• 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.

"Smurfing through time" A Dragon Ball Super upgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
You misread. I literally said we can’t have it removed cuz we’d have 3-A Zeno otherwise which I don’t want. I don’t wanna get rid of it, just didn’t understand why neutral zone isn’t 5D even after this change (which is the actual hole in its logic)
Ah I see. I apologize then.
Neutral Zone was always 5D, it was so infinitely small that it didn't really made them move up a tier. It is still 5D now, but it also has a time axis, which is infinitely large, that encompasses all of the lesser timelines.
 
Neutral Zone was always 5D, it was so infinitely small that it didn't really made them move up a tier. It is still 5D now, but it also has a time axis, which is infinitely large, that encompasses all of the lesser timelines.
It actually wasn't small, just not big enough, there were galaxies there as well iirc, there just wasn't enough to prove that it was universal in size,
 
It actually wasn't small, just not big enough, there were galaxies there as well iirc, there just wasn't enough to prove that it was universal in size,
Neutral space is something that holds all the macrocosm it is more than big enough the reason why it was deemed insignificant was for such spaces to qualify for a 5d space which is low 1c you need infinite^infinite number of space times so that's why I am going with temporal dimensions here
 
Neutral space is something that holds all the macrocosm it is more than big enough the reason why it was deemed insignificant was for such spaces to qualify for a 5d space which is low 1c you need infinite^infinite number of space times so that's why I am going with temporal dimensions here
I know, I was explicitly referring to the 5d spaces between the universe

Not the general structure of the neutral zone
 
Option 2 makes more sense to me.
I think Tilted is making the most sense here. Spatiotemporal separation doesn't inherently introduce new time axes, as DontTalkDT has mentioned in the past (1, 2, 3) and as the Tiering System pages explain. I proposed this exact argument months ago in the original Low 1-C Neutral Space staff thread and it was rejected already. I see no reason why the higher time of the Neutral Space must be ontologically distinct enough to the point where it services itself rather than being serviced by the greater timeline's axis.

Option 1 looks the most reliable to me.
No I've had this discussion before on multiple threads. The neutral zone being a separate dimension and having a separate time axis are two totally different concepts. It can still actually share the time axis of the overarching hypertimeline without anything limiting it. Separate dimension=/=separate time axis. Ill try to give an example: A timeline of two universes would be modeled as, Rx{1, 2} x RxRxR or A multiverse from 2 timelines would be, {1,2)x(RxRxR)xR. They would both be the same thing, now apply that to the neutral zone, and maybe zeno's palace to simulate the two universes/timelines, and they would still share the greater timelines time axis. We need more proof of a distinct time axis for the neutral zone.
can you please check the reasonings above and give your opinion regarding whether you want to change your option or not
 
Actually
From when I asked back then when the initial low1C neutral zone thread came about, a universal sized space seperating 4d universes is the minimum size to be considered significant
Whoever answered that is dead wrong because Neutral Space is multi-universal in size.
 
I agree with Tilted. Especially because the Neutral Zone can be serviced by the standard currently accepted Hypertimeline/Parallel World, and option 2 relies on using Hit’s existence to justify something not hinted at anywhere else. I think a good supporting piece of evidence for Hit’s ability being this way is that it’s directly compared to Whis’, and his own ability affects the Hypertimeline (rewinding it by 3 minutes. This is explicitly noted to be affecting reality in the same “Tier” as Time Travel {thus the Hypertimeline} but doesn’t break cosmic law because it doesn’t create changes in history. It merely resets events, creating no branches in time.)

So to cut the list down.

Hit’s ability is a different variation of Whis’, and Whis’ affects the Hypertimeline, thus you can assume Hit manipulates that, which justifies how he is using his ability in the Neutral Zone.
 
Didn't notice the thread was still ongoing, still prefer option 1. As I mentioned before:
Option 2:Neutral zone has it's own time dimension proven by the fact that hit was able to use his time based ability there and it needs a temporal dimension to work supporting evidence for this would be how in dragon ball different space or dimension usually means different space time one of the examples is how vados calls hits pocket dimension different space when usually hit pocket dimension has both space and time and he makes that pocket dimension with the time he skips
I made this exact same argument on the Neutral Space staff thread months back, as in right down to these precise semantics, and it already got rejected by DontTalkDT. It takes a lot for something to be ontologically separated enough to be considered its own space-time (hence it taking several years for us to gain 2-C macrocosm), much less to exist under its own axis of time. I'm not even sure if this reasoning would be enough to get the Neutral Zone accepted as a unique space-time, as I think the evaluating staff would consider "different dimension=different space=different space-time" too sweeping and hasty to accept as a default generalization for the whole franchise.

Don't see how the Neutral Zone is temporally separate enough to not just be serviced by the hypertimeline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top