Saint Seiya High 1-B Upgrade (Manga)

[Hasty12345]

wouldn't this make every 2-A cosmology into high 1-B though?

no since 2-A structures have parallel timelines, perpendicular temporal axes are beyond tier 2's scope.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

wouldn't this make every 2-A cosmology into high 1-B though?

no, UNLESS those cosmologies have evidence that each timeline or 4D Time-Space exists on a different temporal axis

 

[Ryzen7900X]

yes, and that's the entire premise of DB's low 1-C and what this CRT attempts to prove but on an infinite scale.

makes sense. Then the focus should really be on proving that these are higher temporal axes since that would inherently make them perpendicular and thus result in a high 1-B structure

 

[henryzx900ruly]

makes sense. Then the focus should really be on proving that these are higher temporal axes since that would inherently make them perpendicular and thus result in a high 1-B structure

we don't even need higher temporal axis

We just need to prove that each axis

Is a different axis

 

[Hasty12345]

makes sense. Then the focus should really be on proving that these are higher temporal axes since that would inherently make them perpendicular and thus result in a high 1-B structure

No, they don't need to be higher. The notion of "higher temporal axis" is more conducive to the idea they are parallel. The focus is on proving they are perpendicular.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

I think we've done a good job. However nothing will get approved until we get staff on this thread

 

[Ryzen7900X]

No, they don't need to be higher. The notion of "higher temporal axis" is more conducive to the idea they are parallel. The focus is on proving they are perpendicular.

but didnt we establish that these are essentially the same?

 

[Ryzen7900X]

we don't even need higher temporal axis

We just need to prove that each axis

Is a different axis

okay that's where I'm lost I have no idea how that'll prove it tbh

 

[henryzx900ruly]

but didnt we establish that these are essentially the same?

let me explain why they are NOT the same

[Key]
A=Spacetime.
B=Infinite ammount of space times.

Imagine a Chess board that has a infinite amount of places.

Let's say that A is a queen and it takes a rook

In chess(IRL) you move the piece above the piece you wanna take; It would be like A transcending another A which would make A 5D

Now let's say the chess board is a universe.

There exists a infinite amount of chess pieces which(are all B) they each occupy a different temporal axis

 

[henryzx900ruly]

okay that's where I'm lost I have no idea how that'll prove it tbh

we have; because I already proved that there existed a infinite temporal vector space

 

[Kaiou1991]

Now that the thread has slowed down, I'm going to add the votes.

Let's hope the thread doesn't vanish into the void

 

[henryzx900ruly]

Now that the thread has slowed down, I'm going to add the votes.

Let's hope the thread doesn't vanish into the void

my arguments are unstoppable

 

[Ryzen7900X]

let me explain why they are NOT the same

[Key]
A=Spacetime.
B=Infinite ammount of space times.

Imagine a Chess board that has a infinite amount of places.

Let's say that A is a queen and it takes a rook

In chess(IRL) you move the piece above the piece you wanna take; It would be like A transcending another A which would make A 5D

Now let's say the chess board is a universe.

There exists a infinite amount of chess pieces which(are all B) they each occupy a different temporal axis

That just added to the confusion

 

[henryzx900ruly]

uuhhhhH

That just added to the confusion

coordinate=separate dimension=higher scaling

infinite ammount of coordinates

Now infinite dimension!

Me high 1-B!

 

[henryzx900ruly]

That just added to the confusion

my next analogy will be about pizza

 

[Ryzen7900X]

uuhhhhH


coordinate=separate dimension=higher scaling

infinite ammount of coordinates

Now infinite dimension!

Me high 1-B!

okay no please stop, this isnt helpful. Im just asking hasty what he thinks the difference (if any) is between perpendicular time vs higher temporal axis and why they're not the same as we presumably established previously

 

[henryzx900ruly]

ohhhhhhhhhhh

okay no please stop, this isnt helpful. Im just asking hasty what he thinks the difference (if any) is between perpendicular time vs higher temporal axis and why they're not the same as we presumably established previously

my bad gang, I thought you like didn't understand at all

 

[Hasty12345]

okay no please stop, this isnt helpful. Im just asking hasty what he thinks the difference (if any) is between perpendicular time vs higher temporal axis and why they're not the same as we presumably established previously

They are the same on the wiki.

 

[Berga14]

If time axis aren't perpendicular to each other then this isn't H1B but just 2A. You need to prove this.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

pretty sure what hatsy is going to say is that
higher temporal axis is if something beings transcended and perpendicular time axis is that there's multiple temporal Vectors

 

[Ryzen7900X]

They are the same on the wiki.

see? thats all I wanted to confirm. so really as I said before we just need to prove that they are either perpendicular or higher since they're the same on the wiki and it makes sense (since parallel ones are explicitly not higher temporal dimensions)

 

[Ryzen7900X]

pretty sure what hatsy is going to say is that
higher temporal axis is if something beings transcended and perpendicular time axis is that there's multiple temporal Vectors

I think you're misunderstanding a bit. multiple spatial vectors (say a R^7 space) is inherently a tier 1 space. However according to the wiki if you have multiple temporal vectors then it doesnt achieve the same result unless you prove they're a higher axes (or perpendicular as hasty and i said are the same)

 

[Hasty12345]

I think you're misunderstanding a bit. multiple spatial vectors (say a R^7 space) is inherently a tier 1 space. However according to the wiki if you have multiple temporal vectors then it doesnt achieve the same result unless you prove they're a higher axes (or perpendicular as hasty and i said are the same)

The bolded parts are the same.

 

[Berga14]

I think you're misunderstanding a bit. multiple spatial vectors (say a R^7 space) is inherently a tier 1 space. However according to the wiki if you have multiple temporal vectors then it doesnt achieve the same result unless you prove they're a higher axes (or perpendicular as hasty and i said are the same)

you need to prove that even for spatial vector. Just saying "this universe has 6 spatial dimension" isn't enought

 

[Ryzen7900X]

The bolded parts are the same.

how? thats the part where Im lost. How would multiple temporal dimensions be inherently perpendicular or "higher" than each preceding one?

 

[Ryzen7900X]

you need to prove that even for spatial vector. Just saying "this universe has 6 spatial dimension" isn't enought

spatial dimensions are ALWAYS perpendicular to one another there's no exception to this rule

 

[Hasty12345]

how? thats the part where Im lost. How would multiple temporal dimensions be inherently perpendicular or "higher" than each preceding one?

same way 2D and 3D differ.

 

[Ryzen7900X]

same way 2D and 3D differ.

nah hasty, that logic only works for spatial dimensions which we know are inherently perpendicular to one another (you can NEVER have a 3-space where 1 spatial dimension is parallel to length for example)

 

[Berga14]

spatial dimensions are ALWAYS perpendicular to one another there's no exception to this rule

if this was the case then most tier 2 would have been tier 1. You need context. In your exaple you assumed that those spatial dimensions were already higher spatial axis.

 

[Hasty12345]

nah hasty, that logic only works for spatial dimensions which we know are inherently perpendicular to one another (you can NEVER have a 3-space where 1 spatial dimension is parallel to length for example)

The logic is the same for all perpendicular vectors.

 

[Ryzen7900X]

if this was the case then most tier 2 would have been tier 1. You need context. In your exaple you assumed that those spatial dimensions were already higher spatial axis.

no thats just the wiki having standards on what it thinks qualifies as evidence for higher spatial dimensions. Thats not the same as claiming that spatial dimensions are parallel unless proven otherwise or most verses with a 3D universe would be down to 1D. A fourth spatial axis is inherently perpendicular to the 3 we already know

 

[Ryzen7900X]

The logic is the same for all perpendicular vectors.

Im pretty sure thats not how the wiki treats them even if I agree with you

 

[Berga14]

The logic is the same for all perpendicular vectors.

no, only 3D and most of the time also 4D are assumed to be perpendicular by defoult. For a 5th or/and higher time or spatial axis you need to proove perpendiculatity

 

[Hasty12345]

Im pretty sure thats not how the wiki treats them even if I agree with you

The wiki throws logic out the window in tier 2.

 

[Ryzen7900X]

The wiki throws logic out the window in tier 2.

you got that right but we cant really play by our own standards if we wanna get big changes passed

 

[Ryzen7900X]

no, only 3D and most of the time also 4D are assumed to be perpendicular by defoult. For a 5th or/and higher time or spatial axis you need to proove perpendiculatity

The wiki throws logic out the window in tier 2.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

The wiki throws logic out the window in tier 2.

tier 2 is so goofy

 

[Hasty12345]

you got that right but we cant really play by our own standards if we wanna get big changes passed

This whole thread has been DB fans crying and debunking low 1-C DBS.

 

[henryzx900ruly]

This whole thread has been DB fans crying and debunking low 1-C DBS.

is this even about saint seiya anymore

 

[Ryzen7900X]

This whole thread has been DB fans crying and debunking low 1-C DBS.

maybe but here's my final thoughts on that:
1.) I do think the dbs blog does a better job at demonstrating a higher temporal flow with the time travel example from the verse
2.) we really oughta stop bringing in another verse. One reason dbs crts were constantly stonewalled was because many people kept bringing up GOW so lets stop that