• 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.

Why is COT not Low 1c?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arthex

Arthex

847
361
Apologies, if I get anything wrong.

But why was the COT being 5d rejected? I mean it was sstated to be outside/beyond the "multiverse", had a statement talking about it being beyond time aswell iirc and normal 2A entities can't reach it. With even the destruction of a 2A world being unable to affect it. and it seems to contain crystals, which are literal timelines?

The only argument I can think of, is that it's outside the multiverse rather than beyond it. but that does not make any sense.

That's all, thanks.
 
being outside of something doesn't make you superior to it, being beyond time does not imply higher dimensionality and i'm pretty sure it refers to it's nature of not being in the multiverse's time, 2-A stuff not reaching or affecting it is because it is outside of the multiverse, and i'm pretty sure the whole "containing timelines' thing was rejected and even then, they aren't infinitesimal compared to it
 
Because being outside of something means you are simple not within it's territory, and yes that can happen to infinite-sized structures, because infinite can be contained in relation to other structures, which is why we don't assume a multiverse containing infinite timelines is low 1-C for being containing them and being bigger.

Transcending for tier 1 means you are qualitatively superior to it, meaning you have to literally be bigger and vaster than it.

And as we can see, characters and places outside of 2-A multiverses are not alway larger and superior to it.
 
Aachintya31 said:
my house isn't infinite.
Click to expand...
infinite or finite, this is irrelevant.

What is more interesting to discuss is that 2-A entities can't reach it because it is unreachable, can someone send me screenshots for this information?
 
Uh, uh. I don't think I am qualified to talk about this, but here we go.

Being "outside" the multiverse" is not 5d, I get that. But it has statements of being beyond the multiverse and time/space. Aswell as being unaffected by 2A bullshit. and God's, who are 2A beings themselves cannot reach it.

While on their own, the evidence sounds lacking, but if you consider all of them at once, I think it does make sense that COT is somewhat superior to 2A structures, and it should be treated as possibly "low 1c"
 
Technically, even being superior to a structure wouldn't qualify. You have to outright transcend it.

For example, if the Yggdrasil from GoW is called 'larger and more complex than the multiverse', it wouldn't be Low 1-C, it'd be at least 2-A with just that statement in mind.

IIRC, the gap between Low 1-C and 2-A is larger than the gap between 2-A and Low 2-C. So it's some pretty huge orders of infinity.
 
Last edited:
ByAsura said:
Technically, even being superior to a structure wouldn't qualify. You have to outright transcend it.

For example, if the Yggdrasil from GoW is called 'larger and more complex than the multiverse', it wouldn't be Low 1-C, it'd be at least 2-A with just that statement in mind.

IIRC, the gap between Low 1-C and 2-A is larger than the gap between 2-A and Low 2-C. So it's some pretty huge orders of infinity.
Click to expand...
Just looking forward to Kratos 2-A someday 🤤
 
ByAsura said:
Technically, even being superior to a structure wouldn't qualify. You have to outright transcend it.

For example, if the Yggdrasil from GoW is called 'larger and more complex than the multiverse', it wouldn't be Low 1-C, it'd be at least 2-A with just that statement in mind.
Click to expand...
If multiverse in that example is proven to be 2-A, then the statement should be low 1-C.

So no, you need to be qualitative suprior to it.
 
No it shouldn't. Qualitively superior refers to evidence that spatio-temporal dimensions are above or below each other.

Just being superior at that level isn't enough when spatio-temporal dimensions aren't involved. The gap provably has to be infinite/transcendental.
 
Your comprehension appears to be flawed, as it is imperative that you possess a superior level of quality in comparison to the aforementioned structure.

"transcend" is in English "beyond". So no, in fact you are proving that the statement in OP is low 1-C with this elaboration.

By the term "qualitative", we are specifically referring to magnitude, as all aspects of dimensionality pertain to varying sizes.

It is even possible to exhibit superior quality in relation to a comparatively inferior level of a 2-C, yet still attain a low 1-C.

A prime instance of this is the r>f transcendence.
 
Yes, an infinitely superior level of quality, hence the entire rating system in the first place. There are degrees of superiority that you don't seem to be taking into account at all.

You're arguing point I never made. I never said Low 1-C realms aren't superior to Low 2-C/2-C/2-A, I said simply superior isn't enough evidence on its own, and it'd just be at least 2-A with the evidence at hand.
 
I'm using transcend in the same way that the tiering system page uses it.

I made it explicitly clear that there's whole orders of infinites even as of the first comment.
 
ByAsura said:
Technically, even being superior to a structure wouldn't qualify. You have to outright transcend it.

For example, if the Yggdrasil from GoW is called 'larger and more complex than the multiverse', it wouldn't be Low 1-C, it'd be at least 2-A with just that statement in mind.

IIRC, the gap between Low 1-C and 2-A is larger than the gap between 2-A and Low 2-C. So it's some pretty huge orders of infinity.
Click to expand...
Sounds like it should be Low 1-C since finitely above baseline 2-A (for constructs) ain’t a thing here (if you follow Ultima’s reasoning)
 
ByAsura said:
I'm using transcend in the same way that the tiering system page uses it.

I made it explicitly clear that there's whole orders of infinites even as of the first comment.
Click to expand...
In the whole tiering system, they never mention the term. They use "significant effect" which proves my point further that you need to qualitative significantly transcend a structure.

But since this one is cleared up, then I have nothing to say.
 
I've literally never heard of such a thing, and recall various examples where that's not the case (mainly DC, Arrowverse and Star Trek, where multiversal domains exist among the multiverse).

But my knowledge is also a tad outdated.
ImmortalDread said:
In the whole tiering system, they never mention the term. They use "significant effect" which proves my point further that you need to qualitative significantly transcend a structure.
Click to expand...
They use it 8 times, and all of them refer to layers of infinity/infinite hierarchies. So, I thought it was obvious even in a context outside of Tier 1.

But, it doesn't matter, because the tiering system says it's orders of infinity regardless. So I really don't care.
 
ByAsura said:
I've literally never heard of such a thing, and recall various examples where that's not the case (mainly DC, Arrowverse and Star Trek, where multiversal domains exist among the multiverse).

But my knowledge is also a tad outdated.
Click to expand...
DC and Arrowverse are baseline because of this rule. You’re bijecting the different infinite 4D contstructs to a single baseline infinite 4D construct. Though if they’re separate, the thing that contains them would be Low 1-C according to this reasoning.
 
By multiversal domain, I don't mean infinite space-time continuua, I mean spread across the multiverse and outside the normal continuua.

I should have clarified, but I thought calling it a domain was enough.
 
Should I call in DarkDragonMedeus, Qwasedf and Antvasima? They'd probably have a better grasp, and remember some precedent.

But, at least from my understanding, just being superior to 2-A in a vague sense isn't remotely enough for Low 1-C.
 
ByAsura said:
They use it 8 times, and all of them refer to layers of infinity/infinite hierarchies. So, I thought it was obvious even in a context outside of Tier 1.
Click to expand...
Please be precise in searching, they only mentioned once if you searched full word "transcend" and not "trans". So my point stays.
ByAsura said:
But, it doesn't matter, because the tiering system says it's orders of infinity regardless. So I really don't care.
Click to expand...
Which is not our discussion. I differed with you using the term, and now you have clarified it, you mean qualitative suprior/siginifcant effect.
 
ByAsura said:
Should I call in DarkDragonMedeus, Qwasedf and Antvasima? They'd probably have a better grasp, and remember some precedent.

But, at least from my understanding, just being superior to 2-A in a vague sense isn't remotely enough for Low 1-C.
Click to expand...
Flame, we also want to clear this doubt
 
ByAsura said:
Should I call in DarkDragonMedeus, Qwasedf and Antvasima? They'd probably have a better grasp, and remember some precedent.

But, at least from my understanding, just being superior to 2-A in a vague sense isn't remotely enough for Low 1-C.
Click to expand...
No, the OP got his answer and this question has been asked tons of times and has been answered multiple times.

So it is best to close the thread.
 
ImmortalDread said:
Please be precise in searching, they only mentioned once if you searched full word "transcend" and not "trans". So my point stays.
Click to expand...
Tenses exist, so no it doesn't.

Also, it's just flagrantly wrong. All 8 are transcend.
ImmortalDread said:
Which is not our discussion. I differed with you using the term, and now you have clarified it, you mean qualitative suprior/siginifcant effect.
Click to expand...
Cool. Whatever.
ImmortalDread said:
No, the OP got his answer and this question has been asked tons of times and has been answered multiple times.

So it is best to close the thread.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the way to go.

The answers are quite skewed.
 
Why it is not the way? Should I show you how many threads has been argued over the same topic?
@StrymULTRA Can you come and show him how MANY of this topic we had been and still rejected?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Saqphire
[Dragon Ball] Low 1-C question
Replies
3
Views
2K
Accelerated_Evolution
Accelerated_Evolution
ProfectusInfinity
Low 1-C question.
Replies
3
Views
2K
TiltedFN
TiltedFN
Nullflowerblush
Dragon Ball Super. To be canon, or not to be?
2
Replies
75
Views
4K
LuffyRuffy46307
LuffyRuffy46307
StrymULTRA
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Heroes/Xenoverse - Profile Split
2
Replies
66
Views
5K
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Games - Discussion Rule about Low 1-C
2 3
Replies
80
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top