- 5,531
- 12,907
Probably. Though nothing scales to the latter.
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.
Eğer Yüksek 1-A+ varsa, o zaman büyük olan tüm aralık aksiyomları, olası dünyaları ve olası olasılıkları kapsayan ve bunların ötesinde bir kademe 0 da mevcut olacaktır.
Yanlış bir Monad, tüm şerit aksiyom kümelerinin aksine yalnızca bir dizi aksiyom ve tek bir olasılığa bağlanabilir. Yani gerçek bir Monad bile sahte bir Monad'ı kapsar. Tabi bu ayette 0'ın var olabileceğine dair bir delil
Ultima, what I want to ask is that we already know that a character that conforms to monadicity in a similar way to the transcendental and Hebrew theories can actually be 0 if it encompasses a construct such as Modal reality, but in order for monadicity and aperion not to be fully violated, this entity must be completely eternal, that is, it must be suitable for a singular beginning, not as a character that is later encompassed and elevated, so wouldn't this already restrict cosmologies at levels 1a or higher?Daha spesifik olarak, sahte Monad'lara sahip ayetler gerçekten herhangi bir seviyede olabilir, ancak eğer şey düzgün bir şekilde tanımlanmışsa (Farklılaşmamış, transdual, yada yada yada), 0'dır. Seviyenin temel tanımı gerekiyorsa, her şeyi tam olarak hecelemenize gerek yoktur. elbette karşılanır.
Bunun bir özellikten ziyade bir hata olduğunu söyleyemem. Seviye 0'ın tamamen kozmolojiden bağımsız olması gerçekten bir sorun değil. Aksi takdirde 3-A veya Düşük 2-C olan bir ayetin Seviye 0'a sahip olmasında yanlış bir şey yoktur.
In the case you are talking about then, if the instance of a character that does not have a singular origin, i.e. a primordial being, can only contain the Mr contained in a fictional layer higher than the hierarchy at level 2^n, this makes it 0. Doesn't it have a singular origin for this, so there is no problem for the ichiban in this case?More specifically, verses with fake Monads can really be at any tier, but if the thing is properly defined (Undifferentiated, transdual, yada yada), it's 0. You don't exactly need to spell out everything if the basic definition for the tier is met, of course.
Wouldn't say that's a bug so much as a feature. Tier 0 being totally cosmology-independent isn't really an issue. Nothing wrong with a verse that's otherwise 3-A or Low 2-C having a Tier 0.
The "modal reality" doesn't need to be there, but minor nitpick aside: Yeah, a verse can end up locked beneath Tier 0 if its supreme reality ends up demonstrating such limitations.Ultima, what I want to ask is that we already know that a character that conforms to monadicity in a similar way to the transcendental and Hebrew theories can actually be 0 if it encompasses a construct such as Modal reality, but in order for monadicity and aperion not to be fully violated, this entity must be completely eternal, that is, it must be suitable for a singular beginning, not as a character that is later encompassed and elevated, so wouldn't this already restrict cosmologies at levels 1a or higher?
I won't speak for Transduality, since I plan to revise that whole thing. For Acausality, the answer is no.Ultima, I have a question. If there is a character "A" with Aca 5 and Transudality type 3, and then a character "B" is presented who sees the previous one as fiction, will the latter also have the previous hax by transcending character "A"?
I don't understand the question. Can you rephrase?In the case you are talking about then, if the instance of a character that does not have a singular origin, i.e. a primordial being, can only contain the Mr contained in a fictional layer higher than the hierarchy at level 2^n, this makes it 0. Doesn't it have a singular origin for this, so there is no problem for the ichiban in this case?
You talk about a specific tabim, but you still don't say whether non-primitive entities will be 0 when they scale cosmologically, as required by monadism and the aperion principle?More specifically, verses with fake Monads can really be at any tier, but if the thing is properly defined (Undifferentiated, transdual, yada yada), it's 0. You don't exactly need to spell out everything if the basic definition for the tier is met, of course.
Wouldn't say that's a bug so much as a feature. Tier 0 being totally cosmology-independent isn't really an issue. Nothing wrong with a verse that's otherwise 3-A or Low 2-C having a Tier 0.
Can you give me a preview of what you plan to do with transduality? I was always curious about nondualityI won't speak for Transduality, since I plan to revise that whole thing. For Acausality, the answer is no.
I'm contemplating nuking it.Can you give me a preview of what you plan to do with transduality? I was always curious about nonduality
I think what you want to do with trandualty is to give these features 1a or higher tiers in the 2020 system, am I wrong?Nükleer bomba atmayı düşünüyorum.
Speak English.Dostum demek istediğim monad ve aperion ilkesine göre varoluşun temeli ve başlangıcı olan bir aşkın olması gerektiği gibi, sonattan bu güne kadar ortaya çıkan bir karakter için de aşkın tanımı yapılabilir mi? seviye, örneğin 2^n seviyeli bir hiyerarşi, yani mantıksal düzlemleri ve olasılık seviyelerini içeren l1a'dan daha yüksek bir kurgu katmanını içeren bir Mr. Eğer öyleyse (bu tekil olarak değil sonradan oluşan bir durumdur) 0 olması için yeterli olur mu yoksa h1a ile mi sınırlı kalır çünkü aperion ilkelerinde temel bir varlık olduğunu inkar eden bir durumdur Bildiğiniz gibi, bildiğiniz gibi ichiban'da yaşam öncesi öncesi ve sonrası, gerçek dünyada bile kurgunun farklı seviyeleri var, aslında bunu pek mantıklı bulmuyorum çünkü kozmolojiyi biraz kilitliyor.
No, I'm moreso beginning to think Transduality is defined awfully and the only decent way to redefine it would leave it as a meaningless and redundant power to anything other than Tier 0s.I think what you want to do with trandualty is to give these features 1a or higher tiers in the 2020 system, am I wrong?
Probably. Though nothing scales to the latter.
No matter how much the system changes elder scrolls still always at the topThis guy decides to pop out of nowhere. Elder Scroll will have both a 0 and a High 1-A+?
Agreed.No matter how much the system changes elder scrolls still always at the top
Damn straightNo matter how much the system changes elder scrolls still always at the top
High 1-A.So, how about the Leviathan from The Unwritten?
Ultima discusses this. There can be multiple High 1-A+.How can a verse have multiple High 1A+ characters?
Either you have multiple characters who both somehow represent the one space of all possible things, or you have multiple beings who can select arbitrarily large worlds from these possibilities and create them. Both work.How can a verse have multiple High 1A+ characters?
I dont follow these whatever new tier 1 and 0 stuff is going now but if according to new changes if R>F is now 1-A how will qualitative superiority and hde work?Speak English.
No, I'm moreso beginning to think Transduality is defined awfully and the only decent way to redefine it would leave it as a meaningless and redundant power to anything other than Tier 0s.
Q: "How can there be multiple --"Ultima discusses this. There can be multiple High 1-A+.
there just can be duhQ: "How can there be multiple --"
A: "There can be."
![]()
HDE works the same as it did then. We're just not calling it "qualitative superiority" anymore. That term is 1-A-exclusive.I dont follow these whatever new tier 1 and 0 stuff is going now but if according to new changes if R>F is now 1-A how will qualitative superiority and hde work?
Q: "How can there be multiple --"
A: "There can be."
![]()
I believe my point stands firm.Q: "How can there be multiple --"
A: "There can be."
![]()
Will it give the characters +1d tier?HDE works the same as it did then. We're just not calling it "qualitative superiority" anymore. That term is 1-A-exclusive.
You have no point. Their question was about "How", not "Can". You relied on Ultima to give his answer again.I believe my point stands firm.
I'm not fully sure now that multiple characters can qualify for a tier. I suspected they'd be treated as having equal AP (although potentially unique hax), but idk what would happen if a series showed a High 1-A+ having higher AP than another one.
Halp @Ultima_Reality
intellectual discourse is midYou have no point. Their question was about "How", not "Can". You relied on Ultima to give his answer again.
Edit: This might be coming off as meaner than I intend it, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone or make them feel bad, I just think the question could've been responded a bit better.
It was mainly a joke. So no offense taken. I answered it so quickly, that I forgot to link the response from the thread to which Ultima explained it. Though, given he himself answered it, my response was treated more of a retort than anything else.You have no point. Their question was about "How", not "Can". You relied on Ultima to give his answer again.
Edit: This might be coming off as meaner than I intend it, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone or make them feel bad, I just think the question could've been responded a bit better.
intellectual discourse is mid
I don't trust a person who says they're very smart being very smart.I'm very smart FYI. I wanted to clear that up and I just so happened to read it wrong. So I am very much an intellectual capable of answering the question “the right way”. wink wink hint hint
Hey! It happens to the best of us. Some more than others cough cough AagnaI don't trust a person who says they're very smart being very smart.
I am very dumbHey! It happens to the best of us. Some more than others cough cough Aagna
I am very dumb![]()
I am very dumb![]()
Hey can you answer my question I asked months ago?HDE works the same as it did then. We're just not calling it "qualitative superiority" anymore. That term is 1-A-exclusive.
![]()
I don't see why no one would agree to it. Unless they want their verse to be ignored. If I was a mod and I got 20+ requests at the same time to check out crts, I would ignore every single one.
Does it need to be stated that platonic concepts are clearly platonic and platonic concepts 1-AYeah, but Ultima doesn't think we should assume that they have strange explanations by default. That's why "above dimensions" without any additional context would be Low 1-A, and it would only need a little more context to be 1-A.
Potential contradictions aside, it could. Just as how "They're from a more real world" or "They're from a more fundamental world" would.
idk why y'all're surprised; I repeatedly said "HEY EVERYONE, ULTIMA'S TRYING TO LOWER THE STANDARDS AND I THINK THAT SUCKS", to which Ultima responded "Yeah, they should be lowered" and other staff went "Seems reasonable".