TenSura LN Major Revision - Slime-Verse Salvation - Tier 1 Upgrade

[Fixxed]

You are forgetting that this is not how things work in TenSura, so let's go deeper into the idea of "different non-orthogonal directions" of time by simplifying the matter into a geometrical model:

Consider a tetra-dimensional space where:

• X-axis represents the spatial dimensions.
• The Y-axis represents the ordinary time dimension, with the future upwards.

Now imagine:

• A straight line L1 extending along the Y-axis, representing the flow of ordinary time.
• A second straight line L2 moving parallel to L1, but on a different plane inclined at an angle of 0 with respect to Y.

L2 will never intersect L1, but moves "next to" it in an alternate time direction, as mentioned in the verso. Each point on L2 represents a different "now" than L1, although both move in the "same general direction into the future".

From a physical point of view, this representation in geometric space suggests:

• Multiple "arrows of time" advancing in slightly different directions in space-time.
• Each arrow represents a slightly different notion of causality and time evolution.
• Observers in L1 and L2 would experience the "sense" of time in subtly but perceptibly different ways.

If we consider this idea of timelines moving in non-parallel temporal directions, then the idea of introducing an additional coordinate in order to adequately represent these different notions of time becomes necessary. Then we have to simplify (again) the model I already established in my first post, along with the new one we have:

• The X-axis represents the spatial dimensions.
• The Y-axis represents the ordinary time dimension.
• A line L2 moves in a direction not parallel, neither "superimposed" nor orthogonal to L1 (Y-axis) on a plane inclined at an angle of 0.

Now we must add:

- A fourth axis U perpendicular to the XY and XL2 planes.

Each point in space now has coordinates (x, y, z, u), where:

• (x, y, z) represents the spatial position.
• y represents the ordinary time.
• u represents the "alternative time direction" along L2.

And everything else I already established above.

I dont understand why you put spatial and temporal in 1 diagram. If you want to prove 2nd time axis just put time, because i think we not talking about space in here

I think you batter explain it use feats and situation in tensura, i know what you say here but what the connection about this and slime?

If we use tensura feats, it obviously L1 and L2 are facing same direction of future even if they have different events that occur

• L1 say rimuru get killed by eastern empire
• L2 say rimuru never meet hinata

Are this two timelines not facing to the future? Why and how this two timelines are non-parallel or whatever you say about that?

Branch worlds will have different event, but will not give different notion and sense of time. I mean just events that change here not the entirety of timeline

 

[Digital_Franz]

I dont understand why you put spatial and temporal in 1 diagram. If you want to prove 2nd time axis just put time, because i think we not talking about space in here

I think you batter explain it use feats and situation in tensura, i know what you say here but what the connection about this and slime?

If we use tensura feats, it obviously L1 and L2 are facing same direction of future even if they have different events that occur

• L1 say rimuru get killed by eastern empire
• L2 say rimuru never meet hinata

Are this two timelines not facing to the future? Why and how this two timelines are non-parallel or whatever you say about that?

Branch worlds will have different event, but will not give different notion and sense of time. I mean just events that change here not the entirety of timeline

I don't want to talk much about this. I'll just say this: Time direction doesn't matter.
You seem to forget it but it's just optional. If each timeline has its own time axis then time direction doesn't matter. If it's shown then it's always good.

However: it was explicitly stated that the direction of Time this time was different then previously[2]

 

[Meli_Tempest]

I dont understand why you put spatial and temporal in 1 diagram. If you want to prove 2nd time axis just put time, because i think we not talking about space in here

I think you batter explain it use feats and situation in tensura, i know what you say here but what the connection about this and slime?

If we use tensura feats, it obviously L1 and L2 are facing same direction of future even if they have different events that occur

• L1 say rimuru get killed by eastern empire
• L2 say rimuru never meet hinata

Are this two timelines not facing to the future? Why and how this two timelines are non-parallel or whatever you say about that?

Branch worlds will have different event, but will not give different notion and sense of time. I mean just events that change here not the entirety of timeline

Representing the time axes in geometric spaces to be able to visualize them is fine, it is a mathematical resource, it is not that I am treating them as "spatial" axes. It is simply a conceptual simplification, it is to make it possible to understand.

Even simplifying space-time to a plane is something very common, you can see it in the explanations of relativistic gravity in high school, where you can see how an object with mass, like a ball, deforms a cloth where it was placed, simulating the effect of gravity in space-time.

Now let's explain it in TenSura.

There is a timeline (X) let's say it is the original one we know: Rimuru becomes true dragon, doesn't die and etc etc.

There is another (Y) rimuru dies and is resurrected later, etc etc.

Both are time axes that follow different "directions" but in the sense of their set of events, also not the "where they are going" as such, as both are still heading into the future. But they both "extend" into different senses of the future, but into the future after all, this is what "different directions" means in this context.

If we put them both in a Euclidean space (X), which is the set of (x, y, z, t) i.e. a tetradimensional space (spacetime), and (Y), which is the same, although they look in the "same direction" (the future), Y is "tilted" at an "angle" with respect to (X). (Note that this "spatial" sounding way of explaining things is just a way of simplifying this matter, because explaining this is very difficult).

Then since both look in "different directions" not orthogonal to the future, but not parallel as such, and "flow" in that direction, the idea of an extra dimension (u) reflecting that change becomes necessary, because if not, it is impossible for them to "flow" in that non-orthogonal "different direction".

If you want, you can imagine it with an infinite winding road, it seems to "zigzag" and "move in another direction" but it goes "straight" i.e. "the direction is the same" as such, the future, but such a road must "extend" into "something else" to exist, and cannot "exist" as a straight line. (Please remember this is just one way to imagine it, and again did not imply that time works the same as space).

The rest I already explained, seriously I can't do this forever, tell me you understood it. Put all my explanations together, write them down if you want in a notebook, so you can see what I mean.

 

[Meli_Tempest]

If I made a mistake here, feel free to correct me, but I think the point is more or less clear.

 

[Unqver]

I have not seen the original text equivalent to the conclusion, and I can not understand this way of understanding, so I don't agree.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I have not seen the original text equivalent to the conclusion, and I can not understand this way of understanding, so I don't agree.

If you mean the original cosmology blog by "original text", here

If I made a mistake here, feel free to correct me, but I think the point is more or less clear.

I don't want to talk much about this. I'll just say this: Time direction doesn't matter.
You seem to forget it but it's just optional. If each timeline has its own time axis then time direction doesn't matter. If it's shown then it's always good.

However: it was explicitly stated that the direction of Time this time was different then previously[2]

Just stop at this point. There aren't any new arguments from the opposition, just things that have already been answered. It's best to just wait for staff.

 

[Unqver]

If you mean the original cosmology blog by "original text", here


Just stop at this point. There aren't any new arguments from the opposition, just things that have already been answered. It's best to just wait for staff.

After looking at it, I didn't read anything valuable. I'm sorry, but I'm still against it.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

After looking at it, I didn't read anything valuable. I'm sorry, but I'm still against it.

Not really an argument, you're just saying you're "against it" but not bringing any relevant argument

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

After looking at it, I didn't read anything valuable. I'm sorry, but I'm still against it.

Can you explain your point of disagreement in more detail?

 

[Robo432343]

that was a terrible reason to disagree with a thread

 

[Fixxed]

Representing the time axes in geometric spaces to be able to visualize them is fine, it is a mathematical resource, it is not that I am treating them as "spatial" axes. It is simply a conceptual simplification, it is to make it possible to understand.

Even simplifying space-time to a plane is something very common, you can see it in the explanations of relativistic gravity in high school, where you can see how an object with mass, like a ball, deforms a cloth where it was placed, simulating the effect of gravity in space-time.

Now let's explain it in TenSura.

There is a timeline (X) let's say it is the original one we know: Rimuru becomes true dragon, doesn't die and etc etc.

There is another (Y) rimuru dies and is resurrected later, etc etc.

Both are time axes that follow different "directions" but in the sense of their set of events, also not the "where they are going" as such, as both are still heading into the future. But they both "extend" into different senses of the future, but into the future after all, this is what "different directions" means in this context.

If we put them both in a Euclidean space (X), which is the set of (x, y, z, t) i.e. a tetradimensional space (spacetime), and (Y), which is the same, although they look in the "same direction" (the future), Y is "tilted" at an "angle" with respect to (X). (Note that this "spatial" sounding way of explaining things is just a way of simplifying this matter, because explaining this is very difficult).

Then since both look in "different directions" not orthogonal to the future, but not parallel as such, and "flow" in that direction, the idea of an extra dimension (u) reflecting that change becomes necessary, because if not, it is impossible for them to "flow" in that non-orthogonal "different direction".

If you want, you can imagine it with an infinite winding road, it seems to "zigzag" and "move in another direction" but it goes "straight" i.e. "the direction is the same" as such, the future, but such a road must "extend" into "something else" to exist, and cannot "exist" as a straight line. (Please remember this is just one way to imagine it, and again did not imply that time works the same as space).

The rest I already explained, seriously I can't do this forever, tell me you understood it. Put all my explanations together, write them down if you want in a notebook, so you can see what I mean.

I mean just simplyfy it to time dimension alone, i dont think why bringing spatial dimension are very relevant to the argument

Yeah i dont see anything that unique in tensura after all, that make tensura timelines different from other verse that use MWI timelines, i think because you explain more about the concept of math that the OP use than about the verse it self

Just say in timeline A rimuru arent death and timeline B rimuru are death will definitetly not make the timelines follow the concept that you explain. We banish all verse that use default MWI's concept to multiversal level, its either you can tell the unique in tensura or yeah just have multiversal rating

• I mean why explanation like this can prove timelines in slime are non-parallel non-orthogonal or whataver are that?
  
• You say it are different sense of future, but in my mind it just still the same sense of future but different events that happen, i mean literally what the very meaning of branching timeline

Yeah just like what i say previously just branching in different possibility or different events not branching to the different direction

I am sure you know the different between branching to different events of possibilities and branching to different "direction of time"

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I mean just simplyfy it to time dimension alone, i dont think why bringing spatial dimension are very relevant to the argument

Yeah i dont see anything that unique in tensura after all, that make tensura timelines different from other verse that use MWI timelines, i think because you explain more about the concept of math that the OP use than about the verse it self

Just say in timeline A rimuru arent death and timeline B rimuru are death will definitetly not make the timelines follow the concept that you explain. We banish all verse that use default MWI's concept to multiversal level, its either you can tell the unique in tensura or yeah just have multiversal rating

• I mean why explanation like this can prove timelines in slime are non-parallel non-orthogonal or whataver are that?
• You say it are different sense of future, but in my mind it just still the same sense of future but different events that happen, i mean literally what the very meaning of branching timeline

Yeah just like what i say previously just branching in different possibility or different events not branching to the different direction

I am sure you know the different between branching to different events of possibilities and branching to different "direction of time"

all of this has been answered many times previously, and brings absolutely no new argument. Irrelevant.

 

[Fixxed]

all of this has been answered many times previously, and brings absolutely no new argument. Irrelevant.

Where bruh?? I dont see where you explain why timeline in slime are unique comparing to other verse that use MWI

What i see here are you guys just explain the math concept and not explain the connection of it to slime verse

You not explain why timelines in slime are non parallel or orthogonal and blablabla. Just throw some math concept and say slime are use that
We will make every verse that use MWI being low 1C then

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Where bruh?? I dont see where you explain why timeline in slime are unique comparing to other verse that use MWI

The OP speaks for itself

What i see here are you guys just explain the math concept and not explain the connection of it to slime verse

I've already explained this in the OP and many times in the thread itself, the Timelines have their own time axis, that have their own direction of time

You not explain why timelines in slime are non parallel or orthogonal and blablabla. Just throw some math concept and say slime are use that
We will make every verse that use MWI being low 1C then

bro...
Just read the OP at this point, idk why you're not reading it even so I said it so many times, not my problem if you don't understand a math concept....

At this point, if you don't bring up any new point and continue derailing this, I will have no other option but to report you, I'm sure the admins can judge themselves on who's right and who's wrong here....

 

[Sebas-S.P-san]

Where bruh?? I dont see where you explain why timeline in slime are unique comparing to other verse that use MWI

What i see here are you guys just explain the math concept and not explain the connection of it to slime verse

You not explain why timelines in slime are non parallel or orthogonal and blablabla. Just throw some math concept and say slime are use that
We will make every verse that use MWI being low 1C then

I recommend three things.
1: Read carefully what Meli Tempest wrote
2: Read the OP and the scans they include.
3: Write everything down in a notebook and then read it and then tell us that you understood, okay?

 

[MrTim]

And so, now I think I can comment...

I agree with the part of the timelines being 5D. I think this drawing will clearly convey how time lines work in Tensura.

As for the part with different directions, I will remain neutral for now

 

[Berga14]

And so, now I think I can comment...

I agree with the part of the timelines being 5D. I think this drawing will clearly convey how time lines work in Tensura.

As for the part with different directions, I will remain neutral for now

this is what the op is proposing (more or less) (i'm answering just becase i wanted to use a drawing to)

edit: the 4D timelines/green arrows are consecutive

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Snip

Anyways, answering this one last time thoroughly, after which I'll stop replying to you if you still try to make arguments from repetition

Spoiler: Explanation

I dont understand what you trying to say here, but time dimension not extend through 2D plane or space. Literally where you found this???

The analogy in the OP explains why, and how this is a specific case.

Why is it 6-D?
One would say, why are the cycles collectively 5-D? They aren't stated to be uncountably Infinite either, so what gives? Well, you see, each Timeline's Time Axis has a different direction, as explained above, which produces the following results :

This already explains it well enough on why the multiple timelines' time axes extending in different directions are 5D as a whole
Read the actual thread for where users continuously proved how this is applicable, via practical mathematics and via analogies.

What i mean by different time axis here is, time that not flow to the future or reverse to the past or any spatial axis. It literally not qualify in our standard, and what you show here just some time travel to past that make another timeline. And it say direction not axis, but yeah even if it say axis you still need more explanation

It seems you're indeed blind enough to not read the OP clearly

, with each Timeline having its own Time Dimension[5]

As for the other explanation, I have already explained it well enough on how each of said time axes have different directions. That's self-sufficient in itself. End of argument.

Yeah, because we talking about time dimension here not spatial


Like i say above, the argument about 2 lines in 2D plane are only for spatial dimension not for time dimension, because time dimension not have the direction like space not have 2D plane

I think you don't understand why we treat both a 4-Dimensional Space and a 4-Dimensional Space-time as both Low 2-C, because they are the same

Characters or objects whose power is uncountably infinitely greater than the prior tiers. That is to say, they can significantly affect, create and/or destroy higher-dimensional structures that exceed lesser objects by an uncountably infinite margin. An example of this being 4-dimensional spacetime continuums of universal size, but can be generalized to any 4-dimensional structure of a similar scope.

Time and Space are both Axes, part of Dimensionality. Time is perpendicular to Space by default as well. Your statements outright deny why we treat additional time axes in perpendicular directions as +1D despite you literally quoting a part from the section of FAQ where that was stated

Additionally, essentially, adding a Time Dimension or a Space dimension to a 3-D space is the same as long as both the additional time or space dimensions are of the same size, aka, they extend uncountably infinitely in their respective direction.

An argument of time direction that not-parallel and intersect with each other not will give you some higher time dimension that can placed they

I think you don't quite get it, because any two "Axes" that intersect each other or and are non-parallel nonetheless require a 2-Dimensional Space. That is the same for both Spatial and Temporal Axes, given its a different axes of time entirely and not just time flowing at a different flow rate in same time axis at different places.

The one timeline still facing the future same as the other one, even if the other one facing the past it still not gave you more time axis. You in here use how space dimension work for time dimension

That's an example of anti-parallel but overlapping timelines, and they indeed can be represented in a 1-dimensional plane. However, that is irrelevant to this thread because it doesn't have any context here.

NOW, as a proof that time dimensions and space dimensions work the same when the context require them to be perpendicular or in a way that requires a perpendicular plane for them to be represented in, I quote Qawsedf from this thread :

Me :
Ah, ok, gotten, I wanted to confirm more on that 6D part.

Than, what about this :

A Space-time A has Space-time B, C, D, E, F.... Z in it. [A total of 25 space-times in A]. Each of these space-times have different temporal axis, each of these axis have a different flow/their direction is different too.

What would be the tier of Space-Time A AS A WHOLE. Can it be 1-B[As implied by your answer to the tree example]? This would be my final question in this thread given no other person posses an interesting question that I would want to know too.

Qawsedf : It would be 1-B in totality if you can prove those all have different temporal directions.

Qawsedf : [later]
In this case you would have to prove that all of the temporal axis are perpendicular to each other, since I really don't know what else could get you there.

THERE
One can clearly see how Spatial Dimensions and temporal dimensions work the same in principal, when you add a spatial dimension of uncountable length, say R3, to pre-existing 2-Dimensional space, it becomes 3-D as each point in R3 multiplies itself with the plane of R2 and R2
Same with Time Dimensions, when you add a Time Dimension, say R4, to a 3-Dimensional space, R4's each point multiplies itself to each point on R1, R2 and R3, thus making the totality 4D.

AND, if you argue that the time dimensions in this case aren't perpendicular, yes, the time axes of timelines are NOT orthogonal to each other, but they require an orthogonal plane to represent themselves as explained before countless times and in the OP as well.

With this, I have answered all pre-existing or potential future arguments that might come, as far as I can see potential arguments coming.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I think this drawing will clearly convey how time lines work in Tensura.

Not really, no. This one does not account for each time axis of the timeline extending in different directions. Each 4D cycle has a different direction then the prior, thus why it needs a 2-D temporal structure for those axes/lines to extend to, meanwhile the hyper timeline will be perpendicular to said structure entirely

this is what the op is proposing (more or less) (i'm answering just becase i wanted to use a drawing to)

Pretty much it.

To those who still don't get it despite the [at this point, overly] simplified explanation, the red line[hypertimeline] is perpendicular to the plane containing the green lines[timelines' axes], its extending perpendicular to the plane in the same sense as how a 3-D line perpendicular to a 2-D plane extends towards us so we perceive it as a dot, and not a line.

As for if one might say, but aren't the timelines starting and ending after one another? Well, yes, they are. But the diagram takes the vectors of said time axes and displaces their overall position while keeping the direction the exact same. Basically a vice versa of head to tail rule in vector measurement

 

[Fixxed]

The OP speaks for itself

I've already explained this in the OP and many times in the thread itself, the Timelines have their own time axis, that have their own direction of time

bro...
Just read the OP at this point, idk why you're not reading it even so I said it so many times, not my problem if you don't understand a math concept....

At this point, if you don't bring up any new point and continue derailing this, I will have no other option but to report you, I'm sure the admins can judge themselves on who's right and who's wrong here....

Anyways, answering this one last time thoroughly, after which I'll stop replying to you if you still try to make arguments from repetition

Spoiler: Explanation

The analogy in the OP explains why, and how this is a specific case.

This already explains it well enough on why the multiple timelines' time axes extending in different directions are 5D as a whole
Read the actual thread for where users continuously proved how this is applicable, via practical mathematics and via analogies.

It seems you're indeed blind enough to not read the OP clearly

As for the other explanation, I have already explained it well enough on how each of said time axes have different directions. That's self-sufficient in itself. End of argument.

I think you don't understand why we treat both a 4-Dimensional Space and a 4-Dimensional Space-time as both Low 2-C, because they are the same

Time and Space are both Axes, part of Dimensionality. Time is perpendicular to Space by default as well. Your statements outright deny why we treat additional time axes in perpendicular directions as +1D despite you literally quoting a part from the section of FAQ where that was stated

Additionally, essentially, adding a Time Dimension or a Space dimension to a 3-D space is the same as long as both the additional time or space dimensions are of the same size, aka, they extend uncountably infinitely in their respective direction.

I think you don't quite get it, because any two "Axes" that intersect each other or and are non-parallel nonetheless require a 2-Dimensional Space. That is the same for both Spatial and Temporal Axes, given its a different axes of time entirely and not just time flowing at a different flow rate in same time axis at different places.

That's an example of anti-parallel but overlapping timelines, and they indeed can be represented in a 1-dimensional plane. However, that is irrelevant to this thread because it doesn't have any context here.

NOW, as a proof that time dimensions and space dimensions work the same when the context require them to be perpendicular or in a way that requires a perpendicular plane for them to be represented in, I quote Qawsedf from this thread :

THERE
One can clearly see how Spatial Dimensions and temporal dimensions work the same in principal, when you add a spatial dimension of uncountable length, say R3, to pre-existing 2-Dimensional space, it becomes 3-D as each point in R3 multiplies itself with the plane of R2 and R2
Same with Time Dimensions, when you add a Time Dimension, say R4, to a 3-Dimensional space, R4's each point multiplies itself to each point on R1, R2 and R3, thus making the totality 4D.

AND, if you argue that the time dimensions in this case aren't perpendicular, yes, the time axes of timelines are NOT orthogonal to each other, but they require an orthogonal plane to represent themselves as explained before countless times and in the OP as well.

With this, I have answered all pre-existing or potential future arguments that might come, as far as I can see potential arguments coming.

This will remain endless cycle cause i dont think you understand what i mean

Different direction in here are different possibility events that occur, thats basically the very nature of how MWI work. It is self-evident by the proof you give in OP, where timelines just branching differently in events that happen

The context what i see behind what the meaning for different direction or axis are just branching events not more

 

[PHANtomFELdway]

Agree

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Different direction in here are different possibility events that occur, thats basically the very nature of how MWI work. It is self-evident by the proof you give in OP, where timelines just branching differently in events that happen

I am not arguing against MWI, mate, the point of the OP is that the timelines' time axes have different directions.

The context what i see behind what the meaning for different direction or axis are just branching events not more

that again does not really debunk anything from the OP.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Just stop at this point. There aren't any new arguments from the opposition, just things that have already been answered. It's best to just wait for staff

That statement on its own isn't indicative lf two temporal direction. Since it's still moving forward-backward.


The OP has asked me to comment on this thread and Ive only read the opening post. The key point to me is that time in all of them follows the exact same forwards-backwards motion. The particular wording of this franchise in calling them time axis make it seem like they're explicitly fitting the criteria, but none of the scans actually support having perpendicular time directions to my reading. The most you could argue is the end of time qualifying but even that involves time going forward-backwards in the same direction.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

That statement on its own isn't indicative lf two temporal direction. Since it's still moving forward-backward.


The OP has asked me to comment on this thread and Ive only read the opening post. The key point to me is that time in all of them follows the exact same forwards-backwards motion. The particular wording of this franchise in calling them time axis make it seem like they're explicitly fitting the criteria, but none of the scans actually support having perpendicular time directions to my reading. The most you could argue is the end of time qualifying but even that involves time going forward-backwards in the same direction.

I think you misunderstood me there. What the OP isn't proposing direct perpendicular directions, at least between timelines. They key point is this :

In such a case, the Time Axes between those Worlds, while not parallel or overlapping, would also not be Orthogonal to each other. However, there is indeed the fact that if those Time Axis are independent of each other in the sense of having a different direction, even if not orthogonal, then they can qualify for additional higher Dimensions, which would be needed for those time axes to extend to.

Basically, this is because you can draw as many "Lines" on top of each other in a 1-Dimensional Plane, and all those lines would still be in the same direction, even Anti-Parallel Lines would essentially be extending in the same direction, only difference being, simply in reversed flow. Therefore, they can still be represented in a 1-D plane. This is also why in cases where there's a Multiversal construct containing many Space-Time Continuums, by default, we assume that the Time Dimension of each of those Space-Times extends in the same direction, and therefore would not qualify for an additional Higher Dimension, as there's no need for such a higher Dimension to exist for those individual temporal Dimensions to extend to.

However, what if you draw 2 lines that are non-Parallel or "completely" overlapping? This results in you requiring a 2-Dimensional Plane to contain or draw those lines, because those lines, even if intersecting, must have some "Space" between them, if they are not parallel or completely overlapping. Even if one of the lines is parallel or overlapping with the X-Axis (and thus having its Y-coordinates as 0), the second line, which is not parallel or overlapping to it, must have "some" Y-Coordinates. Resultantly, 2 such lines would always require a 2-Directional plane to represent. A graphical representation would preferably explain better, I suppose.

However, this would not extend to the need of additional Higher Dimensions for each additional Time Axis, because while two lines having different directions need a 2-D plane to be presented, infinite such lines can also be held within the same 2-D plane. We know that Time by nature is Orthogonal to Space, therefore, a Multiverse fulfilling this case must be at least 5-D, the 3-D Space of such a Multiverse would hold the Spatial Aspects of all the Space-Time Continuums it holds, whereas the latter 2-D Plane will hold all the Time Axes of those Space-Times extending in their respective direction. Resultantly, the totality of the Hyperspace would be 5-D. Additionally, in case the Hyperspace also has an overarching Time Dimension, then the Hyper Space-Time would, in this case, be 6-D on total.

So basically, if Timeline A extends towards the 4th Dimension, if we think of that as a line extending in a one-dimensional plane, or say, "filling" said plane, we will realize that to draw another line that is not synchronized to that line, we HAVE to make the other line in a 2-Dimensional plane instead. Though, this does not repeat more the once, since an infinite amount of unsynchronized lines can be drawn in a 2-Dimensional plane, each having their own distinct[but not orthogonal] direction, extending in said directions in a significant way.

So, to sum it up, each Timeline has its own direction of future and distinct events, they are also unsynchronized, as shown that characters need to synchronize it themselves to travel to different timelines. A graphical way to show it would be like this. The "backward and forward" would only be from the perspective of someone inside a specific timeline, meanwhile from the perspective of someone who can see outside the timelines[aka travel between them], there is still divergence[although not orthogonal].

So, basically, if the Time axis of timeline A extends in the 4th dimension, timeline B's direction cannot extend in that same 4th dimension because it has a different direction. Resultantly, just like the image, it would require a 2-dimensional structure for all those timelines' axes.

In terms of math, Timeline A's axes be something like this :
Space-time coordinates of Timeline A : X, Y, Z, T
Basically, X, Y, Z and Y are perpendicular to each other, and have 0 extensions in each other, much like perpendicular axes do in a plane.
Meanwhile, timeline B's axes would be : X, Y, Z, [U+T]
So, why U+T exactly? Because Timeline B's direction is different then the previous one, it cannot perfectly align or synchronize with T, and has a diverse. This diverse causes the Timeline B's axes to extend along [U+T], which also thereby proves the existence of U, as U is required for [U+T] to be drawn/extended/represented, something like this.

Meanwhile, the only "Perpendicular" form of Time is the Hypertimeline, the timeline overarching all the other timelines, travelling in which allows one to travel from one timeline to another, much like chloe or velgrynd did. That is, since Timelines are successive to each other and in a "Loop", where one timeline is created only after the previous one ends, Chloe or Velgryd can travel between those timelines only by going over the hypertimeline which decides the "past" and "future" in a higher notion, aka, what was before Timeline B[that would be timeline A], or what would be after timeline B ends[that would be timeline C]. Or as Ciel explains it, they were sent to "beyond Time", the point where the current Timeline was over, and then "Time passed and they reached the end of time" "after countless hours, what seemed like an eternity"

 

[Qawsedf234]

there is still divergence[although not orthogonal].

The direction is unchanged, what happens is that the flow of time is divergent for the individual branch. But it's still in a forward-backward direction.

So, basically, if the Time axis of timeline A extends in the 4th dimension, timeline B's direction cannot extend in that same 4th dimension because it has a different direction. Resultantly, just like the image, it would require a 2-dimensional structure for all those timelines' axes.

We accept that any structure that has two 4-Dimensional objects has an insignificant 5-D space that separates them. You can have an infinite number of rotating 4D timelines, all separates by a 5th direction, that is just 2A and would never normally touch.

That is, since Timelines are successive to each other and in a "Loop", where one timeline is created only after the previous one ends, Chloe or Velgryd can travel between those timelines only by going over the hypertimeline which decides the "past" and "future" in a higher notion, aka, what was before Timeline B[that would be timeline A], or what would be after timeline B ends[that would be timeline C]. Or as Ciel explains it, they were sent to "beyond Time",

This might give you a 5D rating, but only of the snap shots are previous multiverse states rather than a continous line.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

The direction is unchanged, what happens is that the flow of time is divergent for the individual branch. But it's still in a forward-backward direction.

The "Flow of Time" is something specifically different in-verse, what that part is referring to is specifically the direction of time.
About the forward-backward part, the "direction" of time from the perspective of an individual inside the timeline would be the same even if the timeline was orthogonal.

An example is on X and Y axis, both are perpendicular to each other, but from the pov of someone on X-axis, the points on the past are "back in time" and the points in the future are "forward in time", and the same repeats for anyone only on Y-axis.
Another example is if one is moving in a specific direction, they would still have the same sense of "backward and forward" even in that direction. Lets say there are 2 walls in a field, one extending towards the north and the other towards the east. If one is moving along north, his "forward" would be north and "backward" would be south, and for someone moving in east, his "forward" would be east and backwards be "west". These directions, from the perspective of an outside, may be perpendicular to each other, but from the pov of someone following that direction, they are still perpendicular to each other, or, at least, divergent from each other.

Meanwhile, the one saying those timelines have a "different direction" here is Chloe, a time-traveller, one whose pov is not limited to a specific timeline but rather the whole plane containing them[due to her being a timeline traveller].

This might give you a 5D rating, but only of the snap shots are previous multiverse states rather than a continous line.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more?

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

We accept that any structure that has two 4-Dimensional objects has an insignificant 5-D space that separates them. You can have an infinite number of rotating 4D timelines, all separates by a 5th direction, that is just 2A and would never normally touch.

Also, Rimuru was wandering in that space for an eternity, would that add up anything?

 

[Qawsedf234]

The "Flow of Time"

Which as described here, is the rate of time going forwards to backwards. Having zero time is the same as having a standard flow of time at a rate of 0.

something specifically different in-verse, what that part is referring to is specifically the direction of time.

That's again talking about the progression of time being different. Which isn't the same as a perpendicular direction.

Meanwhile, the one saying those timelines have a "different direction" here is Chloe, a time-traveller, one whose pov is not limited to a specific timeline but rather the whole plane containing them[due to her being a timeline traveller].

As described there, they're all following the same linear direction.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more?

You'd have to enter a snap shot of reality where the time travel never took place. A previous iteration of reality not connected to the future you came from.

Also, Rimuru was wandering in that space for an eternity, would that add up anything?

Afaik, no

 

[Meli_Tempest]

The direction is unchanged, what happens is that the flow of time is divergent for the individual branch. But it's still in a forward-backward direction.


We accept that any structure that has two 4-Dimensional objects has an insignificant 5-D space that separates them. You can have an infinite number of rotating 4D timelines, all separates by a 5th direction, that is just 2A and would never normally touch.

This might give you a 5D rating, but only of the snap shots are previous multiverse states rather than a continous line.

Qawsedf, could you take a look at these explanations? I have given three explanations of how this works to give a better visualization of what the OP wishes to bring up, I think they will be very helpful.

Additional 5D Time Axis

Spoiler: Sum up

Since it seems that this is the most controversial point of the OP, thinking that this is a spatial dimension and not understanding that it is just an analogy, then I will show that this "other timeline" is in fact orthogonal and not only that, but it MUST exist in order to embody the view of cosmology that the OP proposes.

What the OP proposes is the idea of an additional time dimension that "holds" the non-orthogonal "streams" of time flowing in "different directions", so let's simplify it this way:

So under that idea we have two 4-dimensional spaces, represented by the coordinates (X, Y, Z, T) for the first and (X', Y', Z', T') for the second. Where each coordinate can be any real value (R). In order to represent what the OP states it is necessary to add a fifth dimension (u) which is equal to the rest in its real values.

Then in this way we can represent the two systems flowing in a different direction as a subspace within a 5-dimensional Euclidean space, so we can express each point in the space as a tuple of 5 real numbers (X, Y, Z, T, U) and (X', Y', Z', T').

About orthogonality

Spoiler: Sum up

Let's talk about orthogonality:

In this simplification, where we embody each vector of the universal tetradimensional space it is possible to demonstrate the orthogonality of the new value (u) by representing the vectors, functions and calculations that nobody here is interested in, so I will simplify it:

To prove that a vector is orthogonal to another it is necessary that its scalar product is equal to 0.

Let's consider a vector in this 5-dimensional space represented by the coordinates (x, y, z, t, u). We can define two vectors:

1. The vector representing the spatial and temporal coordinates (x, y, z, t).

2. The vector representing only the time coordinate u, i.e. (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, u).

Then we calculate its scalar product:

Scalar product = (x * 0) + (y * 0) + (z * 0) + (t * 0) + (u * 0) = 0.

Since this is a simplification of the real time line we are talking about, and a simplification of the equations needed to prove orthogonality, and will not convince many, we must also consider the following:

In order to "accommodate" two tetradimensional spaces that "flow" in non-orthogonal directions it becomes necessary to have a space in which to accommodate such a "change".

Let's simplify it further by using the analogy of the OP: to represent two lines going in two non-orthogonal directions requires the idea of a two-dimensional plane, where each line can have its own specific direction in that plane.

However, in order for this to be possible, and for each line to follow its direction properly, it is necessary that the newly added dimension be orthogonal to the first. This is because only orthogonal dimensions allow directions to be separated and represented without interfering with each other, intersecting or confusing each other. (Just as we know what happens with slime timelines).

How this works in timelines and counterarguments.

Spoiler: Sum up

However we are looking at this from a simplified, and "spatial" form so how would it work in timelines?

Let's look at it abstractly: Recall that each coordinate can be expressed as a tuple of 5 real numbers, and that each coordinate is itself a set of real numbers, i.e. it is possible to "divide" each dimension into points of the lower dimension where each can be represented by a real number. Then we can look at it in the following way:

Just as changes in time (T) affect the 3-dimensional set, changes in the second dimension of time (u) represent alterations in the 4-dimensional sets, and by varying the value of (u), changes in the coordinates of both sets will be observed. To visualize this better, we can understand that "changing the value of u" would be equivalent to choosing any number between [0 and ], and such a "change" is equal to "choosing any time" of the 4-dimensional set.

But some questions arise:

Is (u) really necessary for the two sets to "flow" in different directions?

Yes, in fact it is absolutely necessary. Let's see:

The flow of each 4-dimensional set, implies that their states change over time (u) (in fact, the Q&A page addresses this as a proof of orthogonality). We can then understand that "as u changes" the states of both sets also change. This is what allows each set to evolve and move in its own direction, even if they are not orthogonal to each other.

That is, if u does not exist, it would not be possible for two timelines (or 4D sets) to move in directions not orthogonal to each other.

How can this be asserted? Let's see:

Without the u-coordinate, there is no time dimension connecting both 4D sets, this means that there is no common frame of reference that would allow both sets to "flow" in any other apparent direction.
-
Without the u-coordinate or its orthogonal properties, it implies that the sets are in a space where their trajectories can intersect, interact; (which we know does not happen in the slime) without u, such trajectories could not be defined since there would be no "time" that allows both sets to move in their respective directions.

But, if they are orthogonal, how are the 4D sets "affected" by changes of values in u?

This is possible because of the function of u as a parameter describing the evolution and change of each set over time:

U is orthogonal in the sense that there is no direct or cross influence between changes in u and changes in the other coordinates, this means that a change in u does not directly affect X, Y, Z, T and vice versa. However, although changes in u do not directly affect the other coordinates, they do determine the state of the set at a given time.

Then we can understand that as u changes, the states of the 4-dimensional sets can be described as functions of u. Or in other words:

Even if u is orthogonal, its change causes the state of the 4-dimensional space to "update".

Conclusions:

Spoiler: Sum up

The (u) coordinate and its orthogonal properties are fundamental to allow timelines to flow in different directions not orthogonal to each other. Without this orthogonality, the 4-dimensional sets would constantly interfere with each other, which is not the case in slime. This ensures that each set maintains its own trajectory without crossing or blurring with the other.

The coordinate (u)represents the changes in the states of the 4-dimensional sets, functioning as their temporal "flow". As (u)varies, the states of both sets update and evolve, allowing each to move in its own direction over time.

Being a timeline where each point is a "moment" of the 4-dimensional set is represented by a real number, we can understand that it is an uncountable set.

Then we understand that the time dimension in which "flow through different directions" the timelines, is orthogonal and an uncountable set, thus fulfilling the necessary requirements for L1-C.

I hope that with this, it is clearer to everyone what the OP is referring to. Please I want to remind everyone that this is based entirely on what the OP posits, and the proofs for all of this are already in the thread, this is just "another way" of understanding the 5 dimensions that the OP posits. But I may still be wrong in my interpretation of the thread, so I would be grateful to Astral if he corrects me if that is the case.



I would also like to remind that much of what he posed here are simplifications or analogies to make it simpler to understand, and I fully understand the difference between the dimensions of time and space, and have posed all of it in this.



Regarding the 6 dimension, that one seems more accepted. So I don't think I need to explain it, the OP did that already very well.

Representing the time axes in geometric spaces to be able to visualize them is fine, it is a mathematical resource, it is not that I am treating them as "spatial" axes. It is simply a conceptual simplification, it is to make it possible to understand.

Even simplifying space-time to a plane is something very common, you can see it in the explanations of relativistic gravity in high school, where you can see how an object with mass, like a ball, deforms a cloth where it was placed, simulating the effect of gravity in space-time.

Now let's explain it in TenSura.

There is a timeline (X) let's say it is the original one we know: Rimuru becomes true dragon, doesn't die and etc etc.

There is another (Y) rimuru dies and is resurrected later, etc etc.

Both are time axes that follow different "directions" but in the sense of their set of events, also not the "where they are going" as such, as both are still heading into the future. But they both "extend" into different senses of the future, but into the future after all, this is what "different directions" means in this context.

If we put them both in a Euclidean space (X), which is the set of (x, y, z, t) i.e. a tetradimensional space (spacetime), and (Y), which is the same, although they look in the "same direction" (the future), Y is "tilted" at an "angle" with respect to (X). (Note that this "spatial" sounding way of explaining things is just a way of simplifying this matter, because explaining this is very difficult).

Then since both look in "different directions" not orthogonal to the future, but not parallel as such, and "flow" in that direction, the idea of an extra dimension (u) reflecting that change becomes necessary, because if not, it is impossible for them to "flow" in that non-orthogonal "different direction".

If you want, you can imagine it with an infinite winding road, it seems to "zigzag" and "move in another direction" but it goes "straight" i.e. "the direction is the same" as such, the future, but such a road must "extend" into "something else" to exist, and cannot "exist" as a straight line. (Please remember this is just one way to imagine it, and again did not imply that time works the same as space).

The rest I already explained, seriously I can't do this forever, tell me you understood it. Put all my explanations together, write them down if you want in a notebook, so you can see what I mean.

 

[Meli_Tempest]

You are forgetting that this is not how things work in TenSura, so let's go deeper into the idea of "different non-orthogonal directions" of time by simplifying the matter into a geometrical model:

Consider a tetra-dimensional space where:

• X-axis represents the spatial dimensions.
• The Y-axis represents the ordinary time dimension, with the future upwards.

Now imagine:

• A straight line L1 extending along the Y-axis, representing the flow of ordinary time.
• A second straight line L2 moving parallel to L1, but on a different plane inclined at an angle of 0 with respect to Y.

L2 will never intersect L1, but moves "next to" it in an alternate time direction, as mentioned in the verse Each point on L2 represents a different "now" than L1, although both move in the "same general direction into the future".

From a physical point of view, this representation in geometric space suggests:

• Multiple "arrows of time" advancing in slightly different directions in space-time.
• Each arrow represents a slightly different notion of causality and time evolution.
• Observers in L1 and L2 would experience the "sense" of time in subtly but perceptibly different ways.

If we consider this idea of timelines moving in non-parallel temporal directions, then the idea of introducing an additional coordinate in order to adequately represent these different notions of time becomes necessary. Then we have to simplify (again) the model I already established in my first post, along with the new one we have:

• The X-axis represents the spatial dimensions.
• The Y-axis represents the ordinary time dimension.
• A line L2 moves in a direction not parallel, neither "superimposed" nor orthogonal to L1 (Y-axis) on a plane inclined at an angle of 0.

Now we must add:

- A fourth axis U perpendicular to the XY and XL2 planes.

Each point in space now has coordinates (x, y, z, u), where:

• (x, y, z) represents the spatial position.
• y represents the ordinary time.
• u represents the "alternative time direction" along L2.

And everything else I already established above.

Also this

 

[Fixxed]

I am not arguing against MWI, mate, the point of the OP is that the timelines' time axes have different directions.

that again does not really debunk anything from the OP.

Mate, i'm tired of this. I think just let staff dicided what have to do here

 

[Fixxed]

The particular wording of this franchise in calling them time axis make it seem like they're explicitly fitting the criteria, but none of the scans actually support having perpendicular time directions to my reading.

Yeah this, i tell them it still the same direction just branch into new timeline, but...

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

Which as described here, is the rate of time going forwards to backwards. Having zero time is the same as having a standard flow of time at a rate of 0.

That's again talking about the progression of time being different. Which isn't the same as a perpendicular direction.

A few points :

• The main point of the above was that "Flow rate of time" is different from "direction of time" as they are mentioned distinctively.
• Why would we even assume that the "direction" here is referring to Flow of time instead rather then the actual direction, since its literally called the latter and not the prior? Since having a different narrative[of Rimuru dying or not dying] doesn't really imply that those different narratives had "different flow of time". Flow of time is something related to the progression speed of time instead, not the direction at which time is progressing. Here its the latter since said narratives explicitly have different events.
• A reminder, because it seems you forgot, but I'm not at all arguing for perpendicular directions for those timelines.

As described there, they're all following the same linear direction.

That's not them following the same linear direction, but rather that chloe's pov includes the "Linear future" of the previous timeline since she literally lived that timeline. The scan was instead used to prove that chloe's perspective is that of a higher one, so her statement of them having a different direction is

• not irrelevant/hypothesis
• referring to actual direction of time[the Linear future was of the previous timeline, as stated that they were her "memories", not the current timeline's direction]

You'd have to enter a snap shot of reality where the time travel never took place. A previous iteration of reality not connected to the future you came from.

That's indeed the case. Since Chloe time travels after Rimuru dies, and travels to a previous iteration[timeline] where Rimuru didn't die yet, aka, she hadn't travelled yet.
Now, if you were wondering, why does she travel to another timeline rather then just the past of the same timeline? its because the world doesn't allow contradictions such as multiple individuals existing in the same timeline, thus why Chloe is thrown into another timeline entirely.
I can't link the scans for the above 2 lines rn because my internet is really bad right now, can't even use imgur to upload pics, so I'm limited to using scans from the OP only, since those are pre-created. I will upload them by tomorrow[its night time here rn]. But I replied regardless to at least explain the basis and that I didn't give up on the thread. Tho, I can copy the text itself so here you go :

Chloe hesitated a bit before replying. “Um, when Mr. Tempest rescued me. He took Alice and me and everyone else to the Dwelling of the Spirits to stabilize us. Then I had a spirit planted inside me, but…”Apparently, Chloe didn’t receive a spirit but an embodiment of her own powers from the future. Even more unbelievably, this embodiment wassentient.“…I think I must’ve died at some point in the future, so I guess I just repeat this process of planting that version of me in myself.” “So the Dwelling is where you learn of this process? Like, every time in the cycle?” “Not exactly. I don’t remember anything about it at the beginning, but then once I start going back in time, I do.”

Here, the "Everyone else to the dwelling......" is something that happens before Rimuru or chloe died, basically a past iteration where she hadn't time travelled yet[since she only travels in time after she dies or after rimuru dies]

Though, some scans I can give you from the OP itself are that Chloe travels from timeline to timeline, aka from one iteration of reality[hypertimeline] to another iteration of reality, yet she couldn't do that at the end of the world. Why? because "Reality"[the hypertimeline] didn't exist either at that point.

 

[Tempestdragon6]

I agree with the op

 

[Catpija]

• Why would we even assume that the "direction" here is referring to Flow of time instead rather then the actual direction, since its literally called the latter and not the prior? Since having a different narrative[of Rimuru dying or not dying] doesn't really imply that those different narratives had "different flow of time". Flow of time is something related to the progression speed of time instead, not the direction at which time is progressing. Here its the latter since said narratives explicitly have different events.

....You need to stop taking words at face value and ignore the surrounding context. After endless time loops, Chloe was finally able to find a timeline where Rimuru hasn't died yet before their time-leap. Unfortunately, you-know-what happen and both her and Hinata got sent to the past. Chloe explains to Hinata that she achieved it by stalling Rimuru's time back then at Ingrancia, in which Hinata hoped that they could get back on that path/event/time without changing the future, i.e replicating what Chloe did in her previous try. No matter how you twist that, it very clear that she wasn't talking about the "direction of time".

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

You need to stop taking words at face value and ignore the surrounding context.

That really depends on what the context exactly is. Sometimes the face value words are the most concrete ones.

After endless time loops, Chloe was finally able to find a timeline where Rimuru hasn't died yet before their time-leap. Unfortunately, you-know-what happen and both her and Hinata got sent to the past.

That isn't really an argument. As I've explained before in the thread, even if there are only 2 timelines that have different directions, even that requires a 2-Dimensional temporal construct for their time dimensions to extend in different non-perpendicular directions.

Chloe explains to Hinata that she achieved it by stalling Rimuru's time back then at Ingrancia, in which Hinata hoped that they could get back on that path/event/time without changing the future, i.e replicating what Chloe did in her previous try. No matter how you twist that, it very clear that she wasn't talking about the "direction of time".

That does not really contradict anything related to the timeline having a different direction as well. The same chapter explains how Chloe remembers the linear future of the previous timeline, yet this time the direction is different. This is also backed up by the fact that Velgrynd had to "Synchronize" timelines when she travelled between them, which means they were originally unsynchronized.
Also, it was just hinata's "Hope", they still did change the future.

 

[Mizuki67]

Looks alright

Hey dark sorry to disturb you but can you ping Elizhaa to this thread

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

@Elizhaa