- 5,123
- 2,633
I'm already aware of that.Yes, it's called a temporal dimension. While the others are spatial. It's a way to measure change.
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 already aware of that.Yes, it's called a temporal dimension. While the others are spatial. It's a way to measure change.
Cool.I'm already aware of that.
4th dimension isn't really for human perception. We can only perceive 3 dimensions.the biggest issue is that I can't find any kind of definition of dimension that even remotely acknowledges time
but even if it was a "temporal dimension" it wouldn't even be comparable to an actual one, since dimensions include things like length, width, and height, while time can't really go like, sideways? From what I can tell the only reason people call it a dimension is because "you need time in order to move" but time just goes in one direction unlike any other dimension.
I'd prefer is someone actually had an explanation that made sense but none seem to exist
No single dimension has length, width and height on its own as far as I'm aware since all three of these things can only exist in three dimensions together. Time moving in only one way actually has a Wikipedia article called the arrow of time.the biggest issue is that I can't find any kind of definition of dimension that even remotely acknowledges time
but even if it was a "temporal dimension" it wouldn't even be comparable to an actual one, since dimensions include things like length, width, and height, while time can't really go like, sideways? From what I can tell the only reason people call it a dimension is because "you need time in order to move" but time just goes in one direction unlike any other dimension.
I'd prefer is someone actually had an explanation that made sense but none seem to exist
well yeah that's what I meant, I was just listing them all not using them all at onceNo single dimension has length, width and height on its own as far as I'm aware since all three of these things can only exist in three dimensions together. Time moving in only one way actually has a Wikipedia article called the arrow of time.
As far as I'm aware using time as a dimension works well with formulas and nobody really has an explanation why time as a dimension is different from other dimensions in the sense that it only ever moves into one direction as far as we can tell.well yeah that's what I meant, I was just listing them all not using them all at once
Well, it would be different from a 4th spatial dimension though time is still an integral part of the space-time continuum.on top of the fact that time can exist in a 2d or 1d space, I think it's safe to say that time is at the very least a different concept entirely from the the 4th dimension in particular
Well, Immeasurable characters are certainly capable of using time like an axis of movement and destroying an infinite time-space continuum does seem like something that should be superior to simply destroying the infinite amount of things that may or may not exist within it to me.well sure, space time continuum and stuff is nice but that doesn't mean that time is related to AP at all, since destroying stuff on a 4d(spatial) level is the equivalent of being infinite on a 3d as each dimension is infinitely larger than the previous, but instead we use time for some reason which is
absolutely weird to me
Why would that be relevant? There is no past or future if time itself is destroyed, so why would that something's future destroyed be relevant by comparison?except destroying something in the past would also destroy it in the future by default, seems unquantifiable at best when considering time manipulation characters
well if time itself is destroyed then that'd be like destroying spaceWhy would that be relevant? There is no past or future if time itself is destroyed, so why would that something's future destroyed be relevant by comparison?
That sounds like a pretty complicated idea when you consider higher-dimensional objects in this context.well if time itself is destroyed then that'd be like destroying space
in the sense that it isn't something tangible that can be interacted with, so it'd be more like a complicated EE or spatial manipulation
Don’t worry I’ll let it slideSo BoS Genos’ Class M rating has no justification :V
Oh. Then I think the very first comment of mine you quoted was a misclick lmao, because I wasn't talking about that at all lmao.The one whom I originally quoted before you started this conversation with me was Zillerthebucko and their comment looked like this:
Yeah temporal dimensions aren't the same as spatial dimensions in every aspect. The "only goes one way" thing is what most people consider an example of that.the biggest issue is that I can't find any kind of definition of dimension that even remotely acknowledges time
but even if it was a "temporal dimension" it wouldn't even be comparable to an actual one, since dimensions include things like length, width, and height, while time can't really go like, sideways? From what I can tell the only reason people call it a dimension is because "you need time in order to move" but time just goes in one direction unlike any other dimension.
I'd prefer is someone actually had an explanation that made sense but none seem to exist
1. According to Minowski, which this site at least partially bases its tiering system on, space and time are not the same so calling it spatial manipulation is incorrect. In fact, you yourself pointed it out didn't you? Regardless if it's 1 spatial dimension, 2 spatial dimension, time still exists, so how can they be the same?well if time itself is destroyed then that'd be like destroying space
in the sense that it isn't something tangible that can be interacted with, so it'd be more like a complicated EE or spatial manipulation
cry lmaoyeah,yeah,yeah,of course that make sense,gojo,a island level(possibly country)level character more powerful than a low-multiversal level character.
(you use black flash, even if you use it, gojo is still inferior)
you guys gotta stop acting like this lol...Low 2-C. Don’t see anything surpassing that.
4 dimensional beings can be Low 1-Cbut uh, 4d is higher dimensional, which is tier 2 at best so....
4-a garou was expected? no.Anything exceeding 2-C seems unlikely unless the setting is expanded to include a complex cosmology. Even God being stated to be higher-dimensional wouldn’t automatically make him Low 1-C.
I agree, I do strongly believe that Saitama will become Low 2-C though. The cosmic levels of power that Murata set up with these recent chapters are leading towards an insane conclusion that will probably affect the entire cosmosAnything exceeding 2-C seems unlikely unless the setting is expanded to include a complex cosmology. Even God being stated to be higher-dimensional wouldn’t automatically make him Low 1-C.
And 3-dimensional characters can be tier 0.4 dimensional beings can be Low 1-C
You ain't the boss of methen, you're wrong and stop with those predications.
This is so possible.Saitama becomes Low 2-C, then many years later some obscure info from a databook not released in the west makes him High 1-C through 11-Dimensional brane cosmology.
Chill, maybe?4-a garou was expected? no.
then, you're wrong and stop with those predications.
I have enough with sucker for love, with nyanlatotep, the real name of god would be:Imagine if GOD has a real name and it's something cute like "Nyannyansuke" or something similar.