What qualifies as significantly large and fully sized?
Idk about Ben 10 to say anything to be honest
If you feel that strongly about it then you were welcome to argue for those cases. Ben 10 was just a reference to a physics theory that didn't give a higher tier in and of itself IIRC. Idk about ID.
Can you show me where in the FAQ or tiering system page such is mentioned?
I've heard R>F difference isn't compulsory but saying no need to prove qualitative superiority, I've never seen or heard that before.
There is none, Vasco. I don't think he is understanding the term's existence at all and seems to be a hater for it.
that will be revised soon because of the DMC thread
From what i remember about Fujiwara argument, she said higher dimensional object can't exist in lower dimensional realm which is a counter to the 9D soul in 3D body such as human, demon body or weapon like Devil Arm so it not really related to current FAQ, unless i missed something
all that stuff got debunked in the thread but she still wanna revise the FAQ
Well, whatever, anyway we should be back at the topic, so i'm in the same side as Planck about likely 1-B, since the scan mention about 28D dimesional plane theory, which probably could just be a theory
What does it mean by fully sized, cause according to the same FAQ being large alone isn't enough, or seeing a structure as flat without context is also considered vague.
infinite
Not compendious. Infinite and whatnot.
depend on contexts of the verse, however usually it is universal in size at least, you can see an example with Low 2-C, as space-time by itself is a 4D structure however only with universal-sized space-time is considering as Low 2-C, because observable universal-sized is considered as significantly large/fully-sized. However small space-time isn't considered to be Low 2-C and is pocket dimension instead
infinite
Still size is just a factor when considering qualitative superiority not just size alone grants qualitative superiority alone.
Still just being large alone without context ain't proof of qualitative superiority.
Yeah, ID has a 4th dimension below time that when accessed by 3D people essentially makes them lesser gods.
So basically, it's called a dimension along with time but might not really be a dimension? idk.
tiering system is exactly about size
Heh, no. When it comes to strictly mathematical dimensions, one just needs to prove size or in this case, the lengths of the spatial axes in question. That "qualitative superiority higher layers" whatever is when your dealing with planes of existence that should prove to have ontological superiority to each other.
Size alone isn't enough for qualitative superiority, you need to prove higher levels of infinity.
I get with mathematical dimensions but simply saying a dimension is bigger than another isn't enough for qualitative superiority.
higher levels of infinity, is bigger size bro, set theory is a thing
2-A still, in a sense, bigger than Low 2-C, unless you want to argue that 2-A = Low 2-C
2-A and low 2-C are the same size. The only difference is the amount.
......What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with mathematical dimensions in the sense the tiering system uses them.
When talking about dimensions size is a factor but there needs to be prove of qualitative superiority not just size alone, a construct can contain other construct and still be the same dimensional level with the structures in it doesn't necessarily mean it's higher dimensional just cause it's bigger, even the wiki FAQ acknowledges simply seeing a structure as flat isn't proof of qualitative superiority.
I'm not talking about mathematical dimensions or the OP, I'm simply having a friendly chat with @Vietthai96 about how size alone don't grant higher tiers.
This is what I'm talking about.
Mind drop the evidence?
Planck also said the same thing what dread was saying. Qualitative superiority doesn't needed to be "proved" in case of axiomatic Dimensions when those Dimensions aren't compactified is proved already, as in that case, they'll be qualitative superior by default not that they won't have it. Qualitative superiority is must for tier 1.
what do you mean by "not compactified"
In a string theory, more particularly in a super string theory, Extra 6 dimensions of space (calabi yay manifolds) are compactified at every point in the 4 Dimensional universe at plancks length and so are smaller than 4 Dimensional universe.
