• 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.

Questions about qualitative superiority and R>F

Status
Not open for further replies.
ImmortalDread said:
If by any chance; mind sending an evidence of Ultima denying this?
Click to expand...
In the 2-A Q&A thread, saying that "an infinite structure containing an infinite low2-c structure can be low2-c", Executor supporting this, and DT and Ultima saying that this is not tier 1... KLOL also clarified this there (based on the information he received from them)

There is a bit too much nonsense. If I can find it I can DM it to you or post it here, or I'd really appreciate it if you could do me a favour and look at that Q&A thread.

Thread is about "2-A"

I'm a bit tired today, so I'm a bit lazy for tag. I'm tortured even now as I write.
 
Reiner said:
I didn't get to read what u sent on my wall, it was deleted before I could read. but Agna answering few questions in a public server randomly is not a evidence nor a standard.
Click to expand...
Btw no He didn't reply on the server, I had discussed this a bit with him and I have a few more discussions and questions like this from DM.

I'll throw it again if you haven't seen it
 
didn't you read all of what I commented that I sent earlier

stop talking rude karbit
 
Last edited:
it's not that you yourself said greater than 2A also did not meet the tier 1 requirements, don't forget you yourself said that in the previous thread don't try to avoid you, plus you spoke rudely to me
 
It's fine; he did not know the person got reported by me, and this seems to be a normal reaction when someone gets offended/insulted. Let's not drag it.
 
Ren1999 said:
I it's not that you yourself said greater than 2A also did not meet the tier 1 requirements, don't forget you yourself said that in the previous thread don't try to avoid you, plus you spoke rudely to me
Click to expand...
I dont ******* said that
 
Btw why do some still say that it does not give HDE to be uncountable infinitely greater than the lower plane as "size" or "existence"?

This is something that R>F does not actually have, so R>F does not give you HDE, but what I said above gives you large size and HDE.
 
Now you got the point after making me lose my brain cells on my wall? HDE standards has been changed as per DT's opinion. That's what I said previously but you just don't listen. Smh. As pain (who changed HDE standard) and I have said, existential QS don't get HDE by default. R>F and Uncountable infinite difference is QS but not HDE. They're just sheer size as per our current standards.
Reiner said:
Yeah R>F is Qualitative transcendence. We Nerf down R>F transcendence to one lvl dimensional jump as we aren't sure just how high R>F scales due it's nature seemingly being far superior than dimensional jumps. But we are sure it's at least 1 level of higher infinite in least so that's just in lack of better option.

As for it being HDE, Ultima and DT have contrary opinion on it. As for Ultima it is HDE or any uncountable infinite sheer size unless stated otherwise but DT says otherwise on it. I'm in agreement with it being HDE but that doesn't really matter to this thread.
Click to expand...

Now kneel.
 
Reiner said:
Now you got the point after making me lose my brain cells on my wall? HDE standards has been changed as per DT's opinion. That's what I said previously but you just don't listen. Smh. As pain (who changed HDE standard) and I have said, existential QS don't get HDE by default. R>F and Uncountable infinite difference is QS but not HDE. They're just sheer size as per our current standards.


Now kneel.
Click to expand...
I guess you still don't want to understand. Nobody is saying that this is a qualitative superiority in the sense of 'existential' or 'size', bruh...

For example, characters with a large size Type 8 would be as large as a universal space-time continuum, and the reason this universal space-time continuum is 4-D is because it is uncountably infinitely larger (in size) than any any 3-D structure and it's gives you +1 axis.

That's exactly what I was talking about and what R>F didn't give you, but it would be wrong to say that R>F gives you uncountably infinite superiority to "size" or "existence".

So it is wrong to say that R>F is qualitatively superior or uncountably infinitely superior in the sense of "size" or "existence". That's why DT said "R>F just mean being more real"

But it would be correct to say that it is uncountable infinitely superior or qualitatively superior from the lower plane in terms of power.

Now stop playing with my brain.
 
1117003705728897034.gif

Not reading allat.
 
That's what he said though. he even specifically said it's not HDE but its still qualitatively superior in terms of infinite difference. that alone should have told you he is talking about power as he already said its not HDE where in HDE is mostly about sizes

idk man sounds like you're heavily misunderstanding what he is saying or assuming wrongly on what he said
 
TheGreatJedi13 said:
That's what he said though. he even specifically said it's not HDE but its still qualitatively superior in terms of infinite difference. that alone should have told you he is talking about power as he already said its not HDE where in HDE is mostly about sizes

idk man sounds like you're heavily misunderstanding what he is saying or assuming wrongly on what he said
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I mean Lmao. being an uncountable infinite difference =/= an uncountable infinite difference in the sense of "size" or "existence".
 
yeah, you just agreed with him.
he said its not about HDE and when he's saying HDe he's talking about sizes
so of course him saying uncountable infinite difference later on isn't about sizes and you told him no he is wrong.
idk what you're trying to explain tbh
 
TheGreatJedi13 said:
yeah, you just agreed with him.
he said its not about HDE and when he's saying HDe he's talking about sizes
so of course him saying uncountable infinite difference later on isn't about sizes and you told him no he is wrong.
idk what you're trying to explain tbh
Click to expand...
I have not claimed otherwise. I refer to him because Reiner said that R>F is an uncountable infinite or qualitative superiority to "size" and "existence".

That's why I said "it's not exactly like qualitative superiority, it's just being more real and similiar to QS but not exactly QS".

Agnaa said that, also DT said that "R>F just being more real" in the HDE revision, that's all.

Again, stop playing with my brain.
 
Then that's going against our R>F page, which says it's a existential and uncountable infinite difference. Our standard gives it Qualitative superiority for it's size.
Click to expand...
These are what Reiner said, in short, if you are qualitatively or uncountable infinite superior to the lower plane as "existential" or "size", you cannot get HDE, but these are the qualities that R>F contains. I don't know what he says now or I misunderstood him.
 
TheGreatJedi13 said:
@Reiner is that what you said? because I didn't see that. not even in his wall
Click to expand...
I was saying that as per recent changes made by DT in HDE page, we do not give existential QS HDE by default anymore. So even uncountable infinite difference in size or R>F that provide existential QS don't get HDE anymore. So yeah. That's the standard now.
 
Reiner said:
I was saying that as per recent changes made by DT in HDE page, we do not give existential QS HDE by default anymore. So even uncountable infinite difference in size or R>F that provide existential QS don't get HDE anymore. So yeah. That's the standard now.
Click to expand...
I looked at the page and it doesn't say anything about "being uncountable infinitely bigger does not give HDE" or something. That would be ridiculous because this is an example of a large size from what I said above, and it's the easiest way to earn HDE.

Can you quote a comment where DT said that? So can you quote the place where he said "being infinitely/uncountable infinite large with" existential" and "size" doesn't give you HDE"?

Edit : I'll look at it later.

If you ask my opinion, you think that R>F same with being uncountable infinitely superior than lower plane with "size" /"existence". That's why you said that "these are not gives you HDE "(I wanted to add that)

But I could be wrong
 
Last edited:
Broskis, I tagged Ultima and DT, unless people named DT and Ultima comment, y'all should not make anymore comments.

Or do I have to bring about an admin to lay down the law again?

@Sir_Ovens
 
LuisGeno said:
I have great doubts about the qualitative superiority and the R>F, if someone answers me I would greatly appreciate it.

First: qualitative superiority could be achieved by being "infinitely larger" than x dimension, and therefore that dimension is infinitesimal to that infinitely larger dimension. Alright? And another thing, if the higher spatial dimensions are not automatically greater infinities than each other, where did the idea that extradimensional axes could give rise to greater infinities come from? Where can I read information about this? I want to learn it well.
Another thing, does the transcendence R>F between layers/dimensions make them infinitely greater than each other? According to me, this has nothing to do with size, but with the nature of dimensions/layers, so is it a form of qualitative transcendence, or is it just a form that is added apart?
And, last question: if in a verse it is mentioned that there are infinite dimensions, that they are explicitly about extra dimensional axes, but nevertheless, there is only evidence of qualitative superiority between 3 of those infinite dimensions, can this qualitative superiority also be applied to all other dimensions? I had heard that this is possible, if it is said that the qualitative superiority is by its nature of spatial dimension, but I want to be sure.

That's all. Sorry for so many questions, but I needed it. Have a nice day, afternoon or night
Click to expand...
Greater infinity =/= greater by an infinity
Not so sure about the R>F concept but no one ever referred to size as something direct and literal
Not getting your second question, if a verse is blatantly explicitly stated to have infinite dimensions then each higher dimensional axis is qualitatively superior to the lower.
 
Reiner said:
Yeah.

Pain made the HDE revision, DT agreed with her revision, Pain agreed with me about the revision = I'm right about the revision = you're wrong.
Click to expand...
Pein and DT didn't talk about what we discussed in the revision, and frankly I think she's wrong. As I said, I don't care what Pein or anybody else says, because it wasn't discussed in the revision. At the very beginning pein opened the revision for R>F to give HDE and DT refused.

Quote me DT's comment or a comment from the HDE page about what we are discussing. Other than that... mehh
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NousGalia
Question about Qualitative superiority?
Replies
31
Views
1K
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Requiem_Yoriichi
Reality-Fiction Transcendence: Why is it qualitative superiority?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Elyartaker
qualitative superiority & reality-fiction
Replies
4
Views
1K
Elyartaker
Elyartaker
Grabbing_dragon
qualitative superiority new tier system
Replies
2
Views
1K
VeryGoofyToddler2
VeryGoofyToddler2
Vyfourthaccount
tier 1 question
Replies
12
Views
844
Vyfourthaccount
Vyfourthaccount
Back
Top