There is a very easy and simple fix for this problem:
Yeah, it is a ******* pain in the neck.
Well we are saying the same thing only the last part is what we seem to disagree with each other, space and time(change) goes hand in hand. I think we agree on that, and to use your definition of time, the distinction between tier 3 and tier 2 is time. tier 3 is destruction of universe sized 3-D space or infinite 3-D space, tier 2 is the destruction of uncountable infinite 3-D space. hence why it is the destruction of a space time continuum, as a space-time continuum destruction will require destruction of uncountable infinite 3-D space
that is the thing, there is no accessing any of this separately, when you return to a point in time or turn back a change, it is still the same space, just the space before X happened, also we have fiction and we have statements like
I am confused by this, can you elaborate? do you mean that once a change occur then the universe before the change would stop existing and there should be nothing called a past in this scenario?
No no it is fine, this is all a vortex of complications
The reason being for this to be disregarded is our tiering system not being 100% maths based. Fiction don't tends to place destroying small spacetime's on a equal footing with destroying universe.
We can worry about those specifics later, this thread's not the time or place.
We said fiction don't tends to place destroying small space-time on equal footing as destroying the universe, yet we nitpicking in order for 2-C onward universe should be spatiotemporally separated this and that despite the fact that most if not all fiction tend to not really this specific. So much contradictory
Like I said, we can worry about those specifics later, now is not the time and nor is this thread the place to do it.
That does involve the theory of relativity so this part is more in question rather than set in stone fact.
No worries, I already tagged him, Ultima, KingPin and other knowledgeable dudes I know of to give an opinion on this.
That's unfortunate.
you can tag @Qawsedf234 if he will be interested in this, and that is about all I know that are knowledgeable in the topic
I'm perfectly fine with them
That part; finite speed dimensional travel is a thing. I said nothing about the dimensional travel page; I was going off what Executor said in a different thread that "A visible on screen flight is not a counterargument against dimensional travel or point A and point B being in different bodies of spaces."
Dimensional travel, as long as it's via things that distance component doesn't get involved is fine. But the moment we are crossing realms physically by travelling means the distance component is involving (even if they're separate dimensions), if done via normal 3 Dimensional movements (as that's what they have been seen to done so far for SDBs, cubes, whis) is infact aren't allowed as per our standards rn.
I never said speed alone does any of that. But definitely is a factor.
Yes some special people, it means for us to be able to say that someone is able to travel to another universe they must have been shown to use dimensional travel previously.
If you mean the second section of the TIering FAQ then all it says is that 3D travel from one space to another is counter-evidence. Higher dimensional travel and stuff is already explicitly not included.
What if within a verse specific topic; the list of fact checks go like this.
I feel like this is dragon ball specific, but let me ignore that and act like this is the first I am seeing this and make a general statement - permit me to quote you or rather let me quote your meaning
I suppose that our standards are good then, but I still think a slight word addition to be more specific wouldn't hurt since some people still misread "3D Flight" as just all flight in general. But I guess that could just be fixed on the dimensional travel page rather than the FAQ page if needed.
out of curiosity, what if they have to use a special means to traverse to other worlds but such means is not instantaneous and takes time? Say they need a special machine/technological device/ to get in and use to travel to another universe. The object first starts moving, and exits the Earths Atmosphere and goes into space. It has to reach a certain speed to open a portal due to that speed "breaking the laws of physics" and it uses "heat" to "wrap space and time" around the starship. Once said speed is reached you visibly see a portal open up, and their then stated by narration and character statements they are going to a universe separate from their own but it will take X-time to reach said Separate Universe. Would that travel time because its not instantaneous debunk it from being a separate universe both spatially and Temporally?
The argument is kind of wrong, when a character is specifically taking different amount of time in travelling from one planet to another, one Dimension to another, one universe to another, then that means it's really covering the whole distance and reaching the other place in question depends on what's their speed is. They opened a portal with their speed and all is headcanon. And it's not only one character but other things as well (super dragon balls, champa's cube). That one character can cross the universe because he is most fastest flyer in the universe, other characters aren't as fast as previous character and universe is too big for them to cross it.
