• 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.

Tier 1 Dragon Ball Is Finally Here, And Hypertimelines Are Back On The Menu! *Visible Groaning Ensues*

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's not helpful to anyone to transform this discussion into a debate about what the votes on a previous thread were, or to argue whether or not one is "allowed" to challenge information that might have been accepted earlier. That is actually derailing, so I am going to begin deleting such comments. Magi is allowed to make the argument, and if you feel it's not relevant to the thread simply don't respond to it and let staff make their assessment.
 
ImmortalDread said:
The basis of what exactly? Which scan are you referring precisely? Be at least not vague here.
Click to expand...
The basis this entire proposal stemmed from. Like, you asked for it and people gave you intel. Like how the Hyperbolic Time Chamber has a separate time dimension and the main timeline overarches it, I’m sure lots of users pointed that out already.
 
i mean the the RoSaT is stated to have a different dimension of time comparitive to realms like the Kaioshin Realm and Living World, which means their spatio-temporal separation involves distinct time dimensions.
Then, there’s is a room inside the Living World that creates all of space-time for it: confirming that it’s serviced by its own time dimension.

Both things have been accepted but if having a timeline that branches realms with distinct time dimensions isn’t enough and will be ignored despite being accepted, then there’s really no more point to this.
 
ProfectusInfinity said:
main-qimg-dbe7fb25cc13d47bb5284fd68ee1348f-lq
Click to expand...
There's no need to be rude, mate. She could just genuinely be confused, or Hell, we all might be confused.
 
Deagonx said:
It's not helpful to anyone to transform this discussion into a debate about what the votes on a previous thread were, or to argue whether or not one is "allowed" to challenge information that might have been accepted earlier. That is actually derailing, so I am going to begin deleting such comments. Magi is allowed to make the argument, and if you feel it's not relevant to the thread simply don't respond to it and let staff make their assessment.
Click to expand...
I think it’s time to move it to the staff discussion. I truly don’t feel like this is going anywhere right now if we’re seeking approval and official appliance to the pages.
 
On to the more productive side, I have told Ultima about this thread and he has responded that he is aware of it. So I think it is a matter of time until he shares a thought.
 
GarrixianXD said:
The basis this entire proposal stemmed from. Like, you asked for it and people gave you intel. Like how the Hyperbolic Time Chamber has a separate time dimension and the main timeline overarches it, I’m sure lots of users pointed that out.
Click to expand...
The structure of your post provides little clarity regarding the topic you are addressing. I have requested specific scans and references related to the claim of low 1-C certainty. Without precise and unambiguous language, it is challenging for me to understand and respond appropriately. Please provide clear and detailed information to facilitate a meaningful conversation.

Please refrain from using generalized language; I am specifically seeking detailed contributions. Once again, kindly provide references, scans, and construct a well-reasoned argument to support your point.

@ProfectusInfinity, your posts of this nature do not enhance your position. In fact, they may diminish your support and credibility.
 
ImmortalDread said:
The structure of your post provides little clarity regarding the topic you are addressing. I have requested specific scans and references related to the claim of low 1-C certainty. Without precise and unambiguous language, it is challenging for me to understand and respond appropriately. Please provide clear and detailed information to facilitate a meaningful conversation.

Please refrain from using generalized language; I am specifically seeking detailed contributions. Once again, kindly provide references, scans, and construct a well-reasoned argument to support your point.

@ProfectusInfinity, your posts of this nature do not enhance your position. In fact, they may diminish your support and credibility.
Click to expand...
If you want to disagree, that's fine, but there isn't much more we can really say without repeating ourselves many, many times over. Especially with the, "perpendicular time" argument, which was established was wrong, and wasn't even a reason for our rejection in the first place.
 
ImmortalDread said:
The structure of your post provides little clarity regarding the topic you are addressing. I have requested specific scans and references related to the claim of low 1-C certainty. Without precise and unambiguous language, it is challenging for me to understand and respond appropriately. Please provide clear and detailed information to facilitate a meaningful conversation.
Click to expand...
You asked for scans and then various users gave you scans, however, you said that it wasn't admissible and wasn’t the specific evidence you asked for, which got me confused about what you’re asking for.
 
To be fair, I wouldn’t act like the OP formatted this god-like. The passing of major evidence for a major CRT in minor CRTs is sneaky and borderline can be taken as maliciously done.

This thread assumes everyone who is evaluating it is familiar with Dragon Ball scaling to some degree and previous threads such as weather or not the overall timeline is low 2-C or 2-C. Though maybe you could say they shouldn’t involve themselves then but still I think it should be reasonable to think a CRT would compile all the evidence on the main post instead of relying on “This was accepted elsewhere” or “We already assume this true”.

Even if I can see myself agreeing with the OP (if ROSAT size doesn’t lead to issues or pocket dimension shenanigans mess with how you would structure the multiverse) I can’t really point at how my thought process goes with just evidence in this OP and have to go look for scans elsewhere.

Also, why can’t you attach the evidence on this thread instead of making people go check other CRTS?
 
PhantomØ4 said:
Also, why can’t you attach the evidence on this thread instead of making people go check other CRTS?
Click to expand...
ProfectusInfinity said:
From the Toeiverse cosmology page:
  • The RoSaT is stated to have a different dimension of time comparitive to realms like the Kaioshin Realm and Living World, which means their spatio-temporal separation involves distinct time dimensions.
  • There is a room inside the Living World that creates all of space-time for it: confirming that it’s serviced by its own time dimension.
Please keep in mind that these justifications were accepted already in previous CRT’s.
Click to expand...
 
Can you add this in the OP as well as other accepted pieces of evidence relevant to the topic?

I think Phantom's point is fair I think it will go a long way if in the OP all the things from those threads were brought here so that people don't have to surf through multiple threads knowing what has been accepted
 
GarrixianXD said:
You asked for scans and then various users gave you scans, however, you said that they weren’t admissible and wasn’t the specific evidence you asked, which got me confused on what you’re asking for.
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the blog that is currently limited to tier 2? Are you referring to the other CRT that is unrelated to cosmology?
Despite the responses I've received, I have not been given a clear and specific answer about which scans are being referred to here.

If you want this discussion to be evaluated properly, you need to provide the scans of the verse clearly. It's not fair to expect others to search through different threads and piece together the information. Without precise references, we risk misinterpretation and endless discussion.
From the Toeiverse cosmology page:
  • The RoSaT is stated to have a different dimension of time comparitive to realms like the Kaioshin Realm and Living World, which means their spatio-temporal separation involves distinct time dimensions.
  • There is a room inside the Living World that creates all of space-time for it: confirming that it’s serviced by its own time dimension.
Please keep in mind that these justifications were accepted already in previous CRT’s.
Click to expand...
I will go step by step

First link
What precisely is the evidence pertaining to 'low 1-C' in this particular context? The existence of a distinct time dimension does not necessarily imply a low 1-C cosmology. Being 'closed off' from the external world does not guarantee that the time dimension is qualitatively superior to that world.

Second link
The concept you're referring to is explicitly discussed in my primary post. The presence of a pocket dimension within a living world does not imply that the entire set must inevitably be uncountably infinitely larger.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Are you referring to the blog that is currently limited to tier 2? Are you referring to the other CRT that is unrelated to cosmology?
Despite the responses I've received, I have not been given a clear and specific answer about which scans are being referred to here.

If you want this discussion to be evaluated properly, you need to provide the scans of the verse clearly. It's not fair to expect others to search through different threads and piece together the information. Without precise references, we risk misinterpretation and endless discussion.

I will go step by step

First link
What precisely is the evidence pertaining to 'low 1-C' in this particular context? The existence of a distinct time dimension does not necessarily imply a low 1-C cosmology. Being 'closed off' from the external world does not guarantee that the time dimension is qualitatively superior to that world.

Second link
The concept you're referring to is explicitly discussed in my primary post. The presence of a pocket dimension within a living world does not imply that the entire set must inevitably be uncountably infinitely larger.
Click to expand...
Basically, you can model a timeline with different space-time continuums with one temporal dimension.

The importance of those specific realms having their own time dimension is that they’re different space-times specifically due to distinct time dimensions.

Nobody’s arguing that these worlds are qualitatively superior, but the entire overarching timeline like how we have the main timeline, future trunks timeline. Those specific timelines having a second temporal dimension hence why they branch off and copy the same exact model with these different realms with their distinct time dimensions.
 
To effectively model a timeline that constitutes a time-space continuum containing diverse space-time continuums and individual temporal dimensions, they are required to be tier 3 structures and their time movement along the same time-axis.

Furthermore, an additional temporal dimension is necessary to grant tier 1, perpendicular to the existing one, similar to the existence of Low 2-C time dimension orthogonal to the 3D time dimension.
 
This CRT has gone all sorts of odd places, so I'll have to clear a few things up right now.

You need to stop quoting Ultima and DontTalk.​

Yeah, that's not happening. I don't want to play the whataboutism game again, but plenty of threads overly quote Ultima and DontTalk. Literally since when, in the history of this website as it's known, has this ever been a problem (unless someone's going out of their way to mischaracterize them)? I have the feeling all our Ultima/DontTalk quotes are only being opposed because it looks silly to argue for things like perpendicular time flow when they're literally quoted saying that's irrelevant. Any take like "Ultima/DontTalk quotes aren't evidence" holds no water, especially not when they're the guys who created the very standards we're arguing about.

You guys were being malicious by getting the other stuff accepted under CRT's titled "minor revision" to divert staff attention.​

Do you guys think the staff are stupid or something? We called them minor CRT's because that's what they were: minor revisions. Those CRT's made no impact whatsoever on the cosmology, and didn't change the number of space-times or anything of the sort. It's already accepted that the realms are spatiotemporally separate, we simply increased those justifications by affirming that they hardbored their own time dimensions.

"The first CRT wasn't accepted."​

This notion in particular is a blatant lie. Here's the CRT for everyone to see.

Lonkitt: "Looks fine to me."

Elizhaa: "The proposed changes seem fine."

LordGriffin: "Hmmm... I guess tech manipulation is fine via his wishes. Everything else looks good, though I'm not interested in discussing cosmology stuff for Dragon Ball, I guess the Room of Spirit and Time stuff is alright so far."

Lephyr: "Only thing I'm neutral on is the RoSaT"

Saman: "The ability additions are fine, though I disagree with the RoSaT, because while it has a different time, it is still quite small. Or maybe that requires it's own thread and tiershit experts, idk."

Oh my? What do we have here? 3 agrees, 1 neutral, and 1 disagree. But let's see why this "wasn't accepted."

Magicomethkuon said:
Also for clarity's sake, the argument about the RoSaT in that thread wasn't exactly accepted either. Lephyr was neutral and said that the part about cosmology should have been its own thread (if that was made afterwards and accepted somewhere else, I apologize). Some staff brought up how it's a small space-time, SamanPatou disagreed, LordGriffin said that he wasn't interested in discussing DB cosmology but that it looked alright so far.

Elizhaa and Lonkitt briefly gave a general agreement, which makes it uncertain how deeply they were in favor with the RoSaT situation. This has led us to a situation where the RoSaT argument of different space times further consolidating no less than the whole cosmology of all Dragon Ball got 2 staff agreements, and while it was said to be a minor revision passed among several other minor things when done. The results of that thread are now being used as part of anchor for an immense revision of the entire Cosmology's rating. I don't think I need to stress how much any cosmology changes for this verse take several staff looks before passing and how this feels like running over an old bridge.
Click to expand...
Seriously? So "makes sense" or "seems fine/simple enough" aren't true agrees? Hey, any staff willing to weigh in on how their hundreds upon hundreds of "simple agrees" aren't true agrees anymore? Please stop lying about how Griffin was neutral, he clearly accepted the thread. Enough of that. Lephyr only remained neutral because they knew it would be somewhat controversial, and Saman only disagreed under a misunderstanding. He outright agreed with our conclusion about the HTC, he only thought we were trying to upgrade it to Low 2-C, which was not the case. I also love how everyone's flat-out ignoring the second CRT.

"B-B-But perpendicular time flow!"​

ImmortalDread said:
To effectively model a timeline that constitutes a time-space continuum containing diverse space-time continuums and individual temporal dimensions, they are required to be tier 3 structures and their time movement along the same time-axis.

Furthermore, an additional temporal dimension is necessary to grant tier 1, perpendicular to the existing one, similar to the existence of Low 2-C time dimension orthogonal to the 3D time dimension.
Click to expand...
First off, I love how I addressed this already in the OP.

Secondly, I need you to prove where this exists in the standards? I cited every standard I could, but you can't refer me to anything regarding Ultima/DDT's stance or the tiering system pages. You keep asking questions, and we've answered all of them. I would like it if you'd give one of our questions an answer: where is this stated among the standards?
 
Last edited:
ProfectusInfinity said:
This CRT has gone all sorts of odd places, so I'll have to clear a few things up right now.

You need to stop quoting Ultima and DontTalk.​

Yeah, that's not happening. I don't want to play the whataboutism game again, but plenty of threads overly quote Ultima and DontTalk. Literally since when, in the history of this website as it's known, has this ever been a problem (unless someone's going out of their way to mischaracterize them)? I have the feeling all our Ultima/DontTalk quotes are only being opposed because it looks silly to argue for things like perpendicular time flow when they're literally quoted saying that's irrelevant. Any take like "Ultima/DontTalk quotes aren't evidence" holds no water, especially not when they're the guys who created the very standards we're arguing about.

You guys were being malicious by getting the other stuff accepted under CRT's titled "minor revision" to divert staff attention.​

Do you guys think the staff are stupid or something? We called them minor CRT's because that's what they were: minor revisions. Those CRT's made no impact whatsoever on the cosmology, and didn't change the number of space-times or anything of the sort. It's already accepted that the realms are spatiotemporally separate, we simply increased those justifications by affirming that they hardbored their own time dimensions.

"The first CRT wasn't accepted."​

This notion in particular is a blatant lie. Here's the CRT for everyone to see.

Lonkitt: "Looks fine to me."

Elizhaa: "The proposed changes seem fine."

LordGriffin: "Hmmm... I guess tech manipulation is fine via his wishes. Everything else looks good, though I'm not interested in discussing cosmology stuff for Dragon Ball, I guess the Room of Spirit and Time stuff is alright so far."

Lephyr: "Only thing I'm neutral on is the RoSaT"

Saman: "The ability additions are fine, though I disagree with the RoSaT, because while it has a different time, it is still quite small. Or maybe that requires it's own thread and tiershit experts, idk."

Oh my? What do we have here? 3 agrees, 1 neutral, and 1 disagree. But let's see why this "wasn't accepted."


Seriously? So "makes sense" or "seems fine/simple enough" aren't true agrees? Hey, any staff willing to weigh in on how their hundreds upon hundreds of "simple agrees" aren't true agrees anymore? Please stop lying about how Griffin was neutral, he clearly accepted the thread. Enough of that. Lephyr only disagreed because they knew it would be somewhat controversial, and Saman only disagreed under a misunderstanding. He outright agreed with our conclusion about the HTC, he only thought we were trying to upgrade it to Low 2-C, which was not the case. I also love how everyone's flat-out ignoring the second CRT.

"B-B-But perpendicular time flow!"​


First off, I love how I addressed this already in the OP.

Secondly, I need you to prove where this exists in the standards? I cited every standard I could, but you can't refer me to anything regarding Ultima/DDT's stance or the tiering system pages. You keep asking questions, and we've answered all of them. I would like it if you'd give one of our questions an answer: where is this stated among the standards?
Click to expand...
Now you're getting plain aggressive for no reason. Fix that attitude before I answer any further, please. This is why threads like this end up moved to staff only.
 
@Deagonx we need some strict moderation/additional assistance from your side. The Op is being passive-aggressive for no rational reason.
 
I'll respond when I get home from work.

But at a glance the various snapshots of time stuff doesn't qualify for a Low 1-C rating since multiple temporal dimensions aren't an automatic translation to a higher geometric space.
 
Last edited:
@ProfectusInfinity (responding to the relevant part) I now love this type of conversation, you are now asking me to prove which standard is this, but when I ask you which concrete scan does low 1-C have, you don't give any, but arguments from DT and Ultima which by the way, are not any evidence in shape and form.

Anyway, @Qawsedf234 also shared his perspective that supports my current last post very much, that multiple temporal dimensions don't give higher rating at all.
A: The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something akin to the frames of a movie placed side-by-side. Basically, the time-like direction may be thought of as a line comprised of uncountably infinite points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the whole universe at any given moment, with the set of all such events comprising the totality of spacetime.
Click to expand...
This structure can then be generalized to any amounts of dimensions, and is also the reason destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather than 3-A or High 3-A). So, for example, a spacetime continuum comprising two temporal dimensions (Instead of just one) would have an additional time direction whose "snapshots" correspond to the whole of a 4-dimensional spacetime, and so on and so forth.
Click to expand...
Pretty much what I said is very common practice known for years.
 
ImmortalDread said:
@Deagonx we need some strict moderation/additional assistance from your side. The Op is being passive-aggressive for no rational reason.
Click to expand...
Magicomethkuon said:
Now you're getting plain aggressive for no reason. Fix that attitude before I answer any further, please. This is why threads like this end up moved to staff only.
Click to expand...

I do not sense any passive aggression or plain aggression towards anyone in particular from his post. He is merely expressing his views.
 
ImmortalDread said:
To effectively model a timeline that constitutes a time-space continuum containing diverse space-time continuums and individual temporal dimensions, they are required to be tier 3 structures and their time movement along the same time-axis.

Furthermore, an additional temporal dimension is necessary to grant tier 1, perpendicular to the existing one, similar to the existence of Low 2-C time dimension orthogonal to the 3D time dimension.
Click to expand...
I know, the RoSaT is a different time dimension from the Kaioshin Realm. This means that space-time have their own distinct time dimensions; meaning they’re different space-times specifically due to different time dimensions.

The OP already responded to this tidbit, but you’ll have to go back to the op to see the messages that DT and Ultima said since the replies don’t show things in the spoiler box. Basically, there’s no site standard that says we need a statement of time being perpendicular to the existing one. As Ultima said it would just make an uncountably amount of snapshots similar to why a Universe is 4D.

ProfectusInfinity said:

In a higher time dimension, time needs to flow in a different direction like backwards or diagonally.​

I can't believe I have to address this notion. So the basis for this is that an object in 1-dimensional space could only be displaced left/right along an R^1 coordinate axis. In R^2 space, a 2-dimensional object could displace itself in another direction and gain width. Following this same pattern, an object in 3-dimensional space could displace itself in a direction perpendicular to the last two. From there, a higher time dimension should demonstrate a perpendicular time flow, right? Most definitely not. Time is an independent parameter [unlike spatial dimensions] that can be applied to any dimensional space and is expected to propagate objects forward only and prohibit free movement in other directions. An "additional time direction" as described in the tiering system FAQ simply needs to overarch a space-time continuum with its own time axis as a part of its greater time flow.

I have no idea how this argument resonated with staff or other people in the past. The tiering pages make no mention of a requirement for a perpendicular time flow (they actually suggest the opposite, since non-linear flow of time is a natural phenomenon that can occur under a single space-time), none of the verses that have been approved for Low 1-C hypertimelines have had to prove this, and the person who proliferated this argument could be found on other time dimension threads refraining to use it: which means it was a bad faith argument from the get-go. To top it off, let me direct you back to this comment where DontTalk blatantly says that overarching timelines which propagate a multiverse in a new forward direction can qualify for Low 1-C, it's just not inherently tier 1 since the overarching timeline doesn't need to be a second time dimension:

I don't think I need to say more, I will never comprehend for the life of me how this clownery of an argument was ever taken seriously.

Higher dimensions still need to be of significant size.​

The problem is that we're dealing with an added temporal dimension here, and well... Ultima explains it better than I could:

We already consider time dimensions to be of significant size, hence why the 4th dimension of a Low 2-C construct is considered to hold qualitative superiority even if we know nothing regarding the time dimension besides that it forms a continuum: this is because time is infinite by default, and bijects with a dimensional space to form uncountably infinitely many elements. Here's another statement Ultima made regarding time dimensions and their significance:
Click to expand...

Also, we’re arguing that there’s many realms with different time dimensions, that are encompassed by the timeline which branches off and still make these realms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Digital_Franz
Omniscient Reader's Viewpoint Verse Creation: The Cosmology Part 2
2 3
Replies
89
Views
10K
LOTM_Historian
LOTM_Historian
REX9097
  • Locked
Ninjago: Tier 1
2 3 4
Replies
130
Views
8K
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
TheUnshakableOne
  • Locked
This Saint Seiya CRT Was A Mistake Part 1....................
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
TheUnshakableOne
TheUnshakableOne
Ikhvagracia
Low 1-C Mikumoverse
Replies
2
Views
814
Miril
Miril
RigelBR7
Amazo upgrade to Low 1-C, possibly 1-C.
Replies
6
Views
1K
Vyfourthaccount
Vyfourthaccount
Back
Top