- 4,097
- 1,360
Not entirely separated as they will end up as Low 2C in that case.
Honestly, we usually go by case by case basis for that reason anyway since it is not like they are entirely separate anyway.
-
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 2 requirements and examples - Part 2
- Thread starter PrinceofPein
- Start date
- Status
Honestly, we usually go by case by case basis for that reason anyway since it is not like they are entirely separate anyway.
- 18,393
- 14,311
I just hope Pain is not ruining the whole thing I build because people want simplified things, lol.
Last edited:
- 10,000
- 3,417
as in, all part of the same space time?
so there isn't any usual standard for things like that?
- 10,000
- 3,417
btw, who wants to take the task to do this?
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 8,913
- 5,812
- Thread starter
- #565
I am done with the blog
- 18,393
- 14,311
lol
- 165,228
- 72,258
- 32,811
- 38,013
IIRC DT said that such sizes were deemed to be unusable until it was presented in peer-reviewed papers and majority of the world's major scientific centers accepted and ratified said papers.
- 6,300
- 1,595
Iirc that 250x the size of observable universe is assuming a "closed" universe. Which iirc is considered the most unlikely of possibilities in the scientific astronomy community
I think using the "future visibility limit" is much better since it's a universally accepted mathematical thingy. It only increases sized by a modest ~~33%
Though I still believe DT disagreed to it due to a misunderstanding
Thread 'Baseline 3-A tiering system question.' https://vsbattles.com/threads/baseline-3-a-tiering-system-question.145658/
Edit: but what Klol said is correct.
I think using the "future visibility limit" is much better since it's a universally accepted mathematical thingy. It only increases sized by a modest ~~33%
Though I still believe DT disagreed to it due to a misunderstanding
Thread 'Baseline 3-A tiering system question.' https://vsbattles.com/threads/baseline-3-a-tiering-system-question.145658/
Edit: but what Klol said is correct.
Last edited:
- 10,396
- 5,237
I agree with my friend
- 10,000
- 3,417
i would like someone else to cover this, i think that adding a "usual standards" part for it would help people understand it better
- 10,502
- 11,574
Not really due to a misunderstanding, but because it's a prediction based on a theory that isn't universally accepted. Ultimately we just don't know how the universe at large works currently, so any theory of that nature should be taken with a grain of salt. Maybe once we know what Dark Matter and Dark Energy are...
And for a baseline the observable universe is better anyway, with how old fictions don't know those theories anyway.
Which one is the current version now?
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 8,913
- 5,812
- Thread starter
- #574
ImmortalDread/Space-time continuum
vsbattles.fandom.com
- 6,300
- 1,595
I dud some searching, and turns out that the current observable universe size that we use appears to use the same math and same variabled into its equation. Including factoring in dark energy and Matter.
Edit also dark energy and Matter are both universally accepted in the scientific community and explained on Nasas website. Infact nasa has hundreds of articles on both.
But... that's all I'll say on it to not clutter yp this thread
Last edited:
- 10,502
- 11,574
Difference is that we can observe the observable universe directly, i.e. we have measurements on it. Meanwhile, for anything outside we have to extrapolate on theory. In so far, no, I don't think it uses the same assumptions.
And Dark Energy and Dark Matter is accepted, in so far as they are stand-ins in cosmological models, I'm not suggesting otherwise. However, we have no idea what they are.
Like, read wikipedia on it:
We have evidence they exist, but we know so little about them that we aren't even sure what they are. So one can hardly say we have a close to complete understanding of them.
Feel like some of the things we discussed earlier still need to be applied, but it's probably easier if I just present a counter-proposal based on that blog. I will do so soon.ImmortalDread/Space-time continuum
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 8,913
- 5,812
- Thread starter
- #577
Sorry, I thought I applied all that was accepted, I must have missed them. Let me wait for the counter-proposal
- 18,393
- 14,311
@DontTalkDT
You mentioned the sandbox twice but have yet to address all of the points. Instead of multiple comments, why not create a single post covering the entire sandbox discussion? This would allow us to complete the thread. I am not in a rush, but I am surprised that there hasn't been a comprehensive counter proposal after two comments on my sandbox.
You mentioned the sandbox twice but have yet to address all of the points. Instead of multiple comments, why not create a single post covering the entire sandbox discussion? This would allow us to complete the thread. I am not in a rush, but I am surprised that there hasn't been a comprehensive counter proposal after two comments on my sandbox.
- 10,502
- 11,574
Alrighty, so here
vsbattles.fandom.com
my conter-proposal (draft #1).
Changes:
So that's something where we can choose which to take.
Of course, I'm expecting that some more changes are necessary after feedback. So yeah, what do you think so far?
Another blog post I use as Sandbox for reasons
vsbattles.fandom.com
Changes:
- Moved the whole thing about separation via high D spaces into a section in the universe part of the article. As said, that stuff just doesn't seem specific to spacetime / timelines, but more so about the separation of space / universes. Generalized that a little, just to mention separation by other means exists as well.
- Moved the stuff about a common time out of qualifications, since this seems to not really be a qualification and more something about the assumed nature.
- Removed the stuff about time manip affecting other spacetimes being a contradiction to them being separate for reasons we already discussed.
- Various reformulations that became necessary due to the former stuff.
So that's something where we can choose which to take.
Of course, I'm expecting that some more changes are necessary after feedback. So yeah, what do you think so far?
- 32,811
- 38,013
So uh, what's the difference between the two?Alrighty, so here
my conter-proposal (draft #1).Another blog post I use as Sandbox for reasons
Changes:
Additionally, there are two versions. One where I replaced the Guidelines section with a link to the Tiering System FAQ, due to covering the same explanations. And a second version where I didn't do that, because the formulation of the guidelines section is nice.
- Moved the whole thing about separation via high D spaces into a section in the universe part of the article. As said, that stuff just doesn't seem specific to spacetime / timelines, but more so about the separation of space / universes. Generalized that a little, just to mention separation by other means exists as well.
- Moved the stuff about a common time out of qualifications, since this seems to not really be a qualification and more something about the assumed nature.
- Removed the stuff about time manip affecting other spacetimes being a contradiction to them being separate for reasons we already discussed.
- Various reformulations that became necessary due to the former stuff.
So that's something where we can choose which to take.
Of course, I'm expecting that some more changes are necessary after feedback. So yeah, what do you think so far?
- 19,376
- 9,968
I wouldn’t mind having the guidelines section be in the page, that way it can answer questions people have regarding what qualifies and what doesn’t.
- 10,502
- 11,574
Between the two versions in my blog? Whether the Guidelines section exists or instead there is just a link to the Tiering System FAQ section that explains the same thing.
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 8,913
- 5,812
- Thread starter
- #583
The time manipulation stuff has already been removed, what you removed was, time travel between universes that we know are not branching and that is still a disqualification.
Other than that, I do not mind, it linking to the FAQ section but it can also be on the page, instead of people going round and round about it, so my preference is the one I prefer
Last edited:
- 18,393
- 14,311
His blog is really confusing honestly, I am not sure what you adjusted or anything.
- 9,863
- 10,612
Second version (the one with guidelines) looks more good.Alrighty, so here
my conter-proposal (draft #1).Another blog post I use as Sandbox for reasons
Changes:
Additionally, there are two versions. One where I replaced the Guidelines section with a link to the Tiering System FAQ, due to covering the same explanations. And a second version where I didn't do that, because the formulation of the guidelines section is nice.
- Moved the whole thing about separation via high D spaces into a section in the universe part of the article. As said, that stuff just doesn't seem specific to spacetime / timelines, but more so about the separation of space / universes. Generalized that a little, just to mention separation by other means exists as well.
- Moved the stuff about a common time out of qualifications, since this seems to not really be a qualification and more something about the assumed nature.
- Removed the stuff about time manip affecting other spacetimes being a contradiction to them being separate for reasons we already discussed.
- Various reformulations that became necessary due to the former stuff.
So that's something where we can choose which to take.
Of course, I'm expecting that some more changes are necessary after feedback. So yeah, what do you think so far?
- 10,502
- 11,574
No the time travel stuff is still there.
The line I removed was:
and the stuff regarding meta-time.... since in my understanding that didn't relate to the time travel stuff either, but was about time manip. (and since I'm not quite sure what separates meta-time from sharing the same time axis)
I mean, I gave a summary of the changes:
Sadly I can't do a nice before/after edit thing, since I created a new blogpost and stuff.
If you're not sure what some change is referring to, I can try to point it out more clearly, though.
- 18,393
- 14,311
I will try to change my sandbox to your fitting and I will send it once again, but ya thanks ^^
- 10,000
- 3,417
i have some confusions regarding this point specifically, what even is "meta time" and can we assume that it is there or there needs to be some statement for it?
PrinceofPein
Username Only- 8,913
- 5,812
- Thread starter
- #589
Then it is okay then
You do not need to, we can use DT's Sandbox as that is currently okay
Now what is left to decide is linking the FAQ or it having what is in the FAQ
- 18,393
- 14,311
No i need to fix its style. Lol
- 19,376
- 9,968
I prefer just using DT's version. It explains everything sufficiently, besides this thread's already gone long enough as it is.
- 18,393
- 14,311
It lacks styling. So I will edit it. That's it. I won't discuss further since I already agree with what he purposed.
- 4,097
- 1,360
Agreed and technically we have gone through some threads regarding Tier 2 to the point it is, imo, quite bothersome to discuss it.
However, that is my opinion on the matter.
- 19,376
- 9,968
@ImmortalDread you do know if you’re outvoted then the edit would be a waste in the end right?
- 18,393
- 14,311
Also, getting outvoted for what exactly the reason? All what I am doing is literally styling the page and make it readable rather just some text without text styling. I am not disagreeing with DT at all.
- 19,376
- 9,968
Which version of the page that we would accept. Agreeing or disagreeing with what DT says wasn’t my point, it’s just who’s version do we use for the wiki. If everyone in this thread picks DT’s version then it’s kind of pointless in the long run.
- 18,393
- 14,311
I... never said anything about my sandbox/version. I will be doing it on his own sandbox, what?
- 19,376
- 9,968
If he allows you to edit his own sandbox then sure
- 18,393
- 14,311
I mean, why not. After all, it's styling. You can check after me, if that's a big issue :/
- 165,228
- 72,258
As usual, I nearly completely trust DontTalk's sense of judgement, but can somebody please remind me about what he would like to do here exactly before we apply them? I have been preparing extensively for my trip abroad for the last 10 days.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
