- 15,054
- 12,822
Are you suggesting moving Monarch of Pointland to Unknown? He has no feats of actually affecting 0D constructs.Sera EX said:
-
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.
Universe level Standards
- Thread starter Sera_EX
- Start date
- Status
- 6,104
- 5,102
- Thread starter
- #322
I don't really care about anything below 10-C being featless. Tier 11 was literally just a compliment to the system until SCP came along. There's nothing inflated about claiming a 0D being is the weakest tier on the site despite having no feats since it's so obscure it's hardly relevant. No one really cares about lower dimensional beings in vs debates for obvious reasons. Only we do.
- 5,501
- 714
^^^
- 784
- 323
Honestly, Low 2-C being the default for universal feats is the most common sense thing ITT. Defaulting to 3-A isn't choosing a safe low end, it's assuming that the writer is using an unconventional definition of the word: universe; meaning that the burden of proof lies on the pro-3-A side in any given case of a universal feat.
- 19,122
- 6,334
@Endless
It isn't unconventional though. "Universe" being used to refer to the totality of celestial bodies isn't some kind of weird thing that we made up, it simply happens to be an ambiguous word.
That's why you have to look at context instead of focusing on the definition of the dictionary which is really not that relevant
It isn't unconventional though. "Universe" being used to refer to the totality of celestial bodies isn't some kind of weird thing that we made up, it simply happens to be an ambiguous word.
That's why you have to look at context instead of focusing on the definition of the dictionary which is really not that relevant
- 8,438
- 3,292
@Endless & Elizhaa
I really, really disagree with Low 2-C being the default for universal statements. Many many uses of "universe" do not seem to imply the literal destruction of the fabric of space-time. Having to prove something is stronger than an equally possible interpretation is the norm.
Having to prove that space-time destruction isn't implied or used is almost asking someone to prove a negative. I am majorly against this. Like almost as hard as you can be against this.
I really, really disagree with Low 2-C being the default for universal statements. Many many uses of "universe" do not seem to imply the literal destruction of the fabric of space-time. Having to prove something is stronger than an equally possible interpretation is the norm.
Having to prove that space-time destruction isn't implied or used is almost asking someone to prove a negative. I am majorly against this. Like almost as hard as you can be against this.
- 15,755
- 7,778
Many many uses of "universe" do not seem to imply the literal destruction of the fabric of space-time,
Like what uses, for example, Assaltwaffle?
Like what uses, for example, Assaltwaffle?
- 12,523
- 3,490
If nothing implies space-time being destroyed then it's 3-A.
- 12,523
- 3,490
Which doesn't make it any less ambiguous in a fictional setting.
- 15,755
- 7,778
Ambiguous how? We basically have a standardized definition of the universe that includes space-time. Space-time is also invisible in real-life, there is that. If the verse defined the universe term incorrectly, then the feat would be not Low 2-C. It weird to make the assumption if there are no such cases of incorrect definitions.ShadowWarrior1999 said:
- 6,300
- 1,599
Question, creating, and recreating a universe is still Low-2c, correct? Or is that also 3-A still...? I thought i saw a comment above about the current standard is low-2c? but i din't know if misread it or misunderstood lol.
- 12,523
- 3,490
Unless if the aforementioned creation is mentioned to involve space-time, then it's 3-A.TheUpgradeManHaHaxD said:
- 6,300
- 1,599
What if there is no statement, powerscale, or anything stating space-time was involved? Its just a simple statement of "Did he just create a universe with his power!?"ShadowWarrior1999 said:
- 6,300
- 1,599
In japan there ismany usages of the word "universe" each one with a different way of spelling, and different meaning. For example."Õ«çÕ«Ö " The universe is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists, including all matter and energy, the planets, stars, galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space.
"þò░õ©ûþòî " = parallel universe (e.g. in SF); different-dimension world
"Õà¿Õ«çÕ«Ö " = whole universe; total universe; all of creation
"õ©ÇÕñ®ÕøøµÁÀ" = the world; the universe
"ÚÇáÕîû" = creation; nature; the Universe
so, i guess it depends on which version of the word is used, but none acutally specify time-space/spacetime
Edit: Spacetime is the only one that states time and space alongside the universe. "µÖéþ®║ " = In physics, spacetime (or space-time, space time, space-time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions. From a Euclidean space perspective, the universe has three dimensions of space and one dimension of time.
Edit 2: in Japan, every usage of the word "universe" has no mentioning of a space-time continuum unless a specific word is used. Such as, Timespace, spacetime, space-time continuum. This is a language barrier difference. So, when looking at low 2-C feats. we just have to look at other context.
"þò░õ©ûþòî " = parallel universe (e.g. in SF); different-dimension world
"Õà¿Õ«çÕ«Ö " = whole universe; total universe; all of creation
"õ©ÇÕñ®ÕøøµÁÀ" = the world; the universe
"ÚÇáÕîû" = creation; nature; the Universe
so, i guess it depends on which version of the word is used, but none acutally specify time-space/spacetime
Edit: Spacetime is the only one that states time and space alongside the universe. "µÖéþ®║ " = In physics, spacetime (or space-time, space time, space-time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. Spacetime is usually interpreted with space as being three-dimensional and time playing the role of a fourth dimension that is of a different sort from the spatial dimensions. From a Euclidean space perspective, the universe has three dimensions of space and one dimension of time.
Edit 2: in Japan, every usage of the word "universe" has no mentioning of a space-time continuum unless a specific word is used. Such as, Timespace, spacetime, space-time continuum. This is a language barrier difference. So, when looking at low 2-C feats. we just have to look at other context.
- 15,755
- 7,778
ShadowWarrior1999, to be honest, most of these are rated Low 2-C here.
- 8,438
- 3,292
@Elizhaa
If I have a jar full of cookies and someone asks what is in it, saying that the jar itself is in the jar or that glass (which makes the jar itself) is in the jar would sound ridiculous. Obviously I'm this case the things in the jar are just the cookies.
Odd metaphor, sorry, but it's what I first thought of.
If I have a jar full of cookies and someone asks what is in it, saying that the jar itself is in the jar or that glass (which makes the jar itself) is in the jar would sound ridiculous. Obviously I'm this case the things in the jar are just the cookies.
Odd metaphor, sorry, but it's what I first thought of.
- 6,300
- 1,599
well.. if its settled.. does that mean we reached a conclusion... im curious to know what was accepted?? i am sorry if i come off being impatient...
- 15,755
- 7,778
Assaltwaffle, I mean the standard definition of the universe is everything that exists include matter and space-time.
- 8,438
- 3,292
Sorry Sera. I don't want to keep arguing about this, but I'm worried if we stop Low 2-C will somehow end up as the standard even though you aren't pushing for it.Sera EX said:
- 6,300
- 1,599
@Agnaa... does this mean nothing will be changed...? *Confused look*
- Status
Similar threads
