Tier 2A : eternal/infinite timeline addition.

[Reiner04]

So as far I've read the Tier 2 in here on vs battle, I find out that it's divided on the basis of number of containers (Spacetime continuum) rather than very basic snapshots amount because If we go with amount of snapshots than it will all be equated to aleph 1 and division will not be possible.

Tier Low 2c: single container of spacetime continuum.

Tier 2B: 2 to 1001 or something number of containers of spacetime continuum.

Tier 2A: infinite number of containers of spacetime continuum.

My concern is that if division is based of number of containers then shouldn't destroying infinite sized timeline/ infinite sized container of spacetime continuum along time axis should be equals to destroying infinite number of timelines/ infinite number of containers of spacetime continuum . And so should be added in Tier 2A?
After all we have done the same thing with High 3a Tier where we have added that Destroying infinite number of universes or destroying infinite sized universe should be taken equal unless they are seprate spacetime continuum's, quilted multiverse.

Note: staff only.

 

[PrinceofPein]

A timeline is supposed to be infinite to even qualify for low 2-C
so this is certainly not the same.
Low 2C is essentially uncountable infinite snapshots of a 3-D space destruction. I.e. an infinite timeline to begin with.

 

[Reiner04]

A timeline is supposed to be infinite to even qualify for low 2-C
so this is certainly not the same.
Low 2C is essentially uncountable infinite snapshots of a 3-D space destruction. I.e. an infinite timeline to begin with.

I understand that part but going with that reasoning we will have tier 2c = tier 2a as even if you take infinite number of containers in which each one contains uncountable number of snapshots even then it wouldn't be greater than aleph 1.
So I came to reasoning that division is not based of snapshots as it will create mess but rather the container itself. One container is for low 2c and infinite number of containers is for 2a, just like how lower tiers such as building or island lvls are divided.

 

[Tatsumi504]

A timeline is supposed to be infinite to even qualify for low 2-C
so this is certainly not the same.

Not really? A universe doesn't need to have infinite size to qualify for low 2-C, it just needs to be confirmed as a space-time continuum (containing uncountable infinite snapshots of 3D space).

 

[PrinceofPein]

I understand that part but going with that reasoning we will have tier 2c = tier 2a as even if you take infinite number of containers in which each one contains uncountable number of snapshots even then it wouldn't be greater than aleph 1.
So I came to reasoning that division is not based of snapshots as it will create mess but rather the container itself. One container is for low 2c and infinite number of containers is for 2a, just like how lower tiers such as building or island lvls are divided.

I have absolutely no idea what you meant here.
But like I said
Low 2-C will be infinite snapshots of a 3-D space of universal size
And 2-A will be infinite low 2-C.

To make this simpler for low 2-C, it is simply every moment that ever occurred both in the past and possibly future getting destroyed.
In a second, there are infinite moments, a timeline would contain infinite seconds, hence uncountable infinite amount of 3-D universal space getting destroyed.

So it is not "infinite timeline = 2-A"
A timeline is supposed to be infinite to begin with and you need an infinite timeline to qualify for tier 2(Low 2-C)

Not really? A universe doesn't need to have infinite size to qualify for low 2-C, it just needs to be confirmed as a space-time continuum (containing uncountable infinite snapshots of 3D space).

That's not what I said, read it again
Timelines ≠ universes
At least not in my context or his context

 

[Reiner04]

I have absolutely no idea what you meant here.
But like I said
Low 2-C will be infinite snapshots of a 3-D space of universal size
And 2-A will be infinite low 2-C.

My bad I will try to make it simple:-
Think of it as 3d box in your house, it would obviously be greater than infinitie snapshots of 2d papers and so will be equals to aleph1.
That box is low 2c but not necessarily infinite 3d box but equals to uncountable infinite 2d papers

Now at 2a we have infinite number of boxes of that 3d box but it's still just uncountable infinite 2d papers which should be equals to infinite box itself.

 

[PrinceofPein]

My bad I will try to make it simple:-
Think of it as 3d box in your house, it would obviously be greater than infinitie snapshots of 2d papers and so will be equals to aleph1.
That box is low 2c but not necessarily infinite 3d box but equals to uncountable infinite 2d papers

Now at 2a we have infinite number of boxes of that 3d box but it's still just uncountable infinite 2d papers which should be equals to infinite box itself.

Still do not get this.
It does not correlate

 

[KLOL506]

Snapshots are not the same as being spacetime continuums.

IIRC Snapshots are periods in time.

 

[Reiner04]

Still do not get this.
It does not correlate

Then it would be difficult to explain but will try.
That said 3d box above, think of it as spacetime continuum, a 4d space, that would not be infinite in 4d right? But will be greater than infinite 3d space and so equals to uncountable infinity.
My point is tier 2a just have infinite number of boxes like them which should be equals to infinite sized box. I can't explain it in better way than this...

 

[Tatsumi504]

My bad I will try to make it simple:-
Think of it as 3d box in your house, it would obviously be greater than infinitie snapshots of 2d papers and so will be equals to aleph1.
That box is low 2c but not necessarily infinite 3d box but equals to uncountable infinite 2d papers

Now at 2a we have infinite number of boxes of that 3d box but it's still just uncountable infinite 2d papers which should be equals to infinite box itself.

This is confusing. Assuming the box to be the size of an observable universe, it'll be 3-A. It only becomes low 2-C when a temporal dimension is added.
Low 2-C is uncountable infinite amount of 3D.

2-A is infinite amount of low 2-C

 

[Reiner04]

Snapshots are not the same as being spacetime continuums.

IIRC Snapshots are periods in time.

Yes

 

[Tatsumi504]

Then it would be difficult to explain but will try.
That said 3d box above, think of it as spacetime continuum, a 4d space, that would not be infinite in 4d right? But will be greater than infinite 3d space and so equals to uncountable infinity.
My point is tier 2a just have infinite number of boxes like them which should be equals to infinite sized box. I can't explain it in better way than this...

Whether the box has an infinite size or not doesn't matter. The size of the 3D space doesn't affect the rating that's given for destroying multiple space-times

 

[Reiner04]

This is confusing. Assuming the box to be the size of an observable universe, it'll be 3-A. It only becomes low 2-C when a temporal dimension is added.
Low 2-C is uncountable infinite amount of 3D.

2-A is infinite amount of low 2-C

Well it has nothing to do with tier 3.

 

[Reiner04]

I guess the only people's who qualifies for this thread should have good knowledge in tier 2 and transfinite numbers

 

[Antvasima]

Pain_to12:

What do you think should be done here?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Low 2-C = 3D universe + 1 temporal dimension = 4D or space-time continuum (or uncountable infinite amount of 3D)
2-A = infinite low 2-C "4D” (infinite of an uncountable infinite amount of 3D)

 

[Reiner04]

Low 2-C = 3D universe + 1 temporal dimension = 4D or space-time continuum (or uncountable infinite amount of 3D)
2-A = infinite low 2-C (infinite of an uncountable infinite amount of 3D)

Yes basically low 2c is a 4d box (contains infinite number of snapshots) and 2a is infinite number of that 4d box each of them contains uncountable number of infinite snapshots of the universe but vary at numbers of containers.
Given that infinite 4d box should be added in tier 2a.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Yes basically low 2c is a 4d box (contains infinite number of snapshots) and 2a is infinite number of that 4d box each of them contains uncountable number of infinite snapshots of the universe but vary at numbers of containers.
Given that infinite 4d box should be added in tier 2a.

Honestly, with all due respect, I am not understanding the issue you have or your concern. Mind elaborating to everyone, what do you mean exactly?
Even @Pain_to12 is quite not understanding you.

 

[Reiner04]

Honestly, with all due respect, I am not understanding the issue you have or your concern. Mind elaborating to everyone, what do you mean exactly?
Even @Pain_to12 is quite not understanding you.

It's that infinite spacetime continuum ( infinite sized 4d container) = infinite number of spacetime continuum (infinite number of 4d containers) and so should be added in tier 2a
I guess that pain would understand it giving some thought. May will take a while though.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Then it would be difficult to explain but will try.
That said 3d box above, think of it as spacetime continuum, a 4d space,

A space time continuum is not 4D space, it is 3D space and 1D time.

that would not be infinite in 4d right? But will be greater than infinite 3d space and so equals to uncountable infinity.
My point is tier 2a just have infinite number of boxes like them which should be equals to infinite sized box. I can't explain it in better way than this...

I think you are mixing it up, let me explain it to you simpler.
For tier 2, the timeline must be infinite that's a standing rule.

Now it does not matter whether the space is infinite or not, as long as it is at least observable universe sized.

So here a single infinite/or not 4D = low 2-C.

Infinite amount of low 2-C = 2-A.

It's that infinite spacetime continuum ( infinite sized 4d container) = infinite number of spacetime continuum (infinite number of 4d containers) and so should be added in tier 2a
I guess that pain would understand it giving some thought. May will take a while though.

See I get your point now after cracking my brain and reading it over and over again and I already said, it does not work that way.
You need an infinite sized container(timeline) for low 2-C to begin with, if it is anything less than infinite, it will be High 3-A.
And for 2-A, you need an infinite amount of infinite sized container(timeline)

 

[PrinceofPein]

Pain_to12:

What do you think should be done here?

I believe he just misunderstood the tiering but I have tried explaining it to him, I don't know if he will understand it tho

 

[ImmortalDread]

It's that infinite spacetime continuum ( infinite sized 4d container) = infinite number of spacetime continuum (infinite number of 4d containers) and so should be added in tier 2a
I guess that pain would understand it giving some thought. May will take a while though.

Honestly, you let me shake my brain infinite times, but No, infinite-sized 4D is not 2-A. Infinite of the 4D universes is 2-A. The timeline should be infinite to even get a low 2-C (a solid rule).

 

[Tatsumi504]

It's that infinite spacetime continuum ( infinite sized 4d container) = infinite number of spacetime continuum (infinite number of 4d containers)

Hmm, yeah, don't get offended but I want you read this again and ask your self how it makes sense. The former is an element in a set while the latter is the set itself.

Finite 3D+1 space-time = infinite 3D+1 space-time because both contain uncountable infinite snapshots of 3D space. The size of that 3D space doesn't matter.

Furthermore, a multiverse isn't exactly a space time continuum, its 4D space. I honestly don't understand how you're equating the two

 

[Reiner04]

Man I was gone for a while and there is alot of mess already. I'll say that only staff and pain or only those who are allowed by staff members should play further. It just so that thread don't get messy.

 

[Sus]

Bruh moment

 

[Reiner04]

A space time continuum is not 4D space, it is 3D space and 1D time.

That's a continuum of spacetime or 4 dimensional coordinate system, spacetime continuum suggested by Elbert Einstein is a 4d model.

For tier 2, the timeline must be infinite that's a standing rule.

It is not and I can guarantee that, universe starts with big bang and collapse because of expansion in the end. A universe can have age and die in the end, it's just that it can be divided into uncountable infinite snapshots of 3d space.

See I get your point now after cracking my brain and reading it over and over again and I already said, it does not work that way.
You need an infinite sized container(timeline) for low 2-C to begin with, if it is anything less than infinite, it will be High 3-A.
And for 2-A, you need an infinite amount of infinite sized container(timeline)

Timeline sure have uncountable infinite snapshots but it's not infinite by default.

 

[Sus]

Where did the "timelines have to be infinite" rule come from?

 

[Reiner04]

Honestly, you let me shake my brain infinite times, but No, infinite-sized 4D is not 2-A. Infinite of the 4D universes is 2-A. The timeline should be infinite to even get a low 2-C (a solid rule).

Then big bang and end of the universe shouldn't be a thing in the first place. Timeline can be divided into uncountably infinite snapshots, just like one can divide total numbers of real number between 1 and 2 uncountably infinite times doesn't mean 1 to 2 is infinite, it's have start and end but can be divided infinitely, same as timeline.

 

[Reiner04]

Where did the "timelines have to be infinite" rule come from?

I don't know getting it today, timeline can have start as big bang and can have end due to collapse of the universe. It's just it can be divided uncountably infinite times.

 

[Sus]

Even a single second of a timeline has uncountably infinite snapshots

 

[Reiner04]

Even a single second of a timeline has uncountably infinite snapshots

Yes bruh at last someone understood

 

[Vietthai96]

What he mean is, an infinite-sized universe along with its time axis should be 2-A. The reason for it is
1. Right now we treat 2-A is infinite low 2-C, however Low 2-C requirement is at least observable-sized universe space-time continuum/timeline
2. Now talking about High 3-A, high 3-A is infinite-sized universe without time in the mix, at the same time you can also say it is infinite amount of observable-sized universes
3. From the reasoning above, which leading to, if high 3-A is just infinite amount of observable-sized universes sit with each other, then it is similar, which 2-A is infinite amount of Low 2-Cs sitting together to form infinite "multiverse", so affecting and infinite-sized universe with its time axis is the same as infinite amount of observable-sized universe space-time continuums

Then big bang and end of the universe shouldn't be a thing in the first place. Timeline can be divided into uncountably infinite snapshots, just like one can divide total numbers of real number between 1 and 2 uncountably infinite times doesn't mean 1 to 2 is infinite, it's have start and end but can be divided infinitely, same as timeline.

The thing is, we don't default every fiction timeline to be the same as big bang, some fiction have the start of time but it still "infinitely long"

 

[Sus]

The thing is, we don't default every fiction timeline to be the same as big bang, some fiction have the start of time but it still "infinitely long"

Since when bruh

 

[Sus]

Also, destroying 2 infinite 3D universes > destroying 1

We simply don't have a tier for it the same as tier 2 because there's barely any verse where all universes share the same timeline

 

[Reiner04]

What he mean is, an infinite-sized universe along with its time axis should be 2-A. The reason for it is
1. Right now we treat 2-A is infinite low 2-C, however Low 2-C requirement is at least observable-sized universe space-time continuum/timeline
2. Now talking about High 3-A, high 3-A is infinite-sized universe without time in the mix, at the same time you can also say it is infinite amount of observable-sized universes
3. From the reasoning above, which leading to, if high 3-A is just infinite amount of observable-sized universes sit with each other, then it is similar, which 2-A is infinite amount of Low 2-Cs sitting together to form infinite "multiverse", so affecting and infinite-sized universe with its time axis is the same as infinite amount of observable-sized universe space-time continuums

Yes all 3 points are well. Just add that all 3d spaces are set along infinite time. Not finite like start with bigbang and end with collapse. You also understood my point, very grateful.

 

[Reiner04]

The thing is, we don't default every fiction timeline to be the same as big bang, some fiction have the start of time but it still "infinitely long"

Infinitely keep going is not same as it being infinite. And as universes theorised to death at the end because of expansion due to dark energy which causes collapse it's not by default case.

 

[KLOL506]

What he mean is, an infinite-sized universe along with its time axis should be 2-A. The reason for it is
1. Right now we treat 2-A is infinite low 2-C, however Low 2-C requirement is at least observable-sized universe space-time continuum/timeline
2. Now talking about High 3-A, high 3-A is infinite-sized universe without time in the mix, at the same time you can also say it is infinite amount of observable-sized universes
3. From the reasoning above, which leading to, if high 3-A is just infinite amount of observable-sized universes sit with each other, then it is similar, which 2-A is infinite amount of Low 2-Cs sitting together to form infinite "multiverse", so affecting and infinite-sized universe with its time axis is the same as infinite amount of observable-sized universe space-time continuums

The thing is, we don't default every fiction timeline to be the same as big bang, some fiction have the start of time but it still "infinitely long"

Yeah I don't see why we should default to this unless a verse shows explicit statements as such. That's a hefty tall order to assume as the default standard.

 

[Reiner04]

Ok I guess most people have at last understood what I meant, topic can continue from here without difficulty.

 

[Reiner04]

Pain_to12:

What do you think should be done here?

Ant, can you tag other knowledgeable members as well so that they can look at this?

 

[Vietthai96]

Anyway, i need to go to sleep, but iirc Ultima is planning to revise Tier 2 anyway