• 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.

Tiering system and science

Berhann

143
61
Are outerversal,hyperversal, alternate timelines, infinite amount of hierarchies, tiering system and that kind of things in vs wiki, scientific theories or backed up by science or has anything to do with science or are they just some random terms created so we can scale characters?

Like are immeasurable, infinite speed,hierarchies a thing in science?

If they are how can I find the theories or researches behind them?
 
Yeah it can all be converted into math. But most of the stuff is theoretical and not applicable in real life but it's still math.
 
No. The higher end of the tiering system is primarily based on mathematical models from Set Theory, not scientific models.
I believe the only tier in tier 1 with a somewhat scientific basis is High 1-C, which is based on the number of dimensions in string theory being at least 10 and M theory/some string theory interpretations being 11. So that’s the tier the universe/multiverse would be if it’s infinitely large along all dimensions.
 
Blahblah9755 said:
No. The higher end of the tiering system is primarily based on mathematical models from Set Theory, not scientific models.
I believe the only tier in tier 1 with a somewhat scientific basis is High 1-C, which is based on the number of dimensions in string theory being at least 10 and M theory/some string theory interpretations being 11. So that’s the tier the universe/multiverse would be if it’s infinitely large along all dimensions.
Click to expand...
Arent tier 0 just really highs alephs?
 
Fun stuff!!!

List of large cardinal properties - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
A simple note:
From what I can get, 1-A is an aleph number, High 1-A is an Inaccessable cardnality, and Teir 0 is mahlo cardinals or greater. SADLY I've been asking about this for ages and no ******* mod is willing to come out and definitively say "You need a Mahlo or greater cardinality of transcendences in order ot be teir 0."

if that IS the case, then you should be able to easily construct an entire teir 0 universe with ONE sentence of world building:
"These characters exist in a realm that is a Rank-Into-Rank Cardinality of trascendtial layers above baseline existence." and you instantly have an entity taht's higher into teir 0 than ANY teir zero on the site.

BUT none of the moderators have answered this. I think becuase they're scared of enabling writers to make super ease and 100% definitive way in which to construct high teirs. They want it to be vague and neubelous and rely upon esoteric stuff in paragraphs and paragraphs and chapters of world building becuase the thought that Azaroth could be one shot by a being who's wholely described in three sentences is upsetting.

or something.

i don't know.

I just want a hecking response. ;-;
 
weeOriginal said:
Fun stuff!!!

List of large cardinal properties - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
A simple note:
From what I can get, 1-A is an aleph number, High 1-A is an Inaccessable cardnality, and Teir 0 is mahlo cardinals or greater. SADLY I've been asking about this for ages and no ******* mod is willing to come out and definitively say "You need a Mahlo or greater cardinality of transcendences in order ot be teir 0."

if that IS the case, then you should be able to easily construct an entire teir 0 universe with ONE sentence of world building:
"These characters exist in a realm that is a Rank-Into-Rank Cardinality of trascendtial layers above baseline existence." and you instantly have an entity taht's higher into teir 0 than ANY teir zero on the site.

BUT none of the moderators have answered this. I think becuase they're scared of enabling writers to make super ease and 100% definitive way in which to construct high teirs. They want it to be vague and neubelous and rely upon esoteric stuff in paragraphs and paragraphs and chapters of world building becuase the thought that Azaroth could be one shot by a being who's wholely described in three sentences is upsetting.

or something.

i don't know.

I just want a hecking response. ;-;
Click to expand...
Why tf would they want there to be less tier 0s bruh? Tier 0s are boring anyway.
 
weeOriginal said:
Fun stuff!!!

List of large cardinal properties - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
A simple note:
From what I can get, 1-A is an aleph number, High 1-A is an Inaccessable cardnality, and Teir 0 is mahlo cardinals or greater. SADLY I've been asking about this for ages and no ******* mod is willing to come out and definitively say "You need a Mahlo or greater cardinality of transcendences in order ot be teir 0."

if that IS the case, then you should be able to easily construct an entire teir 0 universe with ONE sentence of world building:
"These characters exist in a realm that is a Rank-Into-Rank Cardinality of trascendtial layers above baseline existence." and you instantly have an entity taht's higher into teir 0 than ANY teir zero on the site.

BUT none of the moderators have answered this. I think becuase they're scared of enabling writers to make super ease and 100% definitive way in which to construct high teirs. They want it to be vague and neubelous and rely upon esoteric stuff in paragraphs and paragraphs and chapters of world building becuase the thought that Azaroth could be one shot by a being who's wholely described in three sentences is upsetting.

or something.

i don't know.

I just want a hecking response. ;-;
Click to expand...
... you know that our strongest verse (they arent here because the controversy) are literally the strongest in the wiki or fiction because hard mathematics and the writers being mathematchians
 
Livinmeme said:
... you know that our strongest verse (they arent here because the controversy) are literally the strongest in the wiki or fiction because hard mathematics and the writers being mathematchians
Click to expand...
the strongest verses on the wiki are: mythos, umineko, TES, twin peaks, world of darkness etc. (mathyverse is a place)
 
So are aleph numbers,carinals, cardnality and these type of things actually used while scaling characters or these are just the reasons, explanations behind what scaling is and what it is based off?
 
Berhann said:
So are aleph numbers,carinals, cardnality and these type of things actually used while scaling characters or these are just the reasons, explanations behind what scaling is and what it is based off?
Click to expand...
No those are actual thing in math and they are used to scale characters.
 
Livinmeme said:
You said that white ligth is from twin peaks wich is not. i am refering to ruckerverse whith ligth and if that is the cases "wich i heavilly doubt" then twin peaks can get big buffs depending on the context
Click to expand...
ah, my confusion came cus the supreme being of TP is called "Clear light" so i confused it, but yea never heard of ruckerverse, is it from a game, book, VN?
 
Livinmeme said:
Heavily based math verse
Click to expand...
How so?
Does it explicitely state the cardinality of transcendences?
Because if they have something greater than the Wholeness Axiom or Rank Into Rank, should that be published somewhere?

And the mathiverse isn't nesscarily the strongest: our universe also contains all mathematics, but is it explicitely stated that there is that number of transcendences?

And how does twin peaks surpass rank into rank cardinalities? Do you have an actual proof of this or is this just a blanket statement?
 
weeOriginal said:
How so?
Does it explicitely state the cardinality of transcendences?
Because if they have something greater than the Wholeness Axiom or Rank Into Rank, should that be published somewhere?

And the mathiverse isn't nesscarily the strongest: our universe also contains all mathematics, but is it explicitely stated that there is that number of transcendences?

And how does twin peaks surpass rank into rank cardinalities? Do you have an actual proof of this or is this just a blanket statement?
Click to expand...
I heard TWL scales to Cantor's view of Axiomatic Absolute Infinity(dont know much but where would it scale?)
 
Savior said:
I heard TWL scales to Cantor's view of Axiomatic Absolute Infinity(dont know much but where would it scale?)
Click to expand...
Vsb doesn't use cantors absolute infinite as a scale it would depend on the sub math the verse has.

(In this case absolute infinite is bigger than the lower inaccessible cardinals so that means their atleast in the level of the strongly inaccessible or mahlo cardinal.)

Also are you sav nub in yt?
 
Berhann said:
So are aleph numbers,carinals, cardnality and these type of things actually used while scaling characters or these are just the reasons, explanations behind what scaling is and what it is based off?
Click to expand...
Sometimes they use it literally sometimes it is used as a reference point it could be either.
(I'd say they mostly use latter 1 though.)
 
Last edited:
weeOriginal said:
And the mathiverse isn't nesscarily the strongest: our universe also contains all mathematics, but is it explicitely stated that there is that number of transcendences?

And how does twin peaks surpass rank into rank cardinalities? Do you have an actual proof of this or is this just a blanket statement?
Click to expand...
I never heard of this two being this strong, can someone give info?
 
weeOriginal said:
How so?
Does it explicitely state the cardinality of transcendences?
Because if they have something greater than the Wholeness Axiom or Rank Into Rank, should that be published somewhere?

And the mathiverse isn't nesscarily the strongest: our universe also contains all mathematics, but is it explicitely stated that there is that number of transcendences?

And how does twin peaks surpass rank into rank cardinalities? Do you have an actual proof of this or is this just a blanket statement?
Click to expand...
Anyways i don't really see the guy saying it has those cardinals or axioms nor that it surpass it he just said heavy math stuff and not something like biggest or strongest math stuff since this 2 are pretty much the highest math you can have at the moment.

Reinhardt and Berkeley is laughing at the corner.

So just asking how did you come to such conclusion?
 
Savior said:
I heard TWL scales to Cantor's view of Axiomatic Absolute Infinity(dont know much but where would it scale?)
Click to expand...
Outside of vsb this is pretty op but inside vsb this is pretty baseline 0 because ot the fact that vsb doesn't seem to treat Cantors absolute infinite means that it has all large cardinals.

Bassically the cardinals only mentioned in the verse would be the cardinals it has, in this case twl has inaccessible cardinals in the verse and absolute infinite is bigger than this, vsb would treat this as baseline 0 because of it being significantly bigger than lower inaccessible cardinals.

(So really just depends on the sub-math.)

Though this is just what i heard from it.
 
Cat said:
Outside of vsb this is pretty op but inside vsb this is pretty baseline 0 because ot the fact that vsb doesn't seem to treat Cantors absolute infinite means that it has all large cardinals.

Bassically the cardinals only mentioned in the verse would be the cardinals it has, in this case twl has inaccessible cardinals in the verse and absolute infinite is bigger than this, vsb would treat this as baseline 0 because of it being significantly bigger than lower inaccessible cardinals.

(So really just depends on the sub-math.)

Though this is just what i heard from it.
Click to expand...
I see , thanks ! I did hear that VSBW doesnt accept Absolute Inf withouut further concept
Also can i know why alot of people say Mathiverse is strong asf?
 
Savior said:
I see , thanks ! Also can i know why alot of people say Mathiverse is strong asf?
Click to expand...
KakarotGoku said:
Vsb doesn't use cantors absolute infinite as a scale it would depend on the sub math the verse has.

(In this case absolute infinite is bigger than the lower inaccessible cardinals so that means their atleast in the level of the strongly inaccessible or mahlo cardinal.)

Also are you sav nub in yt?
Click to expand...
Yeah , i did hear that vsbw doesnt accept Cantor's view without context ,

Yeah i am
 
Berhann said:
Are outerversal,hyperversal, alternate timelines, infinite amount of hierarchies, tiering system and that kind of things in vs wiki, scientific theories or backed up by science or has anything to do with science or are they just some random terms created so we can scale characters?

Like are immeasurable, infinite speed,hierarchies a thing in science?

If they are how can I find the theories or researches behind them?
Click to expand...
The concept of dimension is something taken directly from math and it is something that you can study starting from "linear algebra" with the basic concept of multidimensional vector space, and going further with multivariable functions. It's not mandatory to study all of that, it is sufficient to simply understand the geometrical meaning, that is what you really need in this forum.

The words "outerversal","hyperversal",etc. are made-up for the characters tiering, they have nothing of scientific.

The concept of "alternative timelines" or "multiverse" instead, is a physics theory that doesn't have any type of confirmation, but it is vastly used in fiction.

Regarding the various speed nomenclatures "immesurable","infinite",etc. they don't have any meaning at scientific level, since the speed of light is an physical limit defined by the principles of relativity. They state that no information can travel faster than light. The only exception is given by the quantum teleportation which, thanks to the quantum entanglement, permits to tranfer instantaniously a information (state) from a quantum particle (e.g. photon) to another quantum particle (another photon) which is entangled with the first. Anyway in this case we are not talking about movement, but instantaneous teleportation (even if the two particles are at galaxies of distance), so it is a completely different thing.
You can find a lot of books,websites, youtube videos, that explain relativity and quantum teleportation also at scientific populurization level.

edit: Oops, the original message of the OP is older than I expected. Well, too late, lol.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Firestorm808
Acceptable Narrative Examples of "Uncountably Infinite" Addition to the Tiering System Explanation Page
Replies
19
Views
3K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
  • Locked
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account
Replies
6
Views
1K
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
EL_xWatcher1234x
What tier is this cosmology ?
Replies
32
Views
4K
EL_xWatcher1234x
EL_xWatcher1234x
GarrixianXD
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account UwU
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
Epiccheev
Epiccheev
Nexus_still_slams
Question about FAQ and Tiering System
Replies
0
Views
1K
Nexus_still_slams
Nexus_still_slams
Back
Top