• 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.

Saint Seiya High 1-B Upgrade (Manga)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reiner04 said:
More than one timelind can have one time axis per faq. U gotta have statement regarding them being separate axis, which seems to be only existing gor future and present.
Click to expand...
But that's the thing, past/future are relative. With infinite points, you'd have infinite of these pairs, hence infinite time axes
 
Reiner04 said:
More than one timeline can have one time axis per faq. U gotta have statement regarding them being separate axis, which seems to be only existing gor future and present.
Click to expand...
A timeline can have more than one axis, that’s the whole basis for hyper timeline logic, it’s a timeline with 2 temporal axes.
 
ceb.jpeg


Bruh how has this thread already devolved into bickering and threats? It hasn't even been half a day 💀. Seriously, a couple of y'all need to chill out a bit.

Is Saint Saiya the new Dragon Ball now?
 
Da3ggman said:
ceb.jpeg


Bruh how has this thread already devolved into bickering and threats? It hasn't even been half a day 💀

Is Saint Saiya the new Dragon Ball now?
Click to expand...
It’s ok, I’m the only one being threatened.

Right now most people, including myself, are arguing over standards, but everyone seems to agree it’s either 2-A or high 1-B. I’m not seeing anyone saying otherwise atm.
 
AlexZiggy said:
But that's the thing, past/future are relative. With infinite points, you'd have infinite of these pairs, hence infinite time axes
Click to expand...
The past and future seems to has been divided over considerable timespan, "one day in future might be one year here" or smth. Being relative makes even day ahead future. But a day ahead doesn't seems like belongs to different time axis given the former reasoning.
Hasty12345 said:
A timeline can have more than one axis, that’s the whole basis for hyper timeline logic, it’s a timeline with 2 temporal axes.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I do agree with 2 time axis as stated. Any other timelines can just be serviced by single one of past (if emerged from it), or future (if emerged from that one). I can see high 1-B due to multitude of spatial dimensions, but not temporal one. Considering if I didn't missed some important detail or messed up some context.
 
Reiner04 said:
The past and future seems to has been divided over considerable timespan, "one day in future might be one year here" or smth. Being relative makes even day ahead future. But a day ahead doesn't seems like belongs to different time axis given the former reasoning.

Yeah, I do agree with 2 time axis as stated. Any other timelines can just be serviced by single one of past (if emerged from it), or future (if emerged from that one). I can see high 1-B due to multitude of spatial dimensions, but not temporal one. Considering if I didn't missed some important detail or messed up some context.
Click to expand...
Wait, are you agreeing to low 1-C?
 
IMO you can only achieve low 1-C if you think the multidimensional universe statements are referring to a universe with greater than 3 spatial dimensions which would axiomatically imply low 1-C universes since spatial axis should by definition be perpendicular to one another. The CRT though can only result in 2-A or high 1-B as hasty said
 
Ryzen7900X said:
IMO you can only achieve low 1-C if you think the multidimensional universe statements are referring to a universe with greater than 3 spatial dimensions which would axiomatically imply low 1-C universes since spatial axis should by definition be perpendicular to one another. The CRT though can only result in 2-A or high 1-B as hasty said
Click to expand...
I never said that
 
AlexZiggy said:
Can I ask how you're getting High 1-B via spatial dimensions?
Click to expand...
spatial dimensions are by definition perpendicular to each other, an infinite number of them (assuming dimensions here are not separate spaces you can access but literal spatial dimensions) would result in a high 1-B structure
 
You’re going to have to point out to me where I said no one can agree to something else in that comment
 
All your points make sense but to be honest this looks more like low 1c to me, though I’m neutral about high 1b. You guys should call some staff because this seems quite straightforward.
 
Can someone educate me on the low 1-C stance? Im not sure how anything other than high 1-B or 2-A can result from this
 
Kaiou1991 said:
The Primary Evidence


The past and future are explicitly stated to have and to be different time axes. This isn't stated Just once but twice. This in itself isn’t enough for High 1-B. However, we have a direct statement that Time is infinite, and even more so, the Universe has an Infinite Number of Futures that branch out.
There are direct, and explicit statements stating that there are an infinite number of futures that branch out, and are also stated to be “numerous” (数多) and “fragmented” while “branching” from “this universe.”
Click to expand...
First off, the axes of the past and future were stated to be different which does not necessarily mean that these are two separate axes. And that third image of yours is not translated.

The "infinite number of futures that branch out" is merely the timelines diverging into separate timelines. And even if your point that the past and future were axes like you said, simply stating that it is "endless and scattered" isn't enough to give an infinite dimensional structure; at best the entire future itself is an axis.
Kaiou1991 said:
Further Evidence

— First, it is significant to understand that a universe, including space-time continuums and timelines, encompasses all three-dimensional space that can be accessed through regular movement within the universe. This means that any location that can be theoretically reached through conventional means of travel, such as spaceflight, would be considered part of the same universe and timeline, regardless of how the fiction portrays it. Movement between universes should only be feasible through extraordinary modes of transportation, such as portals, higher-dimensional movement, or teleportation. By default, it is assumed that universes have separate three-dimensional spaces, but if a piece of fiction demonstrates otherwise, the destruction of several connected timelines would be rated as Low 2-C (Universe level+).

— Secondly, there is the case of timelines that are connected at certain points in time. Unlike the scenario in which travel between universes is always possible through three-dimensional movement, the connection between these timelines only occurs at specific times. At these moments, the timelines may be considered as the same universe. For instance, if a timeline splits into two, the timelines were once the same universe before the split occurred. Conversely, if two timelines merge into one, they become the same universe only after they have been fused. In such cases, the destruction of a timeline is only accounted for if it was not connected to any other timeline for an infinite amount of time. Conversely, if numerous timelines were never separated for an infinite amount of time, they would be considered as one timeline to tier their destruction or creation.

It should be noted that timelines are assumed to be infinite in length unless evidence to the contrary is provided.
Click to expand...
This denotes timelines, not axes.


A character named “Capricorn Shura” is directly stated to be “Traveling through time” and is also additionally directly stated that he was time travelling. His sole purpose is to “Correct Causality” of the branching futures that are directly stated to be connected. This is further evidence because Shura is directly stated to be moving into a different “time axis” when he is forced to go to another world. Which, Shura is stated to be saving “Infinite presents.”
Click to expand...

It was stated Shura has been "trusted out of the time axis", which can be more logically interpreted as being involuntarily expunged from the conventional time-flow; the statement on "moving through an infinite number of multiverses" more likely explains that a "time axes" is rather a set a timelines aka a multiverse.

There we have further evidence that every “Branching future” (in this case alternative “Infinite number of presents”) is/are a “Different Time Axis/temporal dimension” and every branch is directly stated to be connected, and is all stated to be sharing the same universe, and thus it cannot be referring to a multiverse contextually in any way as per the standards laid out on the FAQ page, and Universe pages linked above.
Click to expand...

And how can it not be timelines as how you presented it?

In the absence of contradictory evidence, timelines are assumed to share the same time axis i.e. the same dimension of time. Note that sharing the same temporal axis does not mean that they would be connected in any way, as it only means that their time flows in the same direction. It's like how two people can both move in the same direction without their paths ever meeting, as long as they started in different places.
Click to expand...

Our explanation page also has this passage, which contradicts your statement. A timeline can represent the same universe of infinite other timelines; an example can be Future Trunk's timeline also has a Universe 7 same as the main timeline.

The universe is stated to be “infinite multidimensional (多次元).” This is explicitly, and directly, stating that the Universe has an infinite multitude of dimensions. (Specifically, temporal dimensions/time Axes which are supported by the context of the series)
Click to expand...

This is untranslated. Also, "多次元" means multidimensional, yes, but not "infinite multidimensional".

The universe is then again also further stated to be multidimensional (多次元) later again.
Click to expand...

It directly mentioned the concept of extra-dimensionality but not the "multitude of it". Guess that can be a shred of base evidence for Low 1-C, but this is not High 1-B at all.

Nonetheless, this is a hard net-disagree for me.
 
Last edited:
GarrixianXD said:
First off, the axes of the past and future were stated to be different which does not necessarily mean that these are two separate axes. And that third image of yours is not translated.

The "infinite number of futures that branch out" is merely the timelines diverging into separate timelines. And even if your point that the past and future were axes like you said, simply stating that it is "endless and scattered" isn't enough to give an infinite dimensional structure; at best the entire future itself is an axis.

This denotes timelines, not axes.




It was stated Shura has been "trusted out of the time axis", which can be more logically interpreted as being involuntarily expunged from the conventional time-flow; the statement on "moving through an infinite number of multiverses" more likely explains that a "time axes" is rather a set a timelines aka a multiverse.



And how can it not be timelines as how you presented it?



Our explanation page also has this passage, which contradicts your statement. A timeline can represent the same universe of infinite other timelines; an example can be Future Trunk's timeline also has a Universe 7 same as the main timeline.



Untranslated. "多次元" means multidimensional, yes, but not "infinite multidimensional".



It directly mentioned the concept of extra-dimensionality but not the "multitude of it". Guess that can be a shred of base evidence for Low 1-C, which I have seen CRTs about but this is not High 1-B at all.

Nonetheless, this is a hard net-disagree for me.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply
 
Ryzen7900X said:
Can someone educate me on the low 1-C stance? Im not sure how anything other than high 1-B or 2-A can result from this
Click to expand...
There are an infinite amount of temporal axes in one Saint Seiya universe, which itself is an overarching space time continuum. Like a Dragonball Timeline where each universe has its own temporal axis, the Saint Seiya universe would therefore need to be at least 5d to contain all the temporal axes of the past, present and future

Idk where the OP got the notion of infinite temporal axes = infinite temporal dimensions as he hasn’t proved how the temporal dimensions are quantitatively superior to eachother and infinite multidimensional just sounds like there are an infinite amount of spatial dimensions but idk shit about Saint Seiya. I came here because I have the ability to sense wherever Dragon Ball fans are gooning
 
Last edited:
RanHover60 said:
There are an infinite amount of temporal axes in one Saint Seiya universe, which itself is an overarching space time continuum. Like a Dragonball Timeline where each universe has its own temporal axis, the Saint Seiya universe would therefore need to be at least 5d to contain all the temporal axes of the past, present and future
Click to expand...
Ah i see now, the kind of "higher temporal axis containing lower temporal dimensions" which was part of the DBS argument.
RanHover60 said:
Idk where the OP got the notion of infinite temporal axes = infinite temporal dimensions as he hasn’t proved how the temporal dimensions are quantitatively superior to eachother and infinite multidimensional just sounds like there are an infinite amount of spatial dimensions but I’m a Dragon Ball supporter so take anything I say here with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...
this turned out to be wrong. If there were indeed infinite spatial dimensions then saint seiya would've gotten to high 1-B in less than 2 pages
 
Do we even have a direct statement of infinite spacial coordinates? Because the whole argument is built upon the “multidimensional” statement. Which literally disproves any indication of High 1-B. Multidimensional with the best possible interpretation indicates there more then 3 spacial dimensions but definitely not infinite.
 
No, this is not H1-B. Low 1-C maybe arguable (which seems to be a bit of a muddy area) but not H1-B.

Also, the phrase "multidimensional" does you no good without more details. Multidimensional according to what and how? Because a 4-dimensional structure can basically be a multidimensional space. It can even mean out of space
 
Georredannea15 said:
No, this is not H1-B. Low 1-C maybe arguable (which seems to be a bit of a muddy area) but not H1-B.

Also, the phrase "multidimensional" does you no good without more details. Multidimensional according to what? Because a 4-dimensional structure can basically be a multidimensional space. It can even mean out of space
Click to expand...
^^^This. this is why I dont think that statement necessarily proves anything about infinite temporal axes
 
The bottom right part of the panel or page says (無限に存在する多次元を移動しながら) (paraphrase) "moving through an infinite number of dimensions" so infinite is included but IMO it seems like dimensions is being used as in parallel world (yes jigen has been and can be used to refer to alternate dimensions even if its not the formal definition)

(and another text says 次元の狭間を彷徨いながら which is wandering between dimensions)

I'm not a translator tho and I use MTL so probably good to get someone who can translate properly.
 
BestMGQScalerEver said:
The bottom right part of the panel or page says (無限に存在する多次元を移動しながら) (paraphrase) "moving through an infinite number of dimensions" so infinite is included but IMO it seems like dimensions is being used as in parallel world (yes jigen has been and can be used to refer to alternate dimensions even if its not the formal definition)

(and another text says 次元の狭間を彷徨いながら which is wandering between dimensions)

I'm not a translator tho and I use MTL so probably good to get someone who can translate properly.
Click to expand...
The scene seems rather out of context and I find it highly unlikely that he's wandering or moving between spatial axes than moving between alternate dimensions. (and he's said to be going out of the timeline in that scene so yea moving between alternate worlds)
 
BestMGQScalerEver said:
The scene seems rather out of context and I find it highly unlikely that he's wandering or moving between spatial axes than moving between alternate dimensions. (and he's said to be going out of the timeline in that scene so yea moving between alternate worlds)
Click to expand...
He was moving between different universes. Thats the context
 
RanHover60 said:
There are an infinite amount of temporal axes in one Saint Seiya universe, which itself is an overarching space time continuum. Like a Dragonball Timeline where each universe has its own temporal axis, the Saint Seiya universe would therefore need to be at least 5d to contain all the temporal axes of the past, present and future

Idk where the OP got the notion of infinite temporal axes = infinite temporal dimensions as he hasn’t proved how the temporal dimensions are quantitatively superior to eachother and infinite multidimensional just sounds like there are an infinite amount of spatial dimensions but idk shit about Saint Seiya. I came here because I have the ability to sense wherever Dragon Ball fans are gooning
Click to expand...
what type of haki is this also I would like to note that I have made serval arguments which would prove whatever the op is proving but nobody notices them :(
 
GarrixianXD said:
First off, the axes of the past and future were stated to be different which does not necessarily mean that these are two separate axes. And that third image of yours is not translated.

The "infinite number of futures that branch out" is merely the timelines diverging into separate timelines. And even if your point that the past and future were axes like you said, simply stating that it is "endless and scattered" isn't enough to give an infinite dimensional structure; at best the entire future itself is an axis.

This denotes timelines, not axes.




It was stated Shura has been "trusted out of the time axis", which can be more logically interpreted as being involuntarily expunged from the conventional time-flow; the statement on "moving through an infinite number of multiverses" more likely explains that a "time axes" is rather a set a timelines aka a multiverse.



And how can it not be timelines as how you presented it?



Our explanation page also has this passage, which contradicts your statement. A timeline can represent the same universe of infinite other timelines; an example can be Future Trunk's timeline also has a Universe 7 same as the main timeline.



This is untranslated. Also, "多次元" means multidimensional, yes, but not "infinite multidimensional".



It directly mentioned the concept of extra-dimensionality but not the "multitude of it". Guess that can be a shred of base evidence for Low 1-C, but this is not High 1-B at all.

Nonetheless, this is a hard net-disagree for me.
Click to expand...
i said I was going to use the pizza analogy because I love using analogies.

"More logically interpreted"
ah yes I see! However have you considered the small little fact that;

Let's say we have a pizza and said pizza is the saint seiya universe.

One sausage on this pizza is a single timeline (time axis as the most congruent interpretation you literally point out that the kanji means multi-dimensonial which I mean aware multiple≠infinite but we can use this to our advantage to prove infinite vector temporal space)

Each Sausage lies on a pepperoni piece which would be a different temporal axis.

In spatial and temporal dimensions having an extra axis would grant another dimension.

There exists a infinite ammount of these pepperonis and sausages; creating a infinite temporal vector space.

(Vsbw standards gotta get a crt rq after this one boys!)
Let's say the cheese below the sausage and pepperoni is 3D and we give it another axis

Now it's 4D in spatial dimensioniallity

The same can be applied to temporal Dimensions (1+1=2+3=5D as the reason why a timeline is 4D is because of 3+1=4)
 
henryzx900ruly said:
i said I was going to use the pizza analogy because I love using analogies.

"More logically interpreted"
ah yes I see! However have you considered the small little fact that;

Let's say we have a pizza and said pizza is the saint seiya universe.

One sausage on this pizza is a single timeline (time axis as the most congruent interpretation you literally point out that the kanji means multi-dimensonial which I mean aware multiple≠infinite but we can use this to our advantage to prove infinite vector temporal space)

Each Sausage lies on a pepperoni piece which would be a different temporal axis.

In spatial and temporal dimensions having an extra axis would grant another dimension.

There exists a infinite ammount of these pepperonis and sausages; creating a infinite temporal vector space.

(Vsbw standards gotta get a crt rq after this one boys!)
Let's say the cheese below the sausage and pepperoni is 3D and we give it another axis

Now it's 4D in spatial dimensioniallity

The same can be applied to temporal Dimensions (1+1=2+3=5D as the reason why a timeline is 4D is because of 3+1=4)
Click to expand...
I dont want to be mean but....do you realize how unhelpful that was? You not only didnt address anything that Garraxian said but came up with an incredibly reductive "analogy" that is devoid of any nuance a topic like this must necessarily have
 
Ryzen7900X said:
I dont want to be mean but....do you realize how unhelpful that was? You not only didnt address anything that Garraxian said but came up with an incredibly reductive "analogy" that is devoid of any nuance a topic like this must necessarily have
Click to expand...
yesn't

for one; my analogy is peak and it perfectly describes the Cosmology in the crt

For two; I addressed the points that actually mattered(debunking his first point is a wincon because that's the basis of his arg)

(refuting said point would make everything else irrelevant as if A doesn't equal B then A is rebunked)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

TheUnshakableOne
  • Locked
This Saint Seiya CRT Was A Mistake Part 1....................
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
TheUnshakableOne
TheUnshakableOne
TheUnshakableOne
Uncountably infinite Timelines - Saint Seiya
Replies
29
Views
1K
Huesito88
Huesito88
AlexZiggy
  • Locked
Saint Seiya The Lost Upgrade (2-A)
Replies
26
Views
3K
AlexZiggy
AlexZiggy
StekFence
  • Locked
(Close this please)Pegasus Seiya image change
Replies
19
Views
1K
StekFence
StekFence
Kaiou1991
  • Locked
[STAFF NEEDED] Saint Seiya: Gold Saint Downgrade and Profile Split
2
Replies
60
Views
5K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
Back
Top