What "level" of space and time are we talking about? It can be 4D, 5D, 1374673D, concept/notion of dimensionality itself and etc.
I think it suits Type 1 BDE.
Uh let's say 11-D
Okay
How about information (Type 2) of space?
Maybe I would need more context.
So in the context, there exists a fundamental code which when altered, can change space, time, matter, anti-matter, gravity, etc (which are established as building blocks the verse) as per the will of the user. So would such an information of space getting dwarfed by aspatial realm qualify for Low 1-A?
I suppose so.
Information type 2 is something that depends on the verse, meaning it can’t include all possible dimensions if the verse itself doesn’t contain them. In other words, the realm only dwarfs however many dimensions exist within that verse, not all possible amounts, which isn’t a Low 1-A thing.
True. When he stated the above, I assumed he meant the information of space could change dimensionality, or something of the like. Something that shows it controls spaces breadth.
What would be the condition for information type 2 of space to qualify for Low 1-A?
For that information to control the entirety of space. Like its definition, or how big it is, how many dimensions there are, something of that nature.
Isn't information abstract?
Yes?
So would'nt non physical essence of space be Low 1-A? Or at least the aspatial realm that dwarfs it be Low 1-A?
No, because you need to prove that information is the essence of space beyond what space currently is. One is simply, Information Manip = Manipulating (11-D Space), the other is Information Manip = Manipulating (Any-D Space)
I don’t think Information Type 2 being the essence of space and independent from it is particulars saves it, as ultima, and donttalk made it clear concepts of that type are indivisible, non-localized, aspatial, and above reality, while reality itself participating in them. Information Type 2 is the opposite of those things: it is reality itself, divisible, localized, quantity thing, and such.
Nothing is set in stone; it depends on the verse. If a verse treats information similar to a concept, then it can be Low 1-A. One of the verses I work on does this.
If the realm has an evidence of being "absence of space" and the construct it encompasses has all space and time of verse, then I think this imagery should grant Type 2 or 3 BDE
What verse is that?
And what if information type 2 is most fundamental building block of a universe who's final layer in "unspace" and qualifies for this imagery
He said its BDE 1, but the information we are talking about is more like a higher form of code, which when altered, can change or destroy space i.e. that higher code isn't a part of reality.
Does the above description fit well?
No, this isn't enough.
The link isn’t working, and information type 2 doesn’t include the quiddity of an idea unless there’s evidence from the verse.
Metaphysical is contrasted with physicality, while qualitative is contrasted with the quantitative , they’re two different things, so no.
His question used 'can,' which means it is not by default.HereDifference Between Conceptual, Information, and Advanced Manipulation.
I would like to ask other staff for clarification on some abilities and possible overlap to add to the relevant resource pages. Per our site, we have the following: "Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of...vsbattles.com
So if the case is something like:His question used 'can,' which means it is not by default.
Difference Between Conceptual, Information, and Advanced Manipulation.
I would like to ask other staff for clarification on some abilities and possible overlap to add to the relevant resource pages. Per our site, we have the following: "Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of...
Not enough.
When the code is manipulated, it affects what the things are. For example, if the code of fire is manipulated, there could be a statement saying that fire loses its properties, or that manipulating the code is the same as attribute influence, etc
Where exactly is such a requirement stated in the CM page?
vsbattles.fandom.com
Your question was about Low 1-A requirements and it is needed according to Ultima while it is what Type 1 and Type 2 concepts are if they were not misunderstood a lot.Where exactly is such a requirement stated in the CM page?
Conceptual Manipulation
Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of applications, ranging from not combat-applicable to incredibly dominating. Conceptual Manipulation involves the manipulation of concepts, and not the universe directly...
So basically what you mean is that the concept should have "absolute" control over the things it governs right? Over here:
It is not about absolute control, but rather about them not being separate from whatness. So it is about them being the whatness itself that gives things their whatness.
Just realised that DontTalkDT rejected the idea of Quiddity (or whatness) i.e. the same thing which you said is required (but actually ins't). I'll ask someone knowleadgable regarding my doubts.
He agreed that Type 1 and Type 2 concepts needs to be quiddity in order to qualify; he only rejected quiddity as a term for the wiki.
Not yet been concretely accepted by the wiki standards as of now. This seems more of a rejection to reduce unnecessary complexity.He agreed that Type 1 and Type 2 concepts need to be quiddity in order to qualify; he only rejected quiddity as a term for the wiki.
Concept must necessarily be a Quiddity
Our current standard about "what is concept" are too loose and too vague Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of applications, ranging from not combat-applicable to incredibly dominating. Conceptual...
agree with @DontTalkDT . Since 'what it is to be a thing' is a question, it’s not a good term to use in that context; a better term would be 'what it is to be something,' though even that would still be a question.
