• 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.

Timeless Voids Standards Issues (Staff only)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm somewhat against it, but the justification on the OP is something I heavily disagree with. We've never considered author intent and I don't get why we should suddenly start to care. If it gets contradicted, then we do exactly like any other similar feat and say it's an outlier.

If people can move within a timeless void because they have "a strong heart" or whatever we just consider it as the ability to move in timeless voids, exactly like we do with people who can move in stopped time. The only argument here that holds some water is proving mathematically that moving in a place without time means infinite speed, something I'm not going to get involved with.

We just need to make our standards stricter, we don't need to erase everything doesn't fully work if we can just fix it.
 
I pretty much already explained why the strong heart thing was Antoniofer not giving the full context above. There was more to it than just what he tried making it seem like to better his points in the OP. Anyway, I agree with Kukui's judgment on this.

Also, the OP didn't really give a solid argument against the mathematical justifications on the page so that's just more reasoning for it to stay realistically.
 
TriforcePower1 said:
I'm somewhat against it, but the justification on the OP is something I heavily disagree with. We've never considered author intent and I don't get why we should suddenly start to care. If it gets contradicted, then we do exactly like any other similar feat and say it's an outlier.
Click to expand...
Im in complete 110% agreement with this. Lets not cherry pick author intent when it suits some of us more than others, especially when we have never applied and used it to begin with.

Unless we want to upgrade/downgrade a lot of verses who would be effected by author intent, it shouldn't be used here to determine the purpose of a timeless void within a verse.
 
The math is also flawed, time not existing or flowing in a void doesn't mean that in the formula, s=d/t, t equals 0. It should mean that t equals indefinite.

In a timeless void: a character is traveling x distance over an indefinite amount of time. Speed is not infinite, it is just unknown.
 
There can't be indefinite time within a place that has no time at all. You can't represent something that's supposed to be non-existent in a particular location.

If anything, there's only indefinite time when time exists but it's not flowing.
 
No, t is not indefinite. It's 0. That's literally how it works because time is not flowing and is at a complete stop. They are moving at distances in zero time. The definition of infinite speed.
 
I have already explained why this is graphically correct as graphs are also used to depict rates of speed as a constant. The equation only has it as undefined because mathematicians view the idea of "divide by zero" as irrelevant and nonsensical to capitalize on so it is still fine to use.
 
How can you measure someone moved from point A to point B when there is no time to measure?

Characters fight, talk, think etc. all inside voids. Are we saying all these things happened in exactly zero seconds or they happened in an indefinite amount of time?
 
I agree with Antvasima and Kukui that shouldn't just delete the page, there needs to be an explanation regardless of whether or not we decide to get stricter. Even if we nuke the void types and just say none of it is applicable, we'd still need explanations for why that isn't the case.

I'm going to remain neutral on raising or lowering restrictions, but I will say this. Just because moving in a true void may be considered an Infinite speed feat doesn't quite mean it isn't an Outlier.
 
That would just mean the movements are happening instantaneously logically. If you are literally doing something with no time passage, it means that your actions don't require finite limits which is just common sense. DontTalk explained this rather well with his GER example.

Yes and this is just fiction being fiction. We literally already explained by the logic you're using, Dragon Ball characters might as well not be FTL. That's not really a problem with the void rather than fiction just ignore some logic stupidly.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Just because moving in a true void may be considered an Infinite speed feat doesn't quite mean it isn't an Outlier.
Click to expand...
I mean I agree with this sentiment too but people were literally saying in the Kingdom Hearts thread that just because there were finite speed feats that it automatically debunked it just because we as a site wanted to prioritize statistics of Infinite speed in every scenario rather than understanding the author is just disregarding something to make a better narrative in their perspective. This is ultimately one of the problems is the evaluation people keep using to determine what is and isn't infinite.
 
@ploz

Those things are only happening instantaneously to an observer outside the void where time is flowing. They are not happening instantly or being perceived as instant to the people who are inside the void.

A person who is moving with true infinite speed will be observed as moving as such in any frame, whether inside the void or outside the void.
 
That would be because the people inside the void are literally comparable to them, that's not a refute to my point whatsoever. If you're acknowledging it's like that to the observer, you're quite frankly admitting that it's going to apply that way as way infinite speed. Let me put this in terms of something simpler to understand. If a character is talking at the speed of light to another character at the speed of light, does that debunk them being the speed of light? Because that's the logic being attributed here.

Why would they be perceived like that exactly...? Is there any sort of actual reasoning or are you just going to throw out conjecture?
 
Im just going to reiterate a point I made earlier:

"i'm not even taking into account that PIS is a factor, or, that it's an outlier for characters with finite speed to even be in the same area code of speed with the former. Not every inconsistency has to end with the higher-end character being the issue.

If a 2-A was, out of nowhere, harmed by a 5-B, you wouldn't immediately jump to the 2-A being the outlier would you?"
 
The characters in the void can move at any speed, infinite or finite, it doesn't matter, to anyone outside the void it happened instantly.

The assumption that everyone in the void is moving at infinite speed because there is no time flowing is a wrong conclusion. The correct one is, everyone is moving an an indefinite speed because it is impossible to measure speed without time.
 
Except there literally is no idea of finite movement in a void, that's literally why the idea is that the "t" value is an equated variable to zero. You're point quite literally ignores this as it would be that in perception of the void, yes, anything you would do to anybody else would be perceived because you'd literally be on a similar level as them. That's not a reason to go against it or else we literally go back to the idea that by your logic, a character moving at the speed of light shouldn't be able to hear another character moving at the speed of light and if they do, they aren't capable of moving at the speed of light. The premise is incorrect because it's assuming you can't have dialogue with characters that are comparable to you. And yes, it will happen instantly outside the void because it's infinite speed, thank you for literally supporting what I'm saying.

There is no such thing as "indefinite speed", I literally explained the logic to you above about how this works. If your actions don't require any time passage, they are quite literally going to be instantaneous when they happen because it doesn't require a timeframe. The Speed page literally notes, "travel anywhere instantly" which is what this effectively grants. I'd like to note you literally said this earlier in your comments you're effectively agreeing with me. You need to actually provide why it's more logical, you're just saying it is without any actual reasoning.
 
what if it's possible for most people to move in a void, but some users can become infinite/immeasurable by utilizing the void in a certain manner? Is it still a true void?
 
My premise is that you cannot measure speed inside a place that has no time to measure. It has nothing to do with whether characters can have dialogue. Characters can move at any speed and we wouldn't know because there's no way to know how much time has passed.

Also let's have it that in the void characters have infinite speed, its a large assumption to say that characters were able to move through a void because they have the capacity to move any distance in zero seconds, and rather than anyone that moves in a void will move at infinite speed regardless of their capability to do so outside a void.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Might as well repeat the classic saying. Just because someone can swim in water, doesn't mean they can swim on land.
Click to expand...
I like this analogy. Those who use the void to become infinite are like those using hydrobikes to ride the water and on land.
 
I quote, "Characters fight, talk, think etc. all inside voids. Are we saying all these things happened in exactly zero seconds or they happened in an indefinite amount of time?" I was addressing one of your examples, there's a difference. The logic realistically doesn't change because you can substitute like literally any of those words into there and it still encapsulates the flawed logic. And I repeat, can you provide why you cannot do so? If your actions require a timeframe, you wouldn't be able to perform actions because there is no time passage. That's literally the point and you keep missing it. There is no "Well you can move at any speed in a void" because if we're implying any sort of finite results, you're implying there's a progression of time which is physically impossible in a place without time.

Why would they only be able to move at infinite speed in one place? Why does it change it change when you immediately go to one place to another? These are things, again, you need to provide a reason for. You're labeling it as "a large assumption" for no reason when that's a blanket statement by definition. I don't see what's wrong with the idea. The feat itself is fine, the only thing that would literally need evaluation is just the consistency of it. Your idea is posing the feat itself is incorrect without any substantial justification. Sagan standard says "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" so you would you mind producing that evidence?
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Also let's have it that in the void characters have infinite speed, its a large assumption to say that characters were able to move through a void because they have the capacity to move any distance in zero seconds, and rather than anyone that moves in a void will move at infinite speed regardless of their capability to do so outside a void.
Click to expand...
If everyone and their mother can move in a timeless void like it's a playground, there are other explanations that are just as or even more likely.

1.) It's an outlier for those characters in question.

2.) It's PIS for those characters in question

3.) The void isn't a real void, especially if just anyone can just waltz their way in.
 
Only you are ignoring in this case that time is NOT passing. We don't have to know how much time is passing because we know under these circumstances that time isn't passing at all. This is why t=0 here, please understand this as you seem to keep ignoring the fact that there is no time. If other characters can interact with each other, that's due to being comprable to each other which is pretty simple to understand.

This is again an issue that shouldn't really be used here at all. This is essentially "we see no other feats comprable to this outside of the void" which applies to any basic feat of if this character hasn't shown this feat again or slower in canon. If nothing contradicts that feat they did in the void, then it stays. It isn't an assumption because no matter the distance they moved inside that void, they did it in zero time because time is at a halt.
 
Okay and you realize that analogy is addressing that there is a fundamental difference between solids and liquids right? The reason why someone can't swim on land compared to water is because they don't have a surface allowing them to float and move their legs and freely swim. That in no way is comparable to a timeless void feat. Now, can you tell me why this type of logic would apply to timeless voids? Or else I can literally abuse this type of logic by saying that Sonic's speed is only Massively Hypersonic+ on a mountain but FTL on land. Obviously that makes no sense and you have to draw the correlation.
 
PlozAlcachaz said:
Okay and you realize that analogy is addressing that there is a fundamental difference between solids and liquids right? Now, can you tell me why this type of logic would apply to timeless voids? Or else I can literally abuse this type of logic by saying that Sonic's speed is only Massively Hypersonic+ on a mountain but FTL on land. Obviously that makes no sense and you have to draw the correlation.
Click to expand...
He's saying that you can't immediately correlate moving in a timeless realm with being infinite; you need to first have an established ability that makes you infinite, otherwise it's not a true void.

What you're comparing this to is a major false equivalence because he proposed two states of matter, and you've provided one. A mountain is just as solid as the land, water is a liquid. You can't do the same things in a liquid as you can on a solid. You can't dive bomb into the mountain as a human like you could in water.
 
You guys are operating on this idea that in a void, no one should be able to move because there is no time, and therefore when people are able to move they do so because they have the ability to move to any distance instantaneously.

This is more believable than, in a void, because of its nature of being timeless, you can't measure any speed at all.

Or

That it's more believable than, in a void, because id its nature if being timeless, any movement will be at infinite speed.
 
I say it's a case by case thing. For example, timeless void A doesn't allow for anyone to move because time = 0, and timeless void B does allow for people to move inside it, but they cannot interact with the outside world, and therefore they don't have infinite speed.

This is just for normal civilians though. Someone with infinite speed is allowed to move in the first timeless void, and with a certain power associated with void B, you can interact with the outside world while time is zero.
 
Which I don't agree with. I'm talking in terms we're automatically assuming it's a true void first of all, I'm not positing any claim that all voids are timeless because the World of Void is a prime example of something that's not. But why do they need an established other infinite speed feat for it to be on that level? That sounds very counterproductive to even have it listed as something that makes you infinite in speed if you're not applying it as a potential reasoning. Therefore, the analogy still is incorrect.

I think you missed the point entirely. I'm saying the logic train he had wasn't well defined and that I could apply that idea erroneously to situations that it doesn't apply. You're looking at what I said too literally and analyzing the wrong meaning entirely into a false nitpick.
 
Yes, because you literally need to have a timeframe passage for events to occur. What do you think you see when you see this? In 1 second, this guy would cross 10 meters as a theoretical person. There is a constant rate for his progression as his speed is finite, meaning he requires a timeframe for his actions. Now if you literally take somebody that doesn't have to move for their actions with x being zero since it was our "t" for this example, you get a theoretical person who doesn't need that rate of time to progress. A void's nature would literally be the thing to make or break whether or not you have infinite speed, that is the entire point of the page and why it matters to the speed rating.

We've already provided why people doing finite actions wouldn't be capable of moving in it. This is simply a case of you can or can't do it, I don't understand why there is such a confusion here. I'm not trying to sound rude or condescending, but I can't even understand how the idea that something has these properties is the make or break factor that just gets checked out on whether or not it's ultimately consistent. As Kukui said as well, it's not automatically even the fault of the void if the character is inconsistent. You're incorrectly labeling the onus in this scenario.
 
Unless the verse in question specifically states that you cannot move in a void without the ability to move at infinite speed, you can't claim someone has infinite speed for moving in a void. It's just a huge jump in conclusions. It's like saying someone who can stop time has infinite speed because when you stop time you can't move, so in order to move they have to have infinite speed. It's just jumping through conclusions and making assumptions about physics that doesn't exist in the real world.


Now that we've been talking about this, I say that a character that shows that they can move in a void should get "void mobility" aka the ability to move in voids. We shoudln't assume that they have infinite speed.
 
This is literally the whole Author Intent argument all over again. I'm not going to repeat myself with this part. Terrible example, we've already explained that time stop doesn't count because people aren't often affected by their own ability. If it doesn't work on a person, then it's a resistance to time stop. Don't compare fiction to reality always, this isn't even related to physics that much.
 
It's not author intent arugment because I didn't once invoke what the author wanted to convey.

The author could very well wanted to prove that their characters are infinite speed by having them move in a void, but unless they specifically stated or showed that you need infinite speed to move in a void, there's no evidence to say that characters move at infinite speed.
 
Yes it is, same argument with different wording. You're claiming unless the verse says you need infinite speed in order to move in the void, then it isn't infinite speed. This is outright the same previous argument. As in "unless the author has their characters speed for this feat in mind, we cannot use it". This is basically what's being used. This bad logic applies to almost everything but speed. I'm sorry, but these arguments are just so nitpicky that we need WOG is downright false.
 
Okay, I'll play ball with your idea. Now, can you list me a single verse that does this? If you can't, then your train of thought obviously has like no subscription to it.

Back on topic though, no, you don't need a statement for that. I already explained to you why someone with finite speed cannot logically move in a void without time. If their actions require time to pass and no time is passing, through logic, it's pretty obvious they wouldn't move in a true void. Your logic would literally anyone that enters a timeless void just automatically reactive evos to its qualities and will somehow passively defy logic and do a finite speed feat in there. You're giving literally any character who can move in a timeless void Reactive Evolution and passive Logic Manipulation with this idea so if you want to apply it like that, go ahead.

Somebody using their own hax and not being affected by it is literally just how the ability works most of the time, that's not a good example to use here unless we're going to apply a boatload of resistances to everybody just because they're not affected by using an ability.

It's not jumping to conclusions when it's literally using logic AND physics to back the idea, being the speed equation. I've not seen you give any sort of good explanation as to why we should accept your ideas. You're throwing out things without a reason at all to substantiate them and they're wild to say the least.

Okay, we'll have a "Void Mobility" ability when you can give me a good explanation on why they aren't infinite in nature. Give the entire thread a good explanation that debunks the graphs, the mathematics, and the logic everybody has used and we'll talk. You're pulling a complete red herring to the topic since we're trying to discuss the nature of voids here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LordGriffin1000
  • Locked
Human Statistics Scaling Standards in Fiction (Staff Only)
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Spectra_Schiffer
Q about speed
Replies
1
Views
309
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Antvasima
  • Locked
Regarding our Supergenius intelligence statistic (Staff only)
2
Replies
70
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Milly_Rocking_Bandit
  • Locked
Jujutsu Kaisen: The MHS Cap (Staff Only)
Replies
20
Views
3K
Emirp sumitpo
Emirp sumitpo
ByArrow
  • Locked
Is being able to stand and operate in the void enough for void resistance? (Staff Only)
Replies
9
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top