions leading to different timelines is finite therefore the seemingly infinite multiverse is a finite multiverse but one that has so many worlds you just cannot count them normally?
Can an infinite multiverse only be considered infinite when it is literally infinite as in "everything has happened, happens and/or will happen"?
For instance, when I stumbled upon Serge (Chrono Cross)'s profile it stated that the Chrono Cross verse contains a multiverse embodying infinite timelines. However, by the logic of infinity, would that not mean that in those many timelines there are ones that the bad guy i.e. Time Devourer (Lavos) wins and stops Serge's efforts--or worse, even consume him alongside the Chrono Cross? But that would obviously contradict the events and very outcome of Chrono Cross, so that cannot be possible. But if a "multiverse possessing infinite timelines" excludes certain scenarios or possibilities, can we really call them an infinite multiverse?
Mind you I am not here trying to challenge the cosmology of Chrono Cross specifically--I am using its cosmology as a case example of the question I am struggling with because there are arguably several other fictional works where the authors or characters talk about "infinite upon infinite universes" yet there are certain definitive outcomes that have to exclude the possibility or fruition of a different outcome--especially if said outcome is what would endanger or prevent the heroes from saving the world/multiverse/reality to begin with (example: the villain plans to destroy all of existence in a multiverse that is stated by the author to be infinite but is thwarted by the heroes, which means there CANNOT be a seperate timeline or outcome in which the villain does win because that would mean the heroes failed in saving the multiverse in the first place or were incapable in saving the multiverse to begin with).
