Tier 2 requirements and examples - Part 2

[PrinceofPein]

Read your own wikipedia link. I am not wrong.

You said time is a physical construct and that is wrong totally, even used a misguided relativity example

I did not mean to mischaracterize what you said. I should have said specifically that destroying a universe is 4D because spacetime is 4D not because you’re destroying uncountable infinite 3D spaces.

Destroying a universe by explosion is simple a 3-D feat, since you are destroying it in the present moment, but once you add across all of time you have 4-D, this is not hard to get tbh.

that it does not. An uncountable infinite amount if 3D space does not make 4D space.

you can stack these spaces in any configuration and the space will still be 3-D. The only thing that makes 3D space, 4D is the dimension of time. Of course in fiction, you can add as many multiple dimensions you want but that’s case by case.

Oh I guess you should probably stop replying here then since you are clearly not knowledgeable on this subject and this is derailing.
But to show you what you are saying
Stacking uncountable infinite 1D gives 2D, stacking uncountable 2D gives 3D, but according to your logic stacking uncountable infinite 3D will not give a 4D construct.
Do you know how that sounds?
1+1 is 2
2+1 is 3
but 3+1 is not 4???

Anyway since this is irrelevant to the thread and you have nothing constructive to say, please stop replying here now

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

You said time is a physical construct and that is wrong totally, even used a misguided relativity example

That’s not what I said.

Destroying a universe by explosion is simple a 3-D feat, since you are destroying it in the present moment, but once you add across all of time you have 4-D, this is not hard to get tbh.

Destroying space destroys time because they are conjoined.
An explosion in space does not destroy necessarily destroy said space. But if an explosion destroys space, it will destroy time
because they are linked.

Oh I guess you should probably stop replying here then since you are clearly not knowledgeable on this subject and this is derailing.
But to show you what you are saying
Stacking uncountable infinite 1D gives 2D, stacking uncountable 2D gives 3D, but according to your logic stacking uncountable infinite 3D will not give a 4D construct.
Do you know how that sounds?
1+1 is 2
2+1 is 3
but 3+1 is not 4???

This is absolutely wrong and A=B=C logic. What’s the same for one is not the same for another.

Take a 2D square. You can stack an uncountably infinite amount of them together side by side, and they will never become 3D. Only by stacking them on top of each in the 3rd Dimension will you create a 3D object. You can’t do that with 3D objects or spaces.

So again, I say, it doesn’t matter in what configuration you stack 3D spaces on top of each other, next to each other, inside each other, you won’t create another dimension.

 

[PrinceofPein]

That’s not what I said.



Destroying space destroys time because they are conjoined.
An explosion in space does not destroy necessarily destroy said space. But if an explosion destroys space, it will destroy time
because they are linked.


This is absolutely wrong and A=B=C logic. What’s the same for one is not the same for another.

Take a 2D square. You can stack an uncountably infinite amount of them together side by side, and they will never become 3D. Only by stacking them on top of each in the 3rd Dimension will you create a 3D object. You can’t do that with 3D objects or spaces.

So again, I say, it doesn’t matter in what configuration you stack 3D spaces on top of each other, next to each other, inside each other, you won’t create another dimension.

Okay this is derailing and I am tired of entertaining it

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

The point is that space and time are entwined. Time is relative and nonsimultaneous.

If two places aren't connected by space, they wouldn't share the same time. So for the sake of branching timelines, if the branches don't share the same space, then they aren't part of the same time.

 

[Fixxed]

Branching timelines and parallel timelines are two entirely different things, i don tknow where you are seeing that they are the same thing.
Parallel timelines are timelines in which for each timelines all sequences of events happen in the same chronological order at the same time.
While for Branching timelines, timelines that can divurge from the order based on options or choices made.
Two separate things.
So if you have a valid concern you can drop them, but the branching timelines been the same as parallel timelines is wrong.

Dont know where you get that. But timeline thats branching and created another timelines always mean parallel universes. In MWI branching timeline is always mean parallel universe

Can you give 1 example of branching timelines that is not parallel universes?

 

[PrinceofPein]

Dont know where you get that. But timeline thats branching and created another timelines always mean parallel universes. In MWI branching timeline is always mean parallel universe

Can you give 1 example of branching timelines that is not parallel universes?

refer to previous messages

 

[PrinceofPein]

Bump, this should not become like the part 1 which took a year

 

[ImmortalDread]

I dont understand, but what I mean is that, they share the same space and time with the tree, so they are not separate space-times, and the entire thing for multiple tier 2 structures is separate space-times

If it is proven that each timeline is its own timeline, then the whole tree is low 1-C. Alright thanks for clarification

 

[PrinceofPein]

If it is proven that each timeline is its own timeline, then the whole tree is low 1-C. Alright thanks for clarification

No 2-A

 

[ImmortalDread]

No 2-A

Each timeline is infinite multiverse (2-A) and there are infinite of them. It already reached the limits of aleph 0, the tree as whole is next stage.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Each timeline is infinite multiverse (2-A) and there are infinite of them. It already reached the limits of aleph 0, the tree as whole is next stage.

a single timeline is low 2-C, I don't know where you are seeing 2-A.
A tree with infinite timelines that are self-contained is 2-A, since it can contain infinite timelines.
Timelines are low 2-C not 2-A.
Anyway depends on the verse

 

[ImmortalDread]

It was other instance, but ya.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Anyway depends on the verse

Ya and what I described was verse-cosmology

 

[Antvasima]

Waiting on DT and Ultima, although Qawdsef, Planck and Everything12 insights too will be appreciated

As the one who proposed the "branching timelines should not be separate spacetimes" thing, let me clear a few things up.

First of all, I never said a multiverse in which timelines branch off of each other isn't tier 2. I simply said that without some good context, such a multiverse should not be tiered any higher than Low 2-C. Think of such a multiverse as a tree: there are many branches (timelines) on this tree that shoot off from each other, but these branches can nonetheless be traced back to other branches and, eventually, the trunk from which they all emerged. If a cosmology is shown to work under the logic of timelines branching off of other timelines, unless there is reason to believe otherwise, then we should hold the assumption that those timelines all have a common past, and thus, would not qualify for the multiversal tiers.

Now, parallel timelines are completely different: unlike branching timelines, parallel timelines do not intersect at any point. They may be identical up to a certain moment, but that doesn't erase the fact that they are parallel lines, which we learned as children are straight lines that never, ever touch each other. A multiverse using this logic does count for tiers higher than Low 2-C by default because its timelines match our qualification that two universes are spatiotemporally separate if they do not intersect at any point in space or time, as laid out by DontTalk.

All I can say is, pay attention to the wording fiction uses, and then decide for yourself if a verse is implying that timelines have common histories (or futures) or not.

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Qawsedf234 @Everything12 @Planck69

What do you think about this? I personally think that it seems far too strict.

 

[Planck69]

Personally, I'm of the notion that if the setting treats them as separate timelines then they should count as their own structures, regardless of their origin being as parallel timelines or branching off of an original timeline. Arguing from author intent is obviously not something to be taken as a foundational argument and I'm personally against it but a large number of times in fiction, the branching is treated as them breaking of into their own realities rather than being supported on a single one.

Of course, I can see and understand KingPin's logic for the most part, this is just my take on whether we should be that strict with things. Ultimately, it depends on context.

 

[KLOL506]

Personally, I'm of the notion that if the setting treats them as separate timelines then they should count as their own structures, regardless of their origin being as parallel timelines or branching off of an original timeline. Arguing from author intent is obviously not something to be taken as a foundational argument and I'm personally against it but a large number of times in fiction, the branching is treated as them breaking of into their own realities rather than being supported on a single one.

Of course, I can see and understand KingPin's logic for the most part, this is just my take on whether we should be that strict with things. Ultimately, it depends on context.

Ultimately the reason why I suggested that we take things like these on a case-by-case basis. Because in the end, CONTEXT IS KING. Nothing gets validated without proper context.

 

[Antvasima]

Personally, I'm of the notion that if the setting treats them as separate timelines then they should count as their own structures, regardless of their origin being as parallel timelines or branching off of an original timeline. Arguing from author intent is obviously not something to be taken as a foundational argument and I'm personally against it but a large number of times in fiction, the branching is treated as them breaking of into their own realities rather than being supported on a single one.

Of course, I can see and understand KingPin's logic for the most part, this is just my take on whether we should be that strict with things. Ultimately, it depends on context.

I personally agree with this. Thank you for helping out.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Ultimately the reason why I suggested that we take things like these on a case-by-case basis. Because in the end, CONTEXT IS KING. Nothing gets validated without proper context.

W KLOL, never misses!

 

[PrinceofPein]

Personally, I'm of the notion that if the setting treats them as separate timelines then they should count as their own structures, regardless of their origin being as parallel timelines or branching off of an original timeline. Arguing from author intent is obviously not something to be taken as a foundational argument and I'm personally against it but a large number of times in fiction, the branching is treated as them breaking of into their own realities rather than being supported on a single one.

Of course, I can see and understand KingPin's logic for the most part, this is just my take on whether we should be that strict with things. Ultimately, it depends on context.

Of course, if the author treats them as separate timelines/realities, they will be treated as such, but if the only thing we have is "Branching timelines" and nothing else, then we will no longer by default treat them as self-contained without further context.
I am still looking for examples of verses that would fit these two categories, but it is harder than I thought

 

[PrinceofPein]

verses that i know that works under branching timelines
1. God of War
2. Chrono Clock
3. MCU
Anyone who knows verses that operate under branching timelines, please drop a list, so I can look into them and find examples of what I mean

 

[Reiner04]

Trinity seven.
Dragonball.
Ben 10.
Daily life of immortal king (novel version).

 

[Sir_Ovens]

MCU just straight up has alt universes. After the events of Loki, there isn't one single timeline that branches anymore.

 

[PrinceofPein]

So thanks to @TheGreatJedi13 I was able to get a well detailed explanation of a verse that fits the "connected to the main tree timeline", although he had a different view of it, here is the OG post he used to explain to me

So I'm suggesting another Granblue Fantasy. Although the cosmology blog wasn't updated yet since it was recently updated within the verse regarding Timeline branching works.
This is the Current Blog.

For starters here's nature.
Here is the initial groundwork when it was introduced
For the Whole context of how other branch works from the main and how it was destroyed, you can watch this up to Ch164 Part 2

For summarization.
As for what makes them function as an independent timeline.
Erasing someone across history doesn't affect another person in another branch. This has been proven when the other branch was destroyed and everyone was erased by the Otherworld and when all life disappeared from that world. it was swallowed by the nothingness of neither life and death as the Otherworlds ability is rewriting History. similar to what they did With Guilotta and Zarazustra making everyone forget about them.
Mc was killed as well in another timeline by something that erases anyone across history as if they don't exist.
To explain more about their ability. Octavia explained it as well with Violet Knight here in this entire Ch161 Part3. this is where they also mentioned it like Akasha's Ability who controls and the entire History itself of Sky-realm.
In the Main Timeline. The Otherworlders are also slowly rewriting people out of existence making everyone also forget about them. this works on both past and future since they actually revised the timeline multiple times wherein they tried to replace Rackam with Anamaria then erased her as well later on.

Normally the Otherworld would have succeeded already in the other branch but the target escaped to another branch and that's where they decided to start tampering with its history to get their target back

We can see that these branches are all connected to the main tree and some branches are connected to other branches, also.
So I will like it if @TheGreatJedi13 can be given the permission to respond in this thread.

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

I think there were some discrepancy with my explanation but im discussing it with Pain 2 to since I'm slowly understanding what he meant that the Tree would be low 2-C and each branch would be 3-A high 3-A as they are not self contained.
Irotis/Violet Knight timeline is probably a different Tree/Sky Realm and not a branch as their Timeline are all swallowed by the void including the entirety of its Time and reality. Which wouldn't really fit with how they are in the same tree else the main timeline would have been gone as well

 

[KLOL506]

verses that i know that works under branching timelines
1. God of War

God of War does not work under branching timelines, at all. The Norse Pantheon's 9 Realms all have their own separate space and time-flow, the only space they share are the branches of Yggdrasil, and are physically inaccessible without portals EVEN IF YOU YOURSELF ARE PHYSICALLY ON THOSE BRANCHES. The tree itself serves as a bigger construct than the realms, serving as a bigger overarching timeline than the Realms themselves. There were no original timelines to start off of even because other than Niflheim and Muspelheim which formed when the Primordial Forces of Fire and Ice joined when not even time existed, every single other realm was forged separately by Odin, and the tree itself predates space and time.

3. MCU

MCU timelines aren't branching anymore either because of Loki.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Trinity seven.
Dragonball.
Ben 10.
Daily life of immortal king (novel version).

can you explain Daily life of Immortal king and Ben 10 branching timelines, or just send the relevant scan, possibly for DB too

 

[Reiner04]

can you explain Daily life of Immortal king and Ben 10 branching timelines, or just send the relevant scan, possibly for DB too

Daily life of immortal king branching timeline:
Whenever a person's normal processes becomes entangled with something or he encounters some difficulty in deciding a problem, it leads to branching off of timeline. It later has been worded like "Today a author struggled to update 2000 words or 20000 worlds. (Just to mention, I didn't mistook here but world's were written 10 times or how much the words were).

In Ben 10, it's all just after maths of quantum mechanics, branching happens to resolve the schrodingers cat phenomenon (a basic thing in quantum mechanics). Yeah it's mostly irl.

In Dragonball it's alot different, that to say changing past will lead to branching new timelines.

In Trinity seven no details are present but just that world's branch of infinitely.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Daily life of immortal king branching timeline:
Whenever a person's normal processes becomes entangled with something or he encounters some difficulty in deciding a problem, it leads to branching off of timeline. It later has been worded like "Today a author struggled to update 2000 words or 20000 worlds. (Just to mention, I didn't mistook here but world's were written 10 times or how much the words were).

Oh okay, so let me get this, another timeline branches off the current one anytime there is a problem?

In Ben 10, it's all just after maths of quantum mechanics, branching happens to resolve the schrodingers cat phenomenon (a basic thing in quantum mechanics). Yeah it's mostly irl.

can i get a scan of this?

In Dragonball it's alot different, that to say changing past will lead to branching new timelines.

oh yeah I remember now, I will go through it again

In Trinity seven no details are present but just that world's branch of infinitely.

With no other context?

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

With no other context?

I think it is best to check this CRT(page 1-2) and the blog they are working in

 

[Reiner04]

can i get a scan of this?

Oh okay, so let me get this, another timeline branches off the current one anytime there is a problem

yeah

With no other context?

I didn't seen any for branching specifically. But

I think it is best to check this CRT(page 1-2) and the blog they are working in

 

[PrinceofPein]

Well this is branching timelines and they sound like they are connected to each other.
So practically all branching creates another parallel world in which the Ben does another thing.

These are also connected, and have no further context

I think it is best to check this CRT(page 1-2) and the blog they are working in

I just read the blog
So these are not branching timelines, they are just infinite worlds connected by fate and the possibilities can be branching timeline, and seeing as making changes in the past can affect the present, I will say they are also connected

 

[Reiner04]

About branching timeline, I don't mind anything as long as all the verses treated the same way who shares same kind of cosmology unless the difference is present.

Anyway, holding this topic going on from week aside, more than one universes being treated as low 2C or 2C should be case by case, if they shown to share same spacetime and changing in the past affecting all universes/dimensions then they shouldn't be seprate spacetime continuum's but just one spacetime continuum aka low 2C overall.

 

[ImmortalDread]

As KLOL and Theglassman12 said (the kings themselves), context is a king, its pure value. We only treat them with case-to-case basis.

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody explain the current conclusions here please?

 

[KLOL506]

Still waiting for DontTalkDT and Ultima to give their thoughts.

 

[Antvasima]

I will ask again.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I will ask again.

If possible you can tell them that this thread take a priority since it is a wiki wide revision that affects all tier 2 verses and even possibly tier 1 verses. I don't want this thread to take a year like the part 1

 

[Antvasima]

DontTalkDT said that he will try to help out sometime before next Thursday, but @Ultima_Reality has not replied.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Well, it is Friday already, so bump

 

[Reiner04]

Well, it is Friday already, so bump

How about if you mention it in the OP that which staff has agreed and disagreed to which points in the OP and if agreed then with which condition or smth? So that it can be summarise. 3rd point (branching timeline) will likely be on hold as there are different opinions on it, it can be evaluated when DT or ultima come. For now votes or opinions on other points in the OP can be discussed or asked, for instance, universes being treated as seprate spacetime continuum by default.