Reintroducting HTC to the macrocosm. (DBS)

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Notes to any staff looking at this thread from my point of view.

1. HTC removal was based on terminology of it being outside of the universe and this CRT changed it is all the more reasons to add it back.

2. No concept of time or space is not a contradiction as it could easily also be referring to general notion of it being different than the other worlds which is demonstrated by their unique characteristics such as a different time flow of HTC. It's also a weak rebuttal to say that it is referring to the ontological concepts of time and space as the name is literally "Room of Spirit and Time" or "Hyperbolic Time Chamber" so the more likely option contextually is that time just works differently hence the different notion or idea of it.

3. While people are trying to argue that the guidebook says it's just completely outside of the macrocosm it's moreso referring to how it does not belong to any of the dimensions on the macrocosm map and is a place between those dimensions as a subspace (A subspace being a subset of something so it being a subset of the macrocosm also makes sense.). Even Executor who translated it says that it's referring to that contextually

4. If the guidebook statement ends up as a contradiction or invalid it should still end up being reintroduced due to terminology change.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Notes to any staff looking at this thread from my point of view.

1. HTC removal was based on terminology of it being outside of the universe and this CRT changed it is all the more reasons to add it back.

2. No concept of time or space is not a contradiction as it could easily also be referring to general notion of it being different than the other worlds which is demonstrated by their unique characteristics such as a different time flow of HTC. It's also a weak rebuttal to say that it is referring to the ontological concepts of time and space as the name is literally "Room of Spirit and Time" or "Hyperbolic Time Chamber" so the more likely option contextually is that time just works differently hence the different notion or idea of it.

3. While people are trying to argue that the guidebook says it's just completely outside of the macrocosm it's moreso referring to how it does not belong to any of the dimensions on the macrocosm map and is a place between those dimensions as a subspace (A subspace being a subset of something so it being a subset of the macrocosm also makes sense.). Even Executor who translated it says that it's referring to that contextually

4. If the guidebook statement ends up as a contradiction or invalid it should still end up being reintroduced due to terminology change.

This I feel is the most valid point for its reintroduction.

 

[omegabronic]

Notes to any staff looking at this thread from my point of view.

1. HTC removal was based on terminology of it being outside of the universe and this CRT changed it is all the more reasons to add it back.

Also because it was never stated to be in the macrocosm at all

2. No concept of time or space is not a contradiction as it could easily also be referring to general notion of it being different than the other worlds which is demonstrated by their unique characteristics such as a different time flow of HTC. It's also a weak rebuttal to say that it is referring to the ontological concepts of time and space as the name is literally "Room of Spirit and Time" or "Hyperbolic Time Chamber" so the more likely option contextually is that time just works differently hence the different notion or idea of it.

I don't see how not having time and space could even mean this at all, it would still have time and space if we went with this explanation

3. While people are trying to argue that the guidebook says it's just completely outside of the macrocosm it's moreso referring to how it does not belong to any of the dimensions on the macrocosm map and is a place between those dimensions as a subspace (A subspace being a subset of something so it being a subset of the macrocosm also makes sense.). Even Executor who translated it says that it's referring to that contextually

instead of arguing for his sake, we should just call him here honestly

4. If the guidebook statement ends up as a contradiction or invalid it should still end up being reintroduced due to terminology change.

If there is any statement of it being in the macrocosm then sure, just not the statement in the OP

 

[TiltedFN]

disagree

you join just to disagree with any db upgrades

 

[TiltedFN]

This I feel is the most valid point for its reintroduction.

i agree

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

There isn't any staff agreement.
@KingTempest disagreed
@Lonkitt agreed but later conceded when the point was brought by the reliability of the scan by @LephyrTheRevanchist

King Tempest never voted but he said if it says HTC doesn’t have time that’s flat out wrong but that’s not whats being argued either way
Lonkitt never conceded he asked what are the points that question the scans reliability

Because the translation of the text is stright up not saying this, show where in the text does it imply that it is in between the dimensions when the transpation clearly states that it isn't in the world depicted at all, instead of aeguing for him why not just call him here?

the translator explained to us what the context implies Japanese is a contexual language but sure you can bring him here I have 0 issues with that I recommend it tbh

For big and comtroversial verses like db we need 3 staff agreement, and the only one who agreed was lonkit, who seems to have dialed back on his agreement, asking him to comment again is the best course of action here

That’s for controversial CRTs like infinite db universe

Notes to any staff looking at this thread from my point of view.

1. HTC removal was based on terminology of it being outside of the universe and this CRT changed it is all the more reasons to add it back.

2. No concept of time or space is not a contradiction as it could easily also be referring to general notion of it being different than the other worlds which is demonstrated by their unique characteristics such as a different time flow of HTC. It's also a weak rebuttal to say that it is referring to the ontological concepts of time and space as the name is literally "Room of Spirit and Time" or "Hyperbolic Time Chamber" so the more likely option contextually is that time just works differently hence the different notion or idea of it.

3. While people are trying to argue that the guidebook says it's just completely outside of the macrocosm it's moreso referring to how it does not belong to any of the dimensions on the macrocosm map and is a place between those dimensions as a subspace (A subspace being a subset of something so it being a subset of the macrocosm also makes sense.). Even Executor who translated it says that it's referring to that contextually

4. If the guidebook statement ends up as a contradiction or invalid it should still end up being reintroduced due to terminology change.

In DB GT when Baby shoots his revenge death ball at Goku it affects kibito Kai and Goku mid teleportation and they’re in a space of sorts and Goku drops into the Sugoroku space

The scan tells us that there’s a subspace with no concept of time and space and that it’s not depicted in the depiction of the macrocosm as said by Executor who translated the scan the RoSaT and Sugoroku space have been confirmed to be in this Subspace the RoSaT can have space and time but can be in a place thats without space and time

This I feel is the most valid point for its reintroduction.

What about what I’ve said above?

 

[omegabronic]

the translator explained to us what the context implies Japanese is a contexual language but sure you can bring him here I have 0 issues with that I recommend it tbh

Already asked him, but just to say that context is something that is beyond what translation tells, so the translator's opinion is as valid as anyone else's

That’s for controversial CRTs like infinite db universe

Read the content revisiok rules, that is for every big controversial verse crt there is, we need 3

In DB GT when Baby shoots his revenge death ball at Goku it affects kibito Kai and Goku mid teleportation and they’re in a space of sorts and Goku drops into the Sugoroku space

The scan tells us that there’s a subspace with no concept of time and space and that it’s not depicted in the depiction of the macrocosm as said by Executor who translated the scan the RoSaT and Sugoroku space have been confirmed to be in this Subspace the RoSaT can have space and time but can be in a place thats without space and time

The scan is saying that the subspaces like the rosat and the sugoroku space have no time and space, they are subspaces, they are not in a "subspace"

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Already asked him, but just to say that context is something that is beyond what translation tells, so the translator's opinion is as valid as anyone else's


Read the content revisiok rules, that is for every big controversial verse crt there is, we need 3


The scan is saying that the subspaces like the rosat and the sugoroku space have no time and space, they are subspaces, they are not in a "subspace"

Could you send me a link to where you asked him?

DB isn’t a controversial verse it does have controversial topics though we’d need 3 votes for something like infinite universe we’d need only 2 votes for adding let’s say social influencing for Goku or sum

It doesnt say that it says the Sugoroku space and RoSaT have been confirmed/identified that just means they’ve been confirmed/identified to be in this subspace

 

[omegabronic]

Could you send me a link to where you asked him?

Go to his profile

DB isn’t a controversial verse it does have controversial topics though

it is a big verse tho, which is another thing that the rules talk about, also it is controversial enough to have had several discussion rules on it, so yes it is controversial

we’d need 3 votes for something like infinite universe we’d need only 2 votes for adding let’s say social influencing for Goku or sum

Not what the rules says

It doesnt say that it says the Sugoroku space and RoSaT have been confirmed/identified that just means they’ve been confirmed/identified to be in this subspace

No
"
この他、【図1】の世界のどこにも属さない「亜空間」が存在している。
Also, there are subspaces that don't belong anywhere in the world depicted in [Fig.1]."
They are said to be subspaces, not that they are in one

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Go to his profile


it is a big verse tho, which is another thing that the rules talk about, also it is controversial enough to have had several discussion rules on it, so yes it is controversial


Not what the rules says


No
"
この他、【図1】の世界のどこにも属さない「亜空間」が存在している。
Also, there are subspaces that don't belong anywhere in the world depicted in [Fig.1]."
They are said to be subspaces, not that they are in one

I went to his profile he said he can’t respond today due to Mother’s Day

3 votes are needed for controversial CRTs not minor CRTs like this one that don’t matter much

That is literally what the rule says but I’ll ask Lephy off-site since he’s a Thread mod

What about it?

 

[omegabronic]

I went to his profile he said he can’t respond today due to Mother’s Day

Yeah

3 votes are needed for controversial CRTs not minor CRTs like this one that don’t matter much

"In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions."
Nope, the rules state that we need 3, pretty sure we had this discussion beforehand

That is literally what the rule says but I’ll ask Lephy off-site since he’s a Thread mod

Okay then, that would be good

What about it?

It doesnt say that it says the Sugoroku space and RoSaT have been confirmed/identified that just means they’ve been confirmed/identified to be in this subspace

Your argument is that they are in a subspace with no time and space so the contradiction of the subspace not having time and space would be covered, but it is not saying that they are in a subspace, it is saying that they are a subspace, so the contradiction is still there

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

This argument is turning into an infinite loop, let's wait for the team members to give their opinion on it, instead of filling the thread with repetitive arguments.

 

[TiltedFN]

hasnt mostly everyone agreed lol

 

[omegabronic]

hasnt mostly everyone agreed lol

Not enough staff

 

[TiltedFN]

somebody call staff here

 

[Executor_N0]

Someone asked me to say something, so a quick explanation here

Translating something from Japanese does not bring out the entire interpretation of the in-universe meaning of the text from the work itself, that isn't the case with English text, and neither is with Japanese text. It's true that due to how Japanese is written there's a lot of subtext that is hidden in the original text, but that doesn't remove variability of how each work will use each word and things that are common to be seen used in fictional works that aren't in released dictionaries.

For example, transcendence to time is sometimes written in Japanese as merely a description of something that can time travel, not literal transcendence over the concept of time. The same is very common with other words in English, so it's always important to look at the use in the series itself to the words and try to figure out the intent in what they want to say with what is written instead of thinking that "the translation is wrong".

For example, the "lacks the concept of time and space", for example, can be interpreted in a valid way as just being a reference to those places being detached from conventional space-time and working with different rules that are against the norm. Calling those places "lacking the concept of space-time" might not be true to the highest interpretation, but it's not impossible to see that is what they meant instead of trying to say that the translation is wrong or the book is wrong. For that reason, try to look for the interpretations that might fit those things together instead of picking just the understanding that will bring out contradictions. As I said before, the term "transcending time" or "going beyond time" is often used in Japanese as just meaning "time traveling" (Although that is also a bit more nuanced, I guess the example still holds up)

The same is true about the line that subspaces aren't in the "world depicted in Figure.1" refers to "they aren't a part of the Macrocosm, that is what is being depicted in Figure.1" or "They aren't part of the Macrocosm as depicted in Figure.1, but not necessarily not a part of it as a whole". I can see both being valid interpretations of the translated text, what will give the "true meaning" will be the context of the series and the interpretation, and not necessarily a deeper meaning inside the text.

Japanese, of course, is a very contextual language and there's a lot of nuance inside of it. But, that doesn't mean that knowing Japanese will bring out the exact correct interpretation of the text without knowing the context of the work itself, sometimes it's impossible to be 100% sure because the text never brings some information that will rule out the exact correct interpretation (There's a fun example with Pokémon where the true concept that Azelf ruled over was either willpower or rocks, with many Japanese fans thinking it was rocks until the kanji for it was revealed, that is something that can happen all the time).

 

[TiltedFN]

Someone asked me to say something, so a quick explanation here

Translating something from Japanese does not bring out the entire interpretation of the in-universe meaning of the text from the work itself, that isn't the case with English text, and neither is with Japanese text. It's true that due to how Japanese is written there's a lot of subtext that is hidden in the original text, but that doesn't remove variability of how each work will use each word and things that are common to be seen used in fictional works that aren't in released dictionaries.

For example, transcendence to time is sometimes written in Japanese as merely a description of something that can time travel, not literal transcendence over the concept of time. The same is very common with other words in English, so it's always important to look at the use in the series itself to the words and try to figure out the intent in what they want to say with what is written instead of thinking that "the translation is wrong".

For example, the "lacks the concept of time and space", for example, can be interpreted in a valid way as just being a reference to those places being detached from conventional space-time and working with different rules that are against the norm. Calling those places "lacking the concept of space-time" might not be true to the highest interpretation, but it's not impossible to see that is what they meant instead of trying to say that the translation is wrong or the book is wrong. For that reason, try to look for the interpretations that might fit those things together instead of picking just the understanding that will bring out contradictions. As I said before, the term "transcending time" or "going beyond time" is often used in Japanese as just meaning "time traveling" (Although that is also a bit more nuanced, I guess the example still holds up)

The same is true about the line that subspaces aren't in the "world depicted in Figure.1" refers to "they aren't a part of the Macrocosm, that is what is being depicted in Figure.1" or "They aren't part of the Macrocosm as depicted in Figure.1, but not necessarily not a part of it as a whole". I can see both being valid interpretations of the translated text, what will give the "true meaning" will be the context of the series and the interpretation, and not necessarily a deeper meaning inside the text.

Japanese, of course, is a very contextual language and there's a lot of nuance inside of it. But, that doesn't mean that knowing Japanese will bring out the exact correct interpretation of the text without knowing the context of the work itself, sometimes it's impossible to be 100% sure because the text never brings some information that will rule out the exact correct interpretation (There's a fun example with Pokémon where the true concept that Azelf ruled over was either willpower or rocks, with many Japanese fans thinking it was rocks until the kanji for it was revealed, that is something that can happen all the time).

Thank you for the comment, I think its clear that I just lacks the conventional concept of space and time compared to the other dimensions for say. And verbatim says it exist between dimensions lmao.

 

[TiltedFN]

@Planck69 @DarkDragonMedeus @LordGriffin1000 @LordTracer could we have your help here?

 

[omegabronic]

Someone asked me to say something, so a quick explanation here

Translating something from Japanese does not bring out the entire interpretation of the in-universe meaning of the text from the work itself, that isn't the case with English text, and neither is with Japanese text. It's true that due to how Japanese is written there's a lot of subtext that is hidden in the original text, but that doesn't remove variability of how each work will use each word and things that are common to be seen used in fictional works that aren't in released dictionaries.

For example, transcendence to time is sometimes written in Japanese as merely a description of something that can time travel, not literal transcendence over the concept of time. The same is very common with other words in English, so it's always important to look at the use in the series itself to the words and try to figure out the intent in what they want to say with what is written instead of thinking that "the translation is wrong".

For example, the "lacks the concept of time and space", for example, can be interpreted in a valid way as just being a reference to those places being detached from conventional space-time and working with different rules that are against the norm. Calling those places "lacking the concept of space-time" might not be true to the highest interpretation, but it's not impossible to see that is what they meant instead of trying to say that the translation is wrong or the book is wrong. For that reason, try to look for the interpretations that might fit those things together instead of picking just the understanding that will bring out contradictions. As I said before, the term "transcending time" or "going beyond time" is often used in Japanese as just meaning "time traveling" (Although that is also a bit more nuanced, I guess the example still holds up)

The same is true about the line that subspaces aren't in the "world depicted in Figure.1" refers to "they aren't a part of the Macrocosm, that is what is being depicted in Figure.1" or "They aren't part of the Macrocosm as depicted in Figure.1, but not necessarily not a part of it as a whole". I can see both being valid interpretations of the translated text, what will give the "true meaning" will be the context of the series and the interpretation, and not necessarily a deeper meaning inside the text.

Japanese, of course, is a very contextual language and there's a lot of nuance inside of it. But, that doesn't mean that knowing Japanese will bring out the exact correct interpretation of the text without knowing the context of the work itself, sometimes it's impossible to be 100% sure because the text never brings some information that will rule out the exact correct interpretation (There's a fun example with Pokémon where the true concept that Azelf ruled over was either willpower or rocks, with many Japanese fans thinking it was rocks until the kanji for it was revealed, that is something that can happen all the time).

Thank you, so we can interpret as either not being in the macrocosm or being in the macrocosm

I will say that since we don't have a statement in universe that says that it is inside the macrocosm, and how the phrase can go either way about if it is inside or not, further evidence would be needed to say that it is inside the macrocosm, since the scan in the op can easily be interpreted either way

 

[omegabronic]

@Planck69 @DarkDragonMedeus @LordGriffin1000 @LordTracer could we have your help here?

Normal members can't ping staff

 

[TiltedFN]

Thank you, so we can interpret as either not being in the macrocosm or being in the macrocosm

I will say that since we don't have a statement in universe that says that it is inside the macrocosm, and how the phrase can go either way about if it is inside or not, further evidence would be needed to say that it is inside the macrocosm, since the scan in the op can easily be interpreted either way

Its literally between dimensions bruh, what more evidence do you need. "Not of this world" means nothing, thats why its a subspace, it exist between the dimensions and doesnt exist to any of the worlds

 

[TiltedFN]

Normal members can't ping staff

bruh what

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

I'm starting to think my interpretation is the more clear one even more now since the context around HTC and how the flow of time is weirder and at a different pace than how most normal space-times flow of time work makes it make more sense with the concept of time and space. The part of it being a subspace also has to refer to it being a subset of something and it would make more sense for it to be a subspace of the macrocosm being between dimensions of the macrocosm.

 

[TiltedFN]

I'm starting to think my interpretation is the more clear one even more now since the context around HTC and how the flow of time is weirder and at a different pace than how most normal space-times flow of time work makes it make more sense with the concept of time and space. The part of it being a subspace also has to refer to it being a subset of something and it would make more sense for it to be a subspace of the macrocosm being between dimensions of the macrocosm.

EXACTLY, thats literally what a subspace is lmao. We had a staff agree with your interpretation already.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

So there's not really any contradiction in sight and it being part of the macrocosm is also satisfied by it being between the dimensions.

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

I mean we shouldn’t automatically assume there’s a contradiction we should choose the most logical conclusion instead of circular reasoning and false dichtomy the context tells us that’s it’s in between dimensions so it makes sense for it to be saying that it’s not depicted in figure 1

I think that the subspace itself containing rosat and sugoroku space
or it just meaning it’s not the conventional space and time or both equally as valid interpretations though I think the first one is supported by the series in gt

 

[omegabronic]

Its literally between dimensions bruh, what more evidence do you need.

I need an evidence at all, since as executor explained, the interpretation of it not being in the macrocosm at all is as valid as that of it being there, we need more evidence since the translation of the guide alone is not enough since it can mean either way

"Not of this world" means nothing, thats why its a subspace, it exist between the dimensions and doesnt exist to any of the worlds

It says that it isn't in the world depicted, unless more evidence of it being inside the macrocosm is presented, we can't really use that alone as evidence since it can mean either way

So there's not really any contradiction in sight and it being part of the macrocosm is also satisfied by it being between the dimensions.

Which again can also mean other dimensions, the translation also support that it isn't in the macrocosm but between it and "other dimensions" more evidence is needed in my eyes

bruh what

You didn't knew?

 

[omegabronic]

I mean we shouldn’t automatically assume there’s a contradiction we should choose the most logical conclusion instead of circular reasoning and false dichtomy the context tells us that’s it’s in between dimensions so it makes sense for it to be saying that it’s not depicted in figure 1

I think that the subspace itself containing rosat and sugoroku space
or it just meaning it’s not the conventional space and time or both equally as valid interpretations though I think the first one is supported by the series in gt

Oh a new argument, show me this gt stuff, it might get light into things

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Which again can also mean other dimensions, the translation also support that it isn't in the macrocosm but between it and "other dimensions" more evidence is needed in my eyes

Occam's razor. More simple explanation thus the more likely one is that it is of the macrocosm as "other dimensions" aside from macrocosm and macrocosm dimensions is not an included element into this. This makes my interpretation of subspace between dimensions of macrocosm more likely as I am using already present elements to assert my claim.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Here’s a video that explains it it’s also in the daizenshuu and cooler movie

Bruh don't link discord links especially ones that make you have to download. Plus it's against rules to post tiktoks like that I think.

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Bruh don't link discord links especially ones that make you have to download. Plus it's against rules to post tiktoks like that I think.

you don’t have to download it you just click view

is it against the rules? I thought it was ok

 

[Ringki_64]

you don’t have to download it you just click view

is it against the rules? I thought it was ok

it does download
it might be against the rules because malware might spread this way

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

it does download
it might be against the rules because malware might spread this way

I see I've deleted the video my apologies

 

[omegabronic]

I see I've deleted the video my apologies

If you can take screen shots of the subtitles and send here that would help a lot

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

OP makes sense; being outside the Living Universe but still next to the various "Dimensions" of Universe 7 seems legit for me.

 

[TiltedFN]

How many staff agreements are there?

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

How many staff agreements are there?

2 staff agrees
2 staff who haven’t voted
so basically 2 neutrals and 2 agrees

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

How many staff agreements are there?

Only two in a matter of small topics, it's been more than 48 hours, I believe it can apply.

 

[TiltedFN]

facts

 

[omegabronic]

Only two in a matter of small topics, it's been more than 48 hours, I believe it can apply.

Nope we need 3:

"In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions."
These are the rules, get one more and we are good to go