- 5,271
- 6,013
- Thread starter
- #121
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.
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.