Type 1 Concept for space and dimensions in Honkai

[GarrixianXD]

I think this CRT should rather be straightforward.



It's been said that space and dimensional axes are nothing but "artificial concepts". As space-time and mathematical dimensional axes serve as universal fundamental concepts of reality independent of themselves, any affection towards space-time and dimensions should qualify for Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation, at a Low 1-A scale. Not to mention that the Imaginary Tree is already accepted as possibly Low 1-A as a tier.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

wrong category

 

[GarrixianXD]

wrong category

@Propellus @Duedate8898 sorry guys

 

[Duedate8898]

Moved

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Btw type 1 concepts of dimensions is low 1-A. That's probably important if it's an intrinsic part of the concept and the type.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Btw type 1 concepts of dimensions is low 1-A. That's probably important if it's an intrinsic part of the concept and the type.

Oh dang, thank you.

 

[GarrixianXD]

I think this CRT should rather be straightforward.



It's been said that space and dimensional axes are nothing but "artificial concepts". As space-time and mathematical dimensional axes serve as universal fundamental concepts of reality independent of themselves, any affection towards space-time and dimensions should qualify for Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation, at a Low 1-A scale. Not to mention that the Imaginary Tree is already accepted as possibly Low 1-A as a tier.

@DarkDragonMedeus @Elizhaa @Just_a_Random_Butler @Planck69 @Dereck03 @Catzlaflame @ActuallySpaceMan42 Evals pls.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Guess is looks alright.

 

[deonment]

I think this CRT should rather be straightforward.



It's been said that space and dimensional axes are nothing but "artificial concepts". As space-time and mathematical dimensional axes serve as universal fundamental concepts of reality independent of themselves, any affection towards space-time and dimensions should qualify for Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation, at a Low 1-A scale. Not to mention that the Imaginary Tree is already accepted as possibly Low 1-A as a tier.

I'm just going to say that, no, this isn't what this means, concept here refers to an idea or notion, rather than a universal.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I think this CRT should rather be straightforward.



It's been said that space and dimensional axes are nothing but "artificial concepts". As space-time and mathematical dimensional axes serve as universal fundamental concepts of reality independent of themselves, any affection towards space-time and dimensions should qualify for Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation, at a Low 1-A scale. Not to mention that the Imaginary Tree is already accepted as possibly Low 1-A as a tier.

Nothing here even remotely points to type 1 concepts, the fact that it was called artificial concepts already denotes that it is not a real one which is an argument against your claim and not for your claim

 

[Lord_Farquaad69420]

I agree with pein.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Nothing here even remotely points to type 1 concepts, the fact that it was called artificial concepts already denotes that it is not a real one which is an argument against your claim and not for your claim

Space and dimensions are fundamental concepts that governs all of reality, which is type 1. Artificial meaning not naturally made, and that it can be a concept formulated by humans but it does not necessarily disqualify it being a fundamental concept. Heck, even mathematics were pretty much invented by humans therefore can also be seen as artificial so I’m not understanding your claim.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Space and dimensions are fundamental concepts that governs all of reality, which is type 1. Artificial meaning not naturally made, and that it can be a concept formulated by humans but it does not necessarily disqualify it being a fundamental concept. Heck, even mathematics were pretty much invented by humans therefore can also be seen as artificial so I’m not understanding your claim.

Mathematics was not invented by humans, they are natural laws of the world, studying mathematics =/= inventing mathematics. There was and will always be math even if we all die out.
So if that was you point, then I do not think it stands, but I do not think it is your point, I will point out the op, it is a dialogue that has these statements

I: Do you know how many straight lines can be perpendicular to each other in space?
Carl: The dimensions of space can be unlimited. At this time, just their coordinate axes are already infinite lines perpendicular to each other.......... After all the so called space and straight lines are nothing more than artificial concepts

Walter: Have you forgotten the dimensions of space can be infinite.

This is ignoring the probability statement (can be) all in this claim, which means they are not certain but something that is possibly true. Artificial concepts are things that are not actually experienced but conjured up by the human mind. Do not get me wrong, artificial concepts are concepts nonetheless and that does not make them untrue, but you will need more than this statements to claim space in this context and world extend beyond what was shown in verse and exist independently of the actual space in this verse.

 

[Hasty12345]

Mathematics was not invented by humans, they are natural laws of the world, studying mathematics =/= inventing mathematics.

Isn't this one of the most contentious philosophical topics in mathematics?

 

[GarrixianXD]

Mathematics was not invented by humans, they are natural laws of the world, studying mathematics =/= inventing mathematics. There was and will always be math even if we all die out.
So if that was you point, then I do not think it stands, but I do not think it is your point, I will point out the op, it is a dialogue that has these statements

I: Do you know how many straight lines can be perpendicular to each other in space?
Carl: The dimensions of space can be unlimited. At this time, just their coordinate axes are already infinite lines perpendicular to each other.......... After all the so called space and straight lines are nothing more than artificial concepts

Walter: Have you forgotten the dimensions of space can be infinite.

This is ignoring the probability statement (can be) all in this claim, which means they are not certain but something that is possibly true. Artificial concepts are things that are not actually experienced but conjured up by the human mind. Do not get me wrong, artificial concepts are concepts nonetheless and that does not make them untrue, but you will need more than this statements to claim space in this context and world extend beyond what was shown in verse and exist independently of the actual space in this verse.

First of all, it said "can" and not "could" therefore it does imply a likeliness that makes it a solid hax ability. As for math being an artificial invention or not, not going to debate on that since several sources and mathematicians say otherwise. It was stated that space and dimensions are concepts themselves in the context I've presented, so there's no separation between the concept and the "object", therefore there isn't even an "object" in the first place but rather an independent concept that shapes all of reality. Space-time and dimensions aren't bounded by bubble worlds; as destroying those worlds won't affect space and time itself, therefore it is an independent concept.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Isn't this one of the most contentious philosophical topics in mathematics?

Not at all, it is a silly argument to claim we invented maths, light has been traveling at 3 X 10^8 m/s before the first neanderthal took step, we applied a number convention to it, same with gravity and any laws that relates to physics and maths. They have been here longer than we have and they will be here after we go extinct.

First of all, it said "can" and not "could" therefore it does imply a likeliness that makes it a solid hax ability.

Semantics, means the same thing, implying a likeness. "I can make this mountain disappear", and "I could make this mountain disappear" means the same thing, something I am likely able to do but have not done.

It was stated that space and dimensions are concepts themselves in the context I've presented, so there's no separation between the concept and the "object", therefore there isn't even an "object" in the first place but rather an independent concept that shapes all of reality. Space-time and dimensions aren't bounded by bubble worlds; as destroying those worlds won't affect space and time itself, therefore it is an independent concept.

"After all the so called space and straight lines are nothing more than artificial concepts"
where exactly are your claims stated in this statement? Or are there other scans aside this one? I will like you to substantiate your claims. The concept of space unless stated otherwise is within the confines of what was shown in the verse.

 

[Hasty12345]

Not at all, it is a silly argument to claim we invented maths, light has been traveling at 3 X 10^8 m/s before the first neanderthal took step, we applied a number convention to it, same with gravity and any laws that relates to physics and maths. They have been here longer than we have and they will be here after we go extinct.

I don't wish to engage in this debate too heavily, however, equating the physical laws of physics to the "discoveries" of math based on axioms and laws of deduction doesn't really work.

And pardon me if I don't take your personal stance on the topic as gospel, a 2 second google search will tell you it's contentious with different schools of thought having different takes on the question.

I think any valid argument from the opposing side should avoid asserting an unverifiable, heavily contentious philosophical position that's actively debated in academia as fact to make their point.

 

[Woomica]

I think this CRT should rather be straightforward.



It's been said that space and dimensional axes are nothing but "artificial concepts". As space-time and mathematical dimensional axes serve as universal fundamental concepts of reality independent of themselves, any affection towards space-time and dimensions should qualify for Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation, at a Low 1-A scale. Not to mention that the Imaginary Tree is already accepted as possibly Low 1-A as a tier.

Picku mater...
Your kitchen rn:

 

[NARONG_SUVAN]

Isn’t it’s artificial concept because “concept of space” that human understand is just one of many (wrong) way to interpret universe in Honkai?

Before the theory of Imaginary Tree was put forward, the universe had been addressed as "a void and indiscernible object" because of its undetectable nature.

So space is just made up concept make by human to explain universes that why it’s artificial and in reality space is imaginary tree?

 

[PrinceofPein]

I don't wish to engage in this debate too heavily, however, equating the physical laws of physics to the "discoveries" of math based on axioms and laws of deduction doesn't really work.

And pardon me if I don't take your personal stance on the topic as gospel, a 2 second google search will tell you it's contentious with different schools of thought having different takes on the question.

I think any valid argument from the opposing side should avoid asserting an unverifiable, heavily contentious philosophical position that's actively debated in academia as fact to make their point.

Take it to the message walls?

 

[Hasty12345]

Take it to the message walls?

I don't wish to engage in this debate too heavily

 

[GarrixianXD]

"After all the so called space and straight lines are nothing more than artificial concepts"
where exactly are your claims stated in this statement? Or are there other scans aside this one? I will like you to substantiate your claims. The concept of space unless stated otherwise is within the confines of what was shown in the verse.

I think you're taking the wrong idea. It's space-time and dimensions itself are concepts, not the concepts of those. Bubble universes have undoubtedly been destroyed in the verse and that's self-evident, and it did not affect the entirety of space or time. Therefore, space-time are self-evidently independent concepts. Not even the Imaginary Tree or Sea of Quanta confines space or time.

 

[CodeCCLL]

I think you're taking the wrong idea. It's space-time and dimensions itself are concepts, not the concepts of those.

If space-time and dimensions themselves are concepts, what are the objects of these concepts?

Bubble universes have undoubtedly been destroyed in the verse

If you say that the destruction of Bubble universes is the part that legitimizes type 1 concepts, there should not be a structure in the verse that takes space-time and dimension concepts as objects other than Bubble universes.

Not even the Imaginary Tree or Sea of Quanta confines space or time.

So Sea of Quanta and Imaginary Tree do not take the concepts of space-time and dimension as objects?

If there is a cosmology page/blog can you share the link?

 

[GarrixianXD]

If space-time and dimensions themselves are concepts, what are the objects of these concepts?

Pretty much everything that isn't qualitatively superior and dimensionless voids.

If you say that the destruction of Bubble universes is the part that legitimizes type 1 concepts, there should not be a structure in the verse that takes space-time and dimension concepts as objects other than Bubble universes.

Type 2 concepts are concepts dependent on the entities itself; type 1 concepts are independent concepts that do not depend on their entities. Bubble universes, imaginary tree, leaf worlds, etc. all participate in the concept and nothing has been said about those entities bound to their concepts. Especially when Otto gained authority over the Imaginary Tree, nothing says that all of space-time was being affected and all.

So Sea of Quanta and Imaginary Tree do not take the concepts of space-time and dimension as objects?

Refer to my last post. Also, I rescind my statement on the Sea of Quanta; SoQ is actually a dimensionless void that doesn't call in the category of being a part of the concept of space and time.

If there is a cosmology page/blog can you share the link?

Hoyoverse Cosmology

vsbattles.fandom.com

The closest we got. Though, don't derail from the main discussion please.

 

[Fixxed]

I dont think "concept" in here mean universal abstraction, i think when they say concept it mean literally concept in their mind

 

[Vietthai96]

Also, I rescind my statement on the Sea of Quanta; SoQ is actually a dimensionless void

Bro, you shot yourself in the foot, if SoQ is a dimensionaless void, it contradicting 11D SoQ statement

Also i going to disagree with argument that math is law of nature, no it isn't, it is simply an abstract tool created by human to measure the law of nature

 

[CodeCCLL]

Type 2 concepts are concepts dependent on the entities itself; type 1 concepts are independent concepts that do not depend on their entities. Bubble universes, imaginary tree, leaf worlds, etc. all participate in the concept and nothing has been said about those entities bound to their concepts. Especially when Otto gained authority over the Imaginary Tree, nothing says that all of space-time was being affected and all.

I just want to know if you are conscious of something. If there is a "space-time concept" that takes the space-time in the entire cosmology as its object, this space-time concept is a type 1 concept if it can continue its existence after the space-time in the entire cosmology is destroyed. If there is a place where space-time still exists even if universes, multiverses are destroyed, you cannot prove that this concept is independent of its relevant objects.

 

[GarrixianXD]

Bro, you shot yourself in the foot, if SoQ is a dimensionaless void, it contradicting 11D SoQ statement

R^11 void

Also i going to disagree with argument that math is law of nature, no it isn't, it is simply an abstract tool created by human to measure the law of nature

Bro talk to Pein

I just want to know if you are conscious of something. If there is a "space-time concept" that takes the space-time in the entire cosmology as its object, this space-time concept is a type 1 concept if it can continue its existence after the space-time in the entire cosmology is destroyed. If there is a place where space-time still exists even if universes, multiverses are destroyed, you cannot prove that this concept is independent of its relevant objects.

hmm… pretty sure Space-Time itself is already treated as the building blocks of reality with its concept already independent of itself from universes; therefore, type 1 concept by default. Philosophically speaking.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

hmm… pretty sure Space-Time itself is already treated as the building blocks of reality with its concept already independent of itself from universes; therefore, type 1 concept by default. Philosophically speaking.

No, inherently space time isn’t independent from universes. You have to find actual evidence for this as I don’t recall any thread that will brought this up as it is definitely case by case rather than an inherent thing. Gonna have to earn that itself.


Anyway, I am here for that part only. The rest I remain neutral on

 

[CodeCCLL]

hmm… pretty sure Space-Time itself is already treated as the building blocks of reality with its concept already independent of itself from universes; therefore, type 1 concept by default. Philosophically speaking.

I'm also sure that DontTalkDT said that the concept of space-time (or just time) is type 3 by default, but for some reason I couldn't find the comment now.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

I'm also sure that DontTalkDT said that the concept of space-time (or just time) is type 3 by default, but for some reason I couldn't find the comment now.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/something-like-at-the-conceptual-level.162578/post-6269940

You might been referring to this part

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Oh, here is the exact comment.


https://vsbattles.com/threads/something-like-at-the-conceptual-level.162578/post-6273591

 

[Vietthai96]

concept of space-time being type 3 is bullshit

 

[HammerStrikes219]

concept of space-time being type 3 is bullshit

Then again, fiction can been BS as well. Let’s not kid ourselves on that.

Either way, evidence is always needed for specific types of concept anyway.

 

[Vietthai96]

Then again, fiction can been BS as well. Let’s not kid ourselves on that.

Either way, evidence is always needed for specific types of concept anyway.

I mean, it bs to default it to be type 3, sure some fiction can do bs by creating concept of local space-time, but by default i don't think it is a reasonable to make it type 3. But yeah you are right, let not kid ourselves on that