• 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.

Reality-Fiction difference is not the same as Higher Dimensional difference

I was honestly pretty lazy to read 100 comments instead of just commenting, especially since it didn't get yeeted to fun and games

Ignore 90% of my second comment i guess
 
dbsuper_p_217_en_1.png
 
Delta333 said:
The funniest part is seeing ppl seiously argued with Bern XD
Click to expand...
I genuinely thought he was being serious cause he put this shit into content revision, which is just inappropriate, tbh. However, after the second comment of his/hers, I pretty easily realized that he was just trolling, so I definitely agree with this thread.
 
Tarang123 said:
I genuinely thought he was being serious cause he put this shit into content revision, which is just inappropriate, tbh. However, after the second comment of his/hers, I pretty easily realized that he was just trolling, so I definitely agree with this thread.
Click to expand...
That was done on purpose to garner reactions like that. Which is why my first comment here was troll comment on purpose to point towards that direction.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Well technically speaking, the square on the paper is just as 3-dimensional as you and just as real as you, as everything in this world is made of atoms in 3dimensional space plus time.
Click to expand...
Yeah, since lead of the pencil which is used to draw on paper is still 3D due to lead being made up of 3D atoms but we dont usually go that deep normally.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Well technically speaking, the square on the paper is just as 3-dimensional as you and just as real as you, as everything in this world is made of atoms in 3dimensional space plus time.
Click to expand...
Not exactly, the square itself, as in the physical design is fictional or 2D, the material used to make the square is 3D
 
Tarang123 said:
Not exactly, the square itself, as in the physical design is fictional or 2D, the material used to make the square is 3D
Click to expand...
Yeah, square is 2D but square created in 3D paper would be made up of 3D material and not purely 2D in essence.
 
My_area said:
Yeah, square is 2D but square created in 3D paper would be made up of 3D material and not purely 2D in essence.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's how we interact with lower dimensional objects because of the disconnection between us. The square itself is fundamentally 2D, it's just that we can only interact with it through 3D mediums like a pencil/pen, paper, etc.
 
Tarang123 said:
Yes, that's how we interact with lower dimensional objects because of the disconnection between us. The square itself is fundamentally 2D, it's just that we can only interact with it through 3D mediums like a pencil/pen, paper, etc.
Click to expand...
Though square in this case is made by 3D pencil on a 3D paper so its not purely a "2D square" because the square drawn in the paper would be made of led which is made up of 3D particles.
 
My_area said:
Yeah, since lead of the pencil which is used to draw on paper is still 3D due to lead being made up of 3D atoms but we dont usually go that deep normally.
Click to expand...
Well, to me, if you're going to use real world arguments to support something, the real word argument has to be correct.

Tarang123 said:
Not exactly, the square itself, as in the physical design is fictional or 2D, the material used to make the square is 3D
Click to expand...
It doesn't make sense for you to say the design of a square is fictional. Squares are real. And the design is "2 dimensional", but only because we decided that things with no volume, just length and width, are two dimensional. The square is two dimensional in the same sense that Jackson's Pollock's Number 5 is abstract. Words we created to describe things we came up with. In reality, there is no such thing as 2D space, at least no evidence or observation of such space existing.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Well, to me, if you're going to use real world arguments to support something, the real word argument has to be correct.


It doesn't make sense for you to say the design of a square is fictional. Squares are real. And the design is "2 dimensional", but only because we decided that things with no volume, just length and width, are two dimensional. The square is two dimensional in the same sense that Jackson's Pollock's Number 5 is abstract. Words we created to describe things we came up with. In reality, there is no such thing as 2D space, at least no evidence or observation of such space existing.
Click to expand...
Well, no. The square itself is 2D, this much is accepted. The fact that it's drawn by 3D objects or even on a 3D object is absolutely irrelevant as it's the only way we can interact with said lower dimensional object. Otherwise, it's simply not possible.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Well, to me, if you're going to use real world arguments to support something, the real word argument has to be correct.
Click to expand...
Thats true, but its just that certain things in real life have reasons based on common understanding which can differ from reasons found if analyzed in great depth or attempt to view this topic very scientifically.
 
Personally I think a lot of this reality-fiction thing is hot air sometimes.

Unless the "real" character interacts with the "fictional" character and the fictional character retains their in-verse ability and it shown that the real character is unaffected by it and above it, then I can see the higher tier. But if that's not the case, then it's just unquantifiable.

"Character A sees Character B as fiction" okay? There are many examples where a "fictional" character interacts with "real" character and they view that fictional characters as fiction and they are not superior or above them in anyway and interact with them like normal peers.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
"Character A sees Character B as fiction" okay? There are many examples where a "fictional" character interacts with "real" character and they view that fictional characters as fiction and they are not superior or above them in anyway and interact with them like normal peers.
Click to expand...
Thats interesting to say at the very least. I never honestly heard or saw a example of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Requiem_Yoriichi
Reality-Fiction Transcendence: Why is it qualitative superiority?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Krazydog050
Wanked High 1-A additional keys for The Human Race (The Real World)
Replies
1
Views
1K
Success0906
Success0906
Elyartaker
qualitative superiority & reality-fiction
Replies
4
Views
1K
Elyartaker
Elyartaker
  • Locked
Evidences that Bleach Garganta may be Higher Dimensional
Replies
0
Views
393
Mark2ain
BoundlessDumbness
Reality-Fiction Transcendence: And why True Gods and Secondary Beings are Separated
Replies
1
Views
1K
BoundlessDumbness
BoundlessDumbness
Back
Top