Tier 2 standards question

[DragonLord]

So a common phrase I’ve heard on the forums is that Low 2-C is a representation of uncountable infinity (something which seems lacking on the Tiering page itself unless I missed something). So what exactly are 2-C, 2-B and 2-A?, and why would destroying two uncountable infinite structures be higher then destroying 1?

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

Firstly, because plural > singular. Secondly, because the distance between them universes are unknownable.

why would destroying two uncountable infinite structures be higher then destroying 1?

It doesn't really work like that, the same way as we destroy two 3-dimensional objects being a more impressive feat than just destroying one, even though a 3-dimensional object is made from uncountably infinite 2-dimensional cross sections (think about uncountably infinite number of points being lined up would make up length, 0D to 1D).

 

[DragonLord]

Firstly, because plural > singular.

Not always. As I think most of us know that infinite x 2 is still just infinite

Secondly, because the distance between them universes are unknownable.

Not actually used to my knowledge: Ant actually recently suggested making whole tiers for this distance and it was rejected

It doesn't really work like that, the same way as we destroy two 3-dimensional objects being a more impressive feat than just destroying one, even though a 3-dimensional object is made from uncountably infinite 2-dimensional cross sections (think about uncountably infinite number of points being lined up would make up length, 0D to 1D).

This seems like a odd comparison because those 3D objects don’t get there strength from there 2D and 1D components. They have strength because of there 3D Mass. a character who destroys two uncountable infinite 2D objects would be less then a 3D rock. Unless a Timeline has a quantifiable 4D mass.

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

Not always. As I think most of us know that infinite x 2 is still just infinite

Yes, because bijection or one to one correspondence prevents infinite*2 to have larger cardinality in comparison to baseline infinite, that's the basic knowledge of Set Theory. However, we're no longer dealing with infinities now, but the number of universes (whether they are just one or more) which is finite in this case. The fact that a 4-dimensional universe is made from uncountably infinite 3-dimensional universal snapshots for any given moments doesn't matter, since we're talking about 4D not 3D, in 4D said infinities becomes trivials. Uncountably infinite is equal to 1 dimension, at least in continuum hypothesis.

Not actually used to my knowledge: Ant actually recently suggested making whole tiers for this distance and it was rejected

Them distance is indeed unknownable, which makes 2-C being superior to infinite baseline Low 2-C is questionable.

This seems like a odd comparison because those 3D objects don’t get there strength from there 2D and 1D components. They have strength because of there 3D Mass. a character who destroys two uncountable infinite 2D objects would be less then a 3D rock. Unless a Timeline has a quantifiable 4D mass.

It doesn't really work like that, for example if you have lengths (1D) with the cardinality of R (the set of all real numbers) that are lined up sideways, you just made a whole 2-dimensional plane, same goes with planes (2D) to cube (3D), and so on. R is 1 dimension, and R equate to aleph-1 under continuum hypothesis.

 

[QuasiYuri]

Them distance is indeed unknownable, which makes 2-C being superior to infinite baseline Low 2-C is questionable.

Tbh it doesnt really matter for anything but traditions tho.

 

[GreatIskandar14045]

Tbh it doesnt really matter for anything but traditions tho.

Vs debating is sucks, ain't it?

 

[Arceus0x]

vsdebating was never a good idea especially the moment people began destroying universes.
I'd say that the only form of vsdebating that could be good is everything up to high 3-A.

 

[Laurcus]

I also have some questions about tier 2 and tier 1. Would it be okay if I asked them here? I could make a new thread but I figured that'd be redundant since there's already a thread open talking about tiers around this level.

What's the actual difference between 2-A and 1-C? 2-A is destroying a countably infinite number of space-time continuums while 1-C is destroying the entirety of spaces that are 1 to 2 layers of infinity above a low 2-C model. Low 2-C is destroying a universe sized space-time continuum

So I understand this as if you blow up 50 universes, you're 2-C. If you blow up a million universes you're 2-B. If you blow up an infinite amount of universes you're 2-A. But then 1-C confuses the hell out of me because it says 1-2 layers of infinity greater than low 2-C. Isn't 2-A already at that since low 2-C is 1 universe and 2-A is an infinite amount of universes?

I have some example questions if that helps.

Say you have a multiverse with an infinite amount of universes all of which are infinite in size. Is destroying that a 2-A feat or 1-C? Does it change if each universe has a finite amount of parallel timelines? For example, if you go back in time and kill your grandpa, instead of that making you not exist it just spawns another timeline in that universe. Does it matter if each universe has an infinite amount of such timelines?

How about if a video game character destroys a multiverse with an infinite amount of universes, but at the same time they also affect files on your computer? For example, crashing the game, corrupting your system save and reprogramming the start menu for the game so you can't load any of your saves. Does it change anything if the game world also has separate dimensions that exist outside of the multiversal structure, and the character in question can destroy those dimensions but they haven't been shown to do so at the same time as the aforementioned multiverse destroying plus game file altering feat?

 

[DragonLord]

You could just make your own question thread

Honestly I can’t really follow the answer I was given.