Da3ggman
He/Him- 2,939
- 2,178
I'm voting Dragon Ball, since their arguments are the most convincingPlace your bids in the race to low 1-C everyone. Which verse will win the tier first: Dragon Ball, Seiya, Game Sonic, or Sailor Moon?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm voting Dragon Ball, since their arguments are the most convincingPlace your bids in the race to low 1-C everyone. Which verse will win the tier first: Dragon Ball, Seiya, Game Sonic, or Sailor Moon?
Sure.The Universes already have one direction of causality: past to future.
Where’s the new direction? You’re asserting the idea that this is a new additional temporal direction but you don’t explain why. Either you have to explain why, or find something in our standards that references such a property for Tier 1 structures and refer me to that for explanation.The Corridor has it's own direction: past, present, future, happening simultaneously.
Makes sense.That's two distinct systems of causality. The current FAQ page says:
There are infinite ways a story can handle temporal corridors, they all don't work the same. Each must be viewed upon by a case by case basis. There are corridors where from their perspective everything is frozen in time. Others where the frame of reference also seems to move from past to future in accordance to the rest of time, and ones where there isn't any decipherable information.
That isn’t necessarily an additional flow of time, if anything that’s more akin to atemporality (isn’t that already a thing in sailor moon, correct me if I’m wrong). You need to explain why past, present and future occurring at once (or being perceived as such by someone) indicates an additional temporal dimension? I don’t recall ever seeing a description of any number of temporal dimension that matches this and that’s precisely what I’ve been telling you. Your information, as presented, is basically not tierable by current standards (To be fair our standards suck IMHO)Sailor Moon's story distinctly depicts events that occur in the future have already happened in Pluto's frame of reference, while events in the past are going to happen. That's two distinct flows of causality.
You just stated that the corridor has undefined points in space, therefore any distance between said points is undefined/infinite. That is not how a R^5 space works, forget R^5, that’s not how a R^3 space works. A 3-space (3 dimensional vector space) is already considered to be infinitely large, able to hold uncountable infinite 2D planes and every (uncountably infinite) 1D point on each of those planes. Despite that, each and every one of those points is well defined and is a finite distance away from another well defined point or the “origin”.I never said that R^5 spaces don't have concepts of distance and direction. But for the case of Sailor Moon, the corridor can be argued to be one dimensional layer equivalent above the R^4 spaces.
Insignificant 5D yes, not unlike DBS Neutral Space.The corridor has universes embedded that are separate spacetimes. The wiki staff have already stated on occasion, that a 5th dimension is needed to keep these spacetimes parallel and separated.
No, it can contain 3D dimensional objects (people) and supposedly 4D universes, so it is not R^?, please do not come up with standards on the fly. Also having no concept of distance and direction could also mean it isn’t even a 4D space, but that’s clearly wrong so using that phrase again and again isn’t helping you. A 5-space necessarily contains not only the concept of distance but well defined distances as well, even “more” distances that we can think of, I’ve told you that before haven’t I? A 5-space CAN possess such a property, sure, this is fiction, but you need to prove it’s a 5-space first but you’re using a property not necessarily exclusive to fictional 5-spaces to prove that, which comes off as circular reasoning.The corridor having no concept of distance and direction, means that it can be categorized as R^?
No, there is no such thing as R^? nor is R^5 a subset of such. There exists no such structure or vector space. Maybe you mean R^n? An N-dimensional vector space where N is the number of dimensions, which allows you to denote any point as an N-tuple (an N-dimensional vector denoted as A=[X1, X2, X3…….Xn]) consisting of however many dimensions you want. That is a fundamentally different concept to what you stated and even that doesn’t support your argument as R^5 isn’t necessarily a subset of R^n.where ? represents an undefined number. And because we know that the corridor has spacetime embedded in it that is separated by a 5th dimensional axis, R^5 is a subset of R^?.
No, because I just showed you why “points being undefined” makes little sense and, even in this context, doesn’t support your argument. And I’ve also shown you why “having no concept of distance and direction” is a non-argument here.All points being undefined is supporting evidence to the corridor having no concept of distance and direction.
That does not prove infinite distance, like I said. You‘re making up a possible explanation based off of clever manipulation of the speed formula, and a little (and incorrect) mathematical fact that 1/0 is undefined, and often written as infinity, thus undefined points = infinite distance. This is utter nonsense, mathematically and in terms of scaling. Not only is this already a big, big stretch, but I’ve already shown you why 5-spaces or even a 3-space does NOT work like that and distances between points in those spaces are both finite and well defined (there exists no vector of infinite magnitude) even though those spaces can easily be infinite if you want them to, the rule applies in an infinite 3-space or a 3D dimensional vector subspace (Aka a finite 3D space).It is essentially infinite. Pick any points in the corridor, how long will it take to travel from one point to the other? An infinite amount of time because you'll never reach the second point, regardless of fast you go or what direction you take.
No, the distance between the opening and bottom is perfectly defined. What are you even saying at this point…? Maybe I’m stupid and misunderstanding but this is false! Please, find a better example if you really want to use analogies to elaborate your point.Another example. is take a vase. The distance between the opening of the vase and bottom of the vase is undefined. If you drop a marble inside the vase, how long will it take for that marble to reach the bottom of the base? How many marbles can you drop in the vase until it is filled? Replace marble with universe and vase with corridor.
If time flows from past to future, then its one direction. Even if there are infinite timelines, if for all of them, time flows from past to future, thats all still one direction. So it would only be 2-A.Nah, different cause and effect isn't gonna make you have additional +1 axis. If this is the case then verse have infinite amount of timeline gonna be high 1-B because of infinite amount of cause and effect direction = infinite amount of axes
Not necessarily. That’s an argument PrinceofPein brought up but it is easily dismissed once yo read the standards page and realize the word “different flow of time” is used no where, instead “additional axis of time“ is used. Regardless, that argument has nothing to do with this oneWrong. If time flows from past to future, then its one direction. Even if there are infinite timelines, if for all of them, time flows from past to future, thats all still one direction. So it would only be 2-A.
I believe that is for universes with different rate of time flows. One moving faster than the other. But still having a direction that goes from past to future.Not necessarily. That’s an argument PrinceofPein brought up but it is easily dismissed once yo read the standards page and realize the word “different flow of time” is used no where, instead “additional axis of time“ is used. Regardless, that argument has nothing to do with this one
Where’s the new direction? You’re asserting the idea that this is a new additional temporal direction but you don’t explain why. Either you have to explain why, or find something in our standards that references such a property for Tier 1 structures and refer me to that for explanation.
That isn’t necessarily an additional flow of time, if anything that’s more akin to atemporality (isn’t that already a thing in sailor moon, correct me if I’m wrong). You need to explain why past, present and future occurring at once (or being perceived as such by someone) indicates an additional temporal dimension? I don’t recall ever seeing a description of any number of temporal dimension that matches this and that’s precisely what I’ve been telling you. Your information, as presented, is basically not tierable by current standards (To be fair our standards suck IMHO)
I did not come up with standards on the fly. The corridor contains entire 4D structures and has no concept of distance and direction. That is the facts of the story.No, it can contain 3D dimensional objects (people) and supposedly 4D universes, so it is not R^?, please do not come up with standards on the fly. Also having no concept of distance and direction could also mean it isn’t even a 4D space, but that’s clearly wrong so using that phrase again and again isn’t helping you. A 5-space necessarily contains not only the concept of distance but well defined distances as well, even “more” distances that we can think of, I’ve told you that before haven’t I? A 5-space CAN possess such a property, sure, this is fiction, but you need to prove it’s a 5-space first but you’re using a property not necessarily exclusive to fictional 5-spaces to prove that, which comes off as circular reasoning.
Call it R^n or R^?, it doesn’t matter. For this purpose of this thread, its whatever can accurately describe the corridor which doesn’t exist.No, there is no such thing as R^? nor is R^5 a subset of such. There exists no such structure or vector space. Maybe you mean R^n? An N-dimensional vector space where N is the number of dimensions, which allows you to denote any point as an N-tuple (an N-dimensional vector denoted as A=[X1, X2, X3…….Xn]) consisting of however many dimensions you want. That is a fundamentally different concept to what you stated and even that doesn’t support your argument as R^5 isn’t necessarily a subset of R^n.
Fine. Then the I’ll use the wiki standards and say because there is no concept of distance in the corridor, it has immeasurable distance.That does not prove infinite distance, like I said. You‘re making up a possible explanation based off of clever manipulation of the speed formula, and a little (and incorrect) mathematical fact that 1/0 is undefined, and often written as infinity, thus undefined points = infinite distance. This is utter nonsense, mathematically and in terms of scaling. Not only is this already a big, big stretch, but I’ve already shown you why 5-spaces or even a 3-space does NOT work like that and distances between points in those spaces are both finite and well defined (there exists no vector of infinite magnitude) even though those spaces can easily be infinite if you want them to, the rule applies in an infinite 3-space or a 3D dimensional vector subspace (Aka a finite 3D space).
I am talking about the space inside the jar. But it doesn’t matter. Like above, using our wiki standards, the corridor has immeasurable size.No, the distance between the opening and bottom is perfectly defined. What are you even saying at this point…? Maybe I’m stupid and misunderstanding but this is false! Please, find a better example if you really want to use analogies to elaborate your point.
Frankly I think this is by far your worst Low 1-C Sailor Moon argument/thread so far. It contains so many fallacies both mathematical and scaling-wise it’s hard to decide where to begin questioning your logic.
Let me give you three events:
Event 1. Black Lady sends the shockwaves
Event 2. Sailor Pluto sends Sailor Moon a warning
Event 3. Sailor Moon recieves Pluto’s warning of the shockwaves
Black lady is in the future when she sends the shockwaves. Sailor Moon is in the past when she receives pluto’s warning and is hit by the shockwaves.
Sailor Pluto is not inside the universe when any of these events happen, meaning she’s not in past, future, or present of the universe.
During Event 2, event 1 has to be in her past to react to it. And Event 3 has to be in her future for it to be affect of her actions
If the corridor and the Universe have the same time direction, how can Pluto’s past be the universe’s future and her future be the universe’s past?
If they share the same direction, the flow of causality will be the same. But the flow of causality is not the same. Therefore they do not share the same direction of time.
And again: snapshots of time in universe would only include 3D space. Snapshots of the corridor would include the 4D space of the universe.
You did.I did not come up with standards on the fly. The corridor contains entire 4D structures and
Which, as I just showed for the 1000th time, means absolutely nothing in terms of tiering a structure and if anything runs contrary to what a “baseline” 5D structure should be like. I did state that yes a 5D fictional structure can possess this property (which is why I don’t use it to discredit your argument), but for that to work, you must prove it’s a significant 5D space first and you can’t do that repeating this stuff.has no concept of distance and direction. That is the facts of the story.
No? Why would it be indefinite? R^n just means a vector space of any N dimensions. That N could be 3, or a million. R^? however means absolutely nothing. Please don’t use that notation again.If you were to describe the corridor as R^n l, the n would be indefinite. Which is why I called R^?.
Not what you said above.Call it R^n or R^?, it doesn’t matter.
Sure it does. It’s an insignificant 5D space if, so far, your descriptions about it have been correct and that it physically holds universes inside. That’s a perfectly valid way to describe such a structure.For this purpose of this thread, its whatever can accurately describe the corridor which doesn’t exist.
Why‘s it a subset? Have you proven that its an infinite 5D space instead of a subspace? Aka, that it is significant 5D not insignificant 5D? That’s like saying your room is a universe because both it and the living universe contain at least 3-Dimensions. What you don’t understand is that size of the structure makes all the difference here.The corridor contains universes which by our standard already is accepted as insignificant 5D. So yes, for the corridor R^5 is a subset of it.
Good luck proving that. I don’t know where that standard came from but if it exists, good luck proving that.Fine. Then the I’ll use the wiki standards and say because there is no concept of distance in the corridor, it has immeasurable distance.
Yes, and you were disastrously wrong.I am talking about the space inside the jar.
Good luck proving that. You need to get this accepted in another CRT as far as I know, or add this argument to the OP, ask it to be evaluated as well and hope they both get accepted, which isn’t happening.But it doesn’t matter. Like above, using our wiki standards, the corridor has immeasurable size.
I get that a lot, I am known to be the annoying kid in engineering classes who’s really pedantic about math. That being said, I think it’s your evidence that’s lacking here, either that or you aren’t doing a good job at arguing it. That absolute train-wreck of an analogy makes me believe so.I am trying to index a magical girl series based on arbitrary guidelines that are loosely based in math. Forgive me if it doesn’t align with the axioms of math neatly enough.
If the corridor is acausal then it has a different flow of causality from the universe. Yes or no?You have given what is essentially a textbook definition of atemporality/acausality, which I believe Sailor moon already has and has more substantial evidence for than her existing in a “different” temporal axis altogether. Whatever makes you think it is anything other than acausality? The wiki will never go with the highest possible interpretation of something like this especially when it lacks substantial evidence.
Does this flow absolutely, undeniably, and conclusively require a higher time axis? Can it be nitpicked away as being attributed to something else like the timeless properties of a corridor? Yes or no?If the corridor is acausal then it has a different flow of causality from the universe. Yes or no?
That’s not what I said. I stated that characters possessing this ability indicates acausality. Now whether the realm is acausal or not, I don’t know. Another thing I don’t know is if a realm beinf acausal gives it an additional time axis, you’ll need to ask someone more knowledgeable hereIf the corridor is acausal then it has a different flow of causality from the universe. Yes or no?
This entire thread is about the realm. All my examples is about the realm.That’s not what I said. I stated that characters possessing this ability indicates acausality. Now whether the realm is acausal or not, I don’t know. Another thing I don’t know is if a realm beinf acausal gives it an additional time axis, you’ll need to ask someone more knowledgeable here
All timeless voids have their own their own flow of causality.Does this flow absolutely, undeniably, and conclusively require a higher time axis? Can it be nitpicked away as being attributed to something else like the timeless properties of a corridor? Yes or no?
You keep dodging my main argument. From the perspective of a typical 5th dimensional plane (if I were to concede that this corridor were insignificant 5-D), 4-dimensional space-time and its infinite snapshots appear as a single finite entity: a bubble stuck to a 5-D multiversal position. All timeless voids would theoretically view past/present/future at once, doesn’t mean they have time. And don’t say “well that’s just a theoretical model and we can’t actually conceptualize what time would be like in such a state.” Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your interpretation is no more valid than mine. We can’t just give absolutely everything in fiction its highest end interpretations.
Then why’re you claiming that it does? Also why does an ”acausal realm” have its own temporal axis, if it even is acausal in the first place instead of the character(s).This entire thread is about the realm. All my examples is about the realm.
The realm being accasual doesn’t give its own additional axis.
Read above. I don’t understand why this implies another temporal axis.It is because the universe is embedded within it and contains 4D and the corridor has its own flow of causality, meaning the entire structure contains two different flows of cauality.
On its own, it would be just 4D.Then why’re you claiming that it does? Also why does an ”acausal realm” have its own temporal axis, if it even is acausal in the first place instead of the character(s).
Read above. I don’t understand why this implies another temporal axis.
ngl this sounds like it's just talking about the timeline itself, rather than any special extra-multiversal one.
Like, for analogy's sake:
If particular points in time, where people operate, are 2-D cross-sections of a cube, this corridor would be the volume of the cube.
That's the impression I get.
It's even called "the edges of spacetime."
For holding Universes? No. Otherwise? Still no. A structure can’t be given Low 2-C just because it’s acausal AFAIK.On its own, it would be just 4D.
How can it have a “flow of causality” when it is acausal? You’re being contradictory here.But because the corridor itself, contains 4D structures and has a flow of causality different from the flow of the universes it embeds
Then how’s it acausal? Not that you have proven where this second flow of time even is.it contains 2 different flows of time.
Is there a way to have a conversation with him? Because based on this alone, it's in my favor.I showed Ultima the scans and your explanations, and explained the overall situation, and he said:
it isn’t. You have officially lost track of your own argument. We are already starting with the assumption that the corridor is insignificant 5DIs there a way to have a conversation with him? Because based on this alone, it's in my favor.
Yeah, no. For that, you’ll need to prove that an infinite number of universes can fit inside that corridor or that it is infinite in size, either making it significant 5D yielding the desired Low 1-C tier. You haven’t done that yet.If he likened the universe to a 2D plane of a cube, and the corridor to the cube itself, then the corridor would be nd+1 to the universe.
True.In order to commune with Ultima you have to draw a ritual circle and sacrifice at least two cardinal numbers, a goat, and chant "Down with DT" three times
To be specific here: The comparison was with regards to the 3-D universe, specifically. Singular points in time, where characters operate, are 2-D cross-sections of the cube, and then the cube's volume is the timeline itself, thus making this 4-D per analogy. This seems to be very much what the "Corridor" here is, from what I've been shown. It's described as existing "between times," and overall the scans seem to characterize it as a feature of one spacetime (Calling it "the space-time void," "the depths of space-time," "the edge of space-time," and etc), so, my reading is that it just is the bulk of the timeline.If he likened the universe to a 2D plane of a cube, and the corridor to the cube itself, then the corridor would be nd+1 to the universe.
Thanks for Tier 2 Toei!True.
That would make sense, but the corridor has entire 4D universes embedded in its fabric. As posted here:To be specific here: The comparison was with regards to the 3-D universe, specifically. Singular points in time, where characters operate, are 2-D cross-sections of the cube, and then the cube's volume is the timeline itself, thus 4-D per analogy. This seems to be very much what the "Corridor" here is, from what I've been shown. It's described as existing "between times," and overall the scans seem to characterize it as a feature of one spacetime (Calling it "the space-time void," "the depths of space-time," "the edge of space-time," and etc), so, my reading is that it just is the bulk of the timeline.
She cannot check the routes. Huge differenceso much that Luna's computer cannot check them all.
The cats are literally shown at their computer checking the routes.She cannot check the routes. Huge difference
I'm aware. She said she cannot check all of the interdimensional routesThe cats are literally shown at their computer checking the routes.
She uses the computer to check the routes. What are you missing?I'm aware. She said she cannot check all of the interdimensional routes
Nothing. You just misunderstood the scan. She said she can't possibly check all of the interdimensional routes. I'm not saying she can't check any of them. I also already pointed this out earlier so I don't know why you're still saying it.She uses the computer to check the routes. What are you missing?
I did not misunderstood anything. What are you even talking about?Nothing. You just misunderstood the scan. She said she can't possibly check all of the interdimensional routes. I'm not saying she can't check any of them. I also already pointed this out earlier so I don't know why you're still saying it.
Go read the next panels.I'm pointing out that the scan doesn't say there's more dimensions than she can check. That phrase is referring to the interdimensional routes, as you can see above.
I'm not stonewalling anything. I can't read your thoughts from what you type.I did. Please stop stonewalling this issue, the scan very clearly states:
"The only other possible routes are interdimensional ones, and we can't possibly check all of them."
It is saying they cannot possibly check all of the interdimensional routes. There's nothing in the scan that indicates that "there are so many other dimensions that they can't check them all" or something. The sentence above refers to routes. "Them" cannot grammatically refer to dimensions.
No it doesn't, unless you have specific proof that there is only one route per dimension.Number of routes correlates to the number of dimensions. There is nothing wrong with what I said.
That's my line.Drop this pedantic argument. It's silly.
Show me where I said this.No it doesn't, unless you have specific proof that there is only one route per dimension.
Okay? And my point that there exists multiple alternate dimensions within the fabric of the corridor still stands. That means something.You didn't. But if you don't, the routes scan means nothing. There may be millions of routes per dimension.
And how does that make a significant 5D Space?Okay? And my point that there exists multiple alternate dimensions within the fabric of the corridor still stands. That means something.