Yikes! I suppose even Fuji May Cry after looking at this upgrade CRT

[Phsccarvalho]

Wait, i just want some clarifications here. We know that every multiverse have a 5th axis to displace individual space-time universe to contain them it is just not Low 1-C cause the 5th axis is insignificant unless something prove it being significant to tiering it right???.

So we have Human World to be space-time universe and some other realms, so Demon Realm can absorb and contain those realm separately (iirc), which mean Demon Realm spatial dimesion must be 5th axis to displace those space-times, abd Demon World is infinite in size, mean that the 5th axis also is infinite, which at this point is significant and can be tiered, isn't that is Low 1-C (5D)???

I mean, the space that separates the timelines of an infinite multiverse would be infinite, wouldn't it? And even then it's insignificant 5-D.

 

[Agnaa]

I mean, the space that separates the timelines of an infinite multiverse would be infinite, wouldn't it? And even then it's insignificant 5-D.

The space that separates them isn't necessarily infinite. If the timelines have a size of 0 on the 5-D axis, then an infinite amount of them can be contained in an arbitrarily small interval.

Still, this arbitrarily small interval would have to extend infinitely across four dimensions, to accommodate the infinite 4-D constructs it contains.

 

[Vietthai96]

I mean, the space that separates the timelines of an infinite multiverse would be infinite, wouldn't it? And even then it's insignificant 5-D.

No, the space separate two or more space-times do not neccessary to be infinite, it is unknown, could be of any size

 

[Fixxed]

But its not. Its an infinite amount of 2-As that branch off due to MWI, which is a recursive infinity which leads to transinfinite number.

I think it only infinite multiply by infinite (infinite*infinite), and uncountable infinite need power set (infinite^infinite)

 

[Agnaa]

MWI only upgrades to Low 1-C if we know that a branching timeline is created for every instant. Things like "for every being, of which an infinite number exist" or "for every event" don't qualify, since they'd only create a countably infinite amount.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Wait, i just want some clarifications here. We know that every multiverse have a 5th axis to displace individual space-time universe to contain them it is just not Low 1-C cause the 5th axis is insignificant unless something prove it being significant to tiering it right???.

So we have Human World to be space-time universe and some other realms, so Demon Realm can absorb and contain those realm separately (iirc), which mean Demon Realm spatial dimesion must be 5th axis to displace those space-times, abd Demon World is infinite in size, mean that the 5th axis also is infinite, which at this point is significant and can be tiered, isn't that is Low 1-C (5D)???

This is the exact reason why I'm waiting for Tony to reply for the standards clarification.

My work was to only provide all the evidences there was for DMC cosmology.

What i got are realms with infinite sized space-times that do not cross eachother with different rules of space and time and separate flow of time and laws in comparison to eachother (Human World is the primest example of this given its nature is like light in comparison to Demon World's Darkness) which was all contained by Demon World who in its entirety is stated to be Endless/Infinite Darkness but here i seen some really hilarious arguments against it (especially Demon World being lower realm).

However after looking at this entire 7 pages of mess, i realized we should first establish what even qualifies for certain tiers coz as things are... Yeah...

Anyway Tony told me to have this thread wait for two days. Therefore, this thread should be postponed till then and i request others here to stop arguing till then respectfully.

 

[Georredannea15]

I'm not disagreeing with that.

Well, these are standarts. DT done this and also Ultima said same things before...

For two line segments to be parallel, you'd have to set it so they wouldn't touch regardless of how far they are extended, which wouldn't be possible if they stood side-by-side in 1-D space as in here, meaning you would need them to be displaced over a plane. Same thing happens with planes: For them to be parallel, they shouldn't ever be able to meet, so you'd need them to be displaced over 3-D space. Generalizing that to the 4-D case, spacetimes would obviously have to be displaced over a 5-D region (This works by definition, too: If they're different spacetime continuums then obviously they can't share the same space, in the way 3-D objects exist around us for instance)

But I think you misunderstand something.


A space with a 5th axis(5-D) that separates these 4-D universes and keeps them at 0 volume on 5th axis does not automatically make it Low 1-C.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

Wait, i just want some clarifications here. We know that every multiverse have a 5th axis to displace individual space-time universe to contain them it is just not Low 1-C cause the 5th axis is insignificant unless something prove it being significant to tiering it right???.

Indeed.

So we have Human World to be space-time universe and some other realms, so Demon Realm can absorb and contain those realm separately (iirc), which mean Demon Realm spatial dimesion must be 5th axis to displace those space-times, abd Demon World is infinite in size, mean that the 5th axis also is infinite, which at this point is significant and can be tiered, isn't that is Low 1-C (5D)???

Yes, certainly that's what I'm trying to say.


As the week started (again... please kill me) my time is running thin again so my responses will be few and I'll be responding to staff across tomorrow, today and whatever day I get enough time in my laptop to get the appropriate quotes/scans if needed.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Indeed.


Yes, certainly that's what I'm trying to say.


As the week started (again... please kill me) my time is running thin again so my responses will be few and I'll be responding to staff across tomorrow, today and whatever day I get enough time in my laptop to get the appropriate quotes/scans if needed.

Its alright you can take your time. This thread ain't finished till it gets its stuff straight for tiering and qualifications process anyway.

Also as a Uni student who have to do 4 assignments at once, i can understand the pain.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

I know, but because we know that it is only countably infinitely bigger than the human world at best (really, I'd say that the manga scan implies that they're comparably large), it cannot be of a significant 5-D size.

I see. Well, the current (and soon to be) standard page doesn't mention the 5D space needs some uncountably infinite statement or something similar (unless the argument in question was about being infinitely bigger than tier 2 which it isn't), I understand where you are coming from but if I'm being honest this just sounds like unnecessary nitpicking for the sake of it as the threads DT participated didn't have those very specific statements or implications unless it was for a different line of reasoning altogether.

In fact, current standards only mentions this:

"A: One of the more straightforward ways to qualify for Tier 2 and up through higher dimensions is by affecting whole higher-dimensional universes which can embed the whole of lower-dimensional ones within themselves. For example: A cosmology where the entirety of our 3-dimensional universe is in fact a subset of a much greater 4-dimensional space, or generalizations of this same scenario to higher numbers of dimensions; i.e A cosmology where the four-dimensional spacetime continuum is just the infinitesimal surface of a 5-dimensional object, and etc."

Also the manga is imo pretty clear, it mentions how the human world is a ray/line/streak of light in endless/infinite darkness (aka the demon world) establishing a pretty solid comparison while also giving us the size of the demon world and also satisfying the standard quoted above.

Asking for more than that and we would be running in what the FAQ page describes here:

"In that regard it is important to consider that, by its nature, it is not possible to accurately depict 5 dimensional space. As such depictions of the multiverse are usually not to be understood as accurate representation of the distance between the universes, but rather just qualitative analogies of the multiverse's structure."

Even now I can point out some threads where staff members ask for examples of verses that actually have the kind of thing you are asking (uncountably infinity stuff) because none can pull that stuff and I remember a thread where even DT said he doesn't know of any verse that deals with such things.

Basically it's pretty much impossible to get that kind of comparisons or statements and so the standards don't require them unless someone is gunning for "infinitely bigger than x" arguments.

It's like, you don't need a statement of being uncountably infinitely bigger, but if other evidence confirms that you're less than uncountably infinitely bigger, you cannot be bumped up a tier.

I mean, the standard doesn't mention anything like that and the threads I used as reference don't dwell on that either, in some cases size isn't even established for the 5D space afaik, just that is has relevant magnitude (like the GoW threads).

Your reasoning seems to be as follows, correct me where I'm wrong:

P1. An infinite amount of L2-C realms is a 2-A multiverse.
P2. DT said that a 2-A multiverse is displaced across a 5-D axis.
P3. DMC has an infinite amount of L2-C realms.
P4. The Demon World is said to be the superset/container of these realms
C1. The Demon World is the 5-D axis/5-D container of the realms
P5. The Demon World is infinite in size
C2. The 5-D axis is infinite in size.

The error is that the Demon World being a 2-A multiverse does not mean that it is -- itself -- the 5-D axis. If it's the 5-D container of those realms, it would still be the case that none of the information given tells us that the 5-D axis is infinite in size, because it would still be accurate to call the Demon World "infinite" by virtue of the 4-D infinity within it even if the 5-D axis is arbitrarily small. You cannot infer that the Demon World is the 5-D axis by virtue of it being described as the container of these L2-C realms, that's not how we treat multiverses in terms of being containers of many universes. A multiverse containing infinite universes and also itself being called "infinite" does not mean the 5-D axis is infinite in size.

Here are the pertinent sections of the FAQ that make this clear:

From what I see is that you are trying to apply the wrong standards (Q: Is destroying multiple infinite multiverses a better feat than destroying a single one?) to the feat in question. To expand on this, you are claiming that destroying multiple 2A structures is the same so the Demon World should not qualify when in actuality the feat in question is the Demon World acting as the higher dimensional space that holds several 4D constructs without interacting with each other like how a 5D space does.

However you are correct when pointing that "X being a subset of another set Y does not imply that Y > X in terms of size". If you recall my first post I linked DT's comment regarding this.

Basically "X being a subset of another set Y does not imply that Y > X in terms of size" is what DT was talking when he mentioned how the tiering system works regarding tier 2:

"Space being infinite in itself doesn't matter, as space at that level is infinite in some sense anyway. You would need to be told that either specifically its 5 dimensional volume is infinite or that specifically the 5th dimensional axis (the one you add to the standard timelines) is infinite (or very large) for that to work. But I figure if you have information that specific then you wouldn't need this thread. In general, infinite could mean infinite by 3D or 4D standards, or in the sense of countably infinite times larger than a spacetime continuum, so that is just not enough."

If you recall I summarized his post like this:

"How does a multiverse work? Well it's a bunch of 4-D constructs (your standard Low 2-C universes a.k.a. timelines) displaced across a 5-D axis. The difference between Low 2-C/2-B/2-A and Low 1-C is that this 5-D plane is on insignificant size in tier 2 while it is of significant size in tier 1."

In this case, like I said before, the demon world acts as the 5th dimensional axis that exist between the standard timelines inside of it and since it is stated to be infinite then fulfills the criteria set by DT. Moreover the FAQ supports this line of thinking:

A: One of the more straightforward ways to qualify for Tier 2 and up through higher dimensions is by affecting whole higher-dimensional universes which can embed the whole of lower-dimensional ones within themselves. For example: A cosmology where the entirety of our 3-dimensional universe is in fact a subset of a much greater 4-dimensional space, or generalizations of this same scenario to higher numbers of dimensions; i.e A cosmology where the four-dimensional spacetime continuum is just the infinitesimal surface of a 5-dimensional object, and etc.

 

[Agnaa]

I see. Well, the current (and soon to be) standard page doesn't mention the 5D space needs some uncountably infinite statement or something similar (unless the argument in question was about being infinitely bigger than tier 2 which it isn't), I understand where you are coming from but if I'm being honest this just sounds like unnecessary nitpicking for the sake of it as the threads DT participated didn't have those very specific statements or implications unless it was for a different line of reasoning altogether.

Even now I can point out some threads where staff members ask for examples of verses that actually have the kind of thing you are asking (uncountably infinity stuff) because none can pull that stuff and I remember a thread where even DT said he doesn't know of any verse that deals with such things.

Basically it's pretty much impossible to get that kind of comparisons or statements and so the standards don't require them unless someone is gunning for "infinitely bigger than x" arguments.

That's not what I said. I repeated that later; you don't need evidence of uncountably infinite size in a 5-D space to be Low 1-C, but being only countably infinitely larger than a 4-D construct proves that such a construct doesn't have any size in 5-D space, and as such, is evidence against it.

Also the manga is imo pretty clear, it mentions how the human world is a ray/line/streak of light in endless/infinite darkness (aka the demon world) establishing a pretty solid comparison while also giving us the size of the demon world and also satisfying the standard quoted above.

That is ABSOLUTELY not what it says. Both visually, and from the text, the ray wasn't a single tiny line surrounded by darkness on all sides; it grew into a whole world unto itself within the darkness. Visually, you can see that by the light spreading. Textually, it says "the world ended up separated into two", then went on to describe one of those two being the darkness (demon world), and one of those being the light (human world), which would make no sense if the light was just separating the darkness from more darkness. Plus, there's the additional textual evidence, of them being described as "coexisting", which frames them more as comparable.

Asking for more than that and we would be running in what the FAQ page describes here:

"In that regard it is important to consider that, by its nature, it is not possible to accurately depict 5 dimensional space. As such depictions of the multiverse are usually not to be understood as accurate representation of the distance between the universes, but rather just qualitative analogies of the multiverse's structure."

Incorrect, that statement's about visual diagrams being shown within the media being taken as 100% literal representations of the relative sizes, as those are typically simplified analogies of the multiverse's structure. I'm not doing that here.

I mean, the standard doesn't mention anything like that and the threads I used as reference don't dwell on that either

Yeah, because it's pretty obvious that contradictions need to be managed appropriately. Why would every tier need to say "if there's evidence that requires it to be smaller, they can't get this tier"?

in some cases size isn't even established for the 5D space afaik, just that is has relevant magnitude (like the GoW threads).

Then go downgrade it and tell them I sent you. Standards take priority over the contents of profiles, because sometimes people overlook standards when changing profiles, or don't update profiles when standards change.

 

[Vietthai96]

Wait a minute, you guys lost me, why uncountable infinite is getting refered here??, isn't we talking about that in a multiverse, universes are displaced across a 5th axis, if such axis is big enough it is Low 1-C, Demon World being such axis as it displacing multiple space-time on it such a Human World and is infinite in size so Low 1-C for DW. Eh.........about this???

 

[Agnaa]

Wait a minute, you guys lost me, why uncountable infinite is getting refered here??, isn't we talking about that in a multiverse, universes are displaced across a 5th axis, if such axis is big enough it is Low 1-C, Demon World being such axis as it displacing multiple space-time on it such a Human World and is infinite in size so Low 1-C for DW. Eh.........about this???

That's not what I said. I explained what I meant in this post, this post, this post, this post, and this post.

 

[Vietthai96]

That's not what I said. I explained what I meant in this post, this post, this post, this post, and this post.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Still, from what you have said, the 5th axis that displace 4d structures on it need to be uncountable infinite in comparison to the 4d structure, but how can we even get it except a direct statement which could very well being called: this verse is aware of powerscaling so nuke it??. Because to me that is too specific that, nothing qualify at all unless the verse and author are aware of these terms

I don't like whataboutism, but i think i need some example on our sites for research purposes, if you know any

 

[Agnaa]

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Still, from what you have said, the 5th axis that displace 4d structures on it need to be uncountable infinite in comparison to the 4d structure, but how can we even get it except a direct statement which could very well being called: this verse is aware of powerscaling so nuke it??. Because to me that is too specific that, nothing qualify at all unless the verse and author are aware of these terms

Well you know what they say, sixth time's the charm.

I AM NOT saying that you NEED A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being uncountably infinitely larger as AFFIRMATIVE PROOF.

I AM saying that IF THERE IS A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being countably infinltely larger, or smaller, that is DISQUALIFYING EVIDENCE.

And hey, looking at the evidence more, I think "the Demon World contains multiple separate timelines" is a really weird starting point. The evidence in the OP for that all sucks:

• This scan saying an enemy arrived through a rift in the time-space fabric, which can happen within universes with such things as wormholes.
• This scan saying that the Underworld has "realms", which is common fantasy terminology that can mean anything as small as another region within a country.
• This set of scans just showing some places that look different.

Absolutely nothing here establishes the Demon World encompassing even a single space-time (i.e. it could still be part of a single Low 2-C space alongside the Human World).

 

[Vietthai96]

Well you know what they say, sixth time's the charm.

I AM NOT saying that you NEED A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being uncountably infinitely larger as AFFIRMATIVE PROOF.

I AM saying that IF THERE IS A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being countably infinltely larger, or smaller, that is DISQUALIFYING EVIDENCE.

And hey, looking at the evidence more, I think "the Demon World contains multiple separate timelines" is a really weird starting point. The evidence in the OP for that all sucks:

• This scan saying an enemy arrived through a rift in the time-space fabric, which can happen within universes with such things as wormholes.
• This scan saying that the Underworld has "realms", which is common fantasy terminology that can mean anything as small as another region within a country.
• This set of scans just showing some places that look different.

Absolutely nothing here establishes the Demon World encompassing even a single space-time (i.e. it could still be part of a single Low 2-C space alongside the Human World).

I mean yeah, but........ehhhhhhh, i only argued from standard view point that, we have multiple low 2-C structures, and a realm contain them, said realm must be the 5th axis that displace multiple low 2-C structures on it, so if said realm/dimension is significant in size, such as stated to be infinite, then said realm have enough evidence to be low 1-C, right???

About how legit and persuasive the scans is, i will not say anything since i'm not DMC expert, i just argued from general stand points, assumed that Demon World legit contain, or capable of containing multiple separate low 2-C structure (in this case is basic space-time universe), and DW is infinite in size thus it is low 1-C

 

[Random-Helper323]

Well you know what they say, sixth time's the charm.

I AM NOT saying that you NEED A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being uncountably infinitely larger as AFFIRMATIVE PROOF.

I AM saying that IF THERE IS A STATEMENT of the 5th axis being countably infinltely larger, or smaller, that is DISQUALIFYING EVIDENCE.

And hey, looking at the evidence more, I think "the Demon World contains multiple separate timelines" is a really weird starting point. The evidence in the OP for that all sucks:

• This scan saying an enemy arrived through a rift in the time-space fabric, which can happen within universes with such things as wormholes.
• This scan saying that the Underworld has "realms", which is common fantasy terminology that can mean anything as small as another region within a country.
• This set of scans just showing some places that look different.

Absolutely nothing here establishes the Demon World encompassing even a single space-time (i.e. it could still be part of a single Low 2-C space alongside the Human World).

Okay, there are a few things to reference, but I'm very busy and can't dig up the scans, so I'll just reference the stuff.

1. The human world is a space-time, and it used to be part of the Demon World. It is likewise shown that time flows differently in the Demon World from the human world.

2. The Demon World contains the Mirror World which is basically referred to as outside of time, with a being that is present in all of time being unable to reach it.

3. The Demon World contains the Infinite Nirvana, which is on an infinite time loop and escaped using an item that effects a time space continuum.

4. POC introduces the Nightmare Realm which as far as I can gather is also operating on a separate space-time (I'm not all that clued in on the Peak of Combat game)

There are almost certainly more, but these are some, and this is my attempt to explain.

 

[Agnaa]

I mean yeah, but........ehhhhhhh, i only argued from standard view point that, we have multiple low 2-C structures, and a realm contain them, said realm must be the 5th axis that displace multiple low 2-C structures on it, so if said realm/dimension is significant in size, such as stated to be infinite, then said realm have enough evidence to be low 1-C, right???

About how legit and persuasive the scans is, i will not say anything since i'm not DMC expert, i just argued from general stand points, assumed that Demon World legit contain, or capable of containing multiple separate low 2-C structure (in this case is basic space-time universe), and DW is infinite in size thus it is low 1-C

If those six prior explanations aren't sufficient (and they seem to be, since you're still not grappling with my point), then there's nothing I can do.

Okay, there are a few things to reference, but I'm very busy and can't dig up the scans, so I'll just reference the stuff.

1. The human world is a space-time, and it used to be part of the Demon World.

This seems to contradict other information repeated by supporters throughout this thread (i.e. that the Demon World still contains the Human World, and that the Human World was created as a part of it).

It is likewise shown that time flows differently in the Demon World from the human world.

Time flows differently in orbit around Earth than it does on Earth. This is not relevant evidence.

2. The Demon World contains the Mirror World which is basically referred to as outside of time, with a being that is present in all of time being unable to reach it.

This sounds promising.

3. The Demon World contains the Infinite Nirvana, which is on an infinite time loop and escaped using an item that effects a time space continuum.

This could easily be a subset of an ordinary timeline, so this doesn't seem promising.

4. POC introduces the Nightmare Realm which as far as I can gather is also operating on a separate space-time (I'm not all that clued in on the Peak of Combat game)

This is really vague so I don't have much to say.

I look forward when you're free enough to dig up the scans for 2 and 4.

 

[Deagonx]

To expand on this, you are claiming that destroying multiple 2A structures is the same so the Demon World should not qualify when in actuality the feat in question is the Demon World acting as the higher dimensional space that holds several 4D constructs without interacting with each other like how a 5D space does.

My point is that a superset of 4-D constructs being called "infinite" doesn't make it Low 1-C.

the demon world acts as the 5th dimensional axis

The issue is that there's no evidence that this is the case. The Demon World being a superset of other 4-D constructs does not mean it is -- itself -- the 5-D axis they are displaced amongst. That's not sufficient evidence to draw that conclusion.

 

[Vietthai96]

If those six prior explanations aren't sufficient (and they seem to be, since you're still not grappling with my point), then there's nothing I can do.

Ehhhhhhh..............but...........well..........sorry

Eh, so i re-read what you said, so you meant that since the evidences disprove the idea of demon world being big enough (uncountable infinitely large) to be Low 1-C, instead of implying it is large enough, or at least not being anti-feat, so you disagree, right??

 

[Georredannea15]

@Tony_di_bugalu Dude, the Low 1-C requirement here is not due to the fact that a space has a 5th axis and the structure in it is infinite because basically a 4-dimensional structure can extend infinitely inside a 5-D space and it doesn't prove that this 5th axis have infinite size.

You will have to provide some evidence or context that "a structure or space extends infinitely along the 5th dimensional axis".

I think that's what they are saying because that's what DT was telling us in the GoW Low 1-C thread.

 

[Georredannea15]

The issue is that there's no evidence that this is the case. The Demon World being a superset of other 4-D constructs does not mean it is -- itself -- the 5-D axis they are displaced amongst. That's not sufficient evidence to draw that conclusion.

No, if you have a space in which multiple parallel 4D structures are displaced, this space must have a 5th axis (so it is basically 5D but... Not Low 1-C)

This is basically what the standards say

 

[Deagonx]

No, if you have a space in which multiple parallel 4D structures are displaced, this space must have a 5th axis (so it is basically 5D but... Not Low 1-C)

This is basically what the standards say

Yes, but that does not mean that the superset of these structures must itself be that axis. We know that one must exist, but we do not assume that whatever the verse calls this collection of 4D structures is the name for the 5D axis.

This was what I was demonstrating by referencing the FAQ about whether destroying multiple multiverses is better than a single multiverse. Examine the wording carefully:

In spite of what our intuitions may tell us, destroying or fully affecting multiple infinite-sized multiverses is in fact not better than doing the same to a single infinite multiverse, and thus, not above the "baseline" for 2-A.

A multiverse is, quite simply, a container/superset/collection of 4D structures. What is the baseline tier is a "single infinite multiverse?" 2-A. The reasoning Tony is using to try and assert that the Demon World is

1) The Demon World contains infinite 4D structures
2) The Demon World is therefore the 5D axis upon which they are displaced
3) Further statements of the Demon World being infinite mean that this 5D axis is itself infinite
4) The Demon World is therefore Low 1-C

However, if that reasoning were valid then a multiverse would also by default represent the 5D axis upon which 4D structures are displaced. Yet an infinite multiverse is baseline 2-A. Not only does a multiverse being infinite not mean the 5D axis is infinite, even an infinite amount of infinite multiverses isn't necessarily suggestive of the 5D axis being infinite in size.

We simply cannot reach Low 1-C this way. Our standards are clear on this. You can't just take a container/collection/superset of 4D structures in a verse and say "well, I know 4D structures must be displaced among a 5D axis, so the verse's designator for this grouping of 4D structures must itself be a reference to that axis." That is not how it works.

 

[Agnaa]

Ehhhhhhh..............but...........well..........sorry

Eh, so i re-read what you said, so you meant that since the evidences disprove the idea of demon world being big enough (uncountable infinitely large) to be Low 1-C, instead of implying it is large enough, or at least not being anti-feat, so you disagree, right??

Basically, yeah. The evidence, with its elaboration, shows it's an anti-feat (by having the human world be non-zero in comparison), rather than something that actually qualifies.

If there was enough sufficiently explicit evidence for it being Low 1-C, that'd turn the tides, but most of it's vague enough (i.e. just calling the demon world an "endless realm") that it'd be reasoned to have the same issue.

 

[Tanin_iver]

However, if that reasoning were valid then a multiverse would also by default represent the 5D axis upon which 4D structures are displaced. Yet an infinite multiverse is baseline 2-A.

Not only does a multiverse being infinite not mean the 5D axis is infinite, even an infinite amount of infinite multiverses is necessarily suggestive of the 5D axis being infinite in size.

Because an infinite number of universes need not need be displaced in the 5D axis infinitely, they can occupy any finite amount of the axis which isn't significant enough to be considered Low 1-C(as Agnaa explained earlier).
Here we have a structure which is necessarily 5D(arguments presented above) that is described to be infinite.

Basically, yeah. The evidence, with its elaboration, shows it's an anti-feat (by having the human world be non-zero in comparison), rather than something that actually qualifies.

If there was enough sufficiently explicit evidence for it being Low 1-C, that'd turn the tides, but most of it's vague enough (i.e. just calling the demon world an "endless realm") that it'd be reasoned to have the same issue.

Human World(Low 2-C 4D infinite) is explicitly stated(not focusing on the diagram bcos showing infinitesimal in a Manga page would be difficult) to be a ray of light (infinitesimal) to DW(which is another infinite structure). An infinite structure that is infinitesimal to another infinite structure necessitates that the larger structure is a higher infinite cardinal.

This also isn't the primary argument, I am just explaining you the concept.

 

[Georredannea15]

Yes, but that does not mean that the superset of these structures must itself be that axis. We know that one must exist, but we do not assume that whatever the verse calls this collection of 4D structures is the name for the 5D axis.

This was what I was demonstrating by referencing the FAQ about whether destroying multiple multiverses is better than a single multiverse. Examine the wording carefully:

A multiverse is, quite simply, a container/superset/collection of 4D structures. What is the baseline tier is a "single infinite multiverse?" 2-A. The reasoning Tony is using to try and assert that the Demon World is

1) The Demon World contains infinite 4D structures
2) The Demon World is therefore the 5D axis upon which they are displaced
3) Further statements of the Demon World being infinite mean that this 5D axis is itself infinite
4) The Demon World is therefore Low 1-C

However, if that reasoning were valid then a multiverse would also by default represent the 5D axis upon which 4D structures are displaced. Yet an infinite multiverse is baseline 2-A. Not only does a multiverse being infinite not mean the 5D axis is infinite, even an infinite amount of infinite multiverses isn't necessarily suggestive of the 5D axis being infinite in size.

We simply cannot reach Low 1-C this way. Our standards are clear on this. You can't just take a container/collection/superset of 4D structures in a verse and say "well, I know 4D structures must be displaced among a 5D axis, so the verse's designator for this grouping of 4D structures must itself be a reference to that axis." That is not how it works.

I think you misunderstood me. I did not claim that, in fact I said something similar.


Having infinite 4-D structures in a space with a 5th axis =/= 5th axis being infinite. Because having infinite 4-D structures means that only the 4th axis is infinite.

 

[Deagonx]

Because an infinite number of universes need not need be displaced in the 5D axis infinitely, they can occupy any finite amount of the axis which isn't significant enough to be considered Low 1-C(as Agnaa explained earlier).
Here we have a structure which is necessarily 5D(arguments presented above) that is described to be infinite.

This merely repeats the argument, which I responded to in great detail. An infinite multiverse is not Low 1-C, despite both (A) being necessarily 5D and (B) being described as infinite. We do not assume that the superset of many 4D structures is analogous to the 5D axis in such a way that if it is described as "infinite" we assume that the 5D axis is infinite in size. This is why an "infinite multiverse" is still simply 2-A and even "infinitely many infinite multiverse" is also still 2-A.

Having infinite 4-D structures in a space with a 5th axis =/= 5th axis being infinite. Because having infinite 4-D structures means that only the 4th axis is infinite.

In that we agree.

 

[Tanin_iver]

This merely repeats the argument, which I responded to in great detail. An infinite multiverse is not Low 1-C, despite both (A) being necessarily 5D and (B) being described as infinite.
We do not assume that the superset of many 4D structures is analogous to the 5D axis in such a way that if it is described as "infinite" we assume that the 5D axis is infinite in size

This is kind of misunderstanding what I am pointing out. A 2-A structure is not Low 1-C because it can fit in a arbitrarily small 5D axis, while the DW, which is a 5D superset structure(x, y, z, t, w) is called infinite not just the Low 2-C realms themselves (x, y, z, t) which is also described infinite independently.
If u are trying to assert the claim that the DW being infinite means the 5th axis is not explicitly infinite then u may need to prove why it is only talking about the other axes and not all of the axes combined or the structure as a whole.
Moreover, if the wiki really needs dimensions of each axis to be this explicitly stated then we need to re-evaluate each and every Tier 3, 2 and 1 verse if they qualify or not.

 

[Deagonx]

This is kind of misunderstanding what I am pointing out. A 2-A structure is not Low 1-C because it can fit in a arbitrarily small 5D axis, while the DW, which is a 5D superset structure(x, y, z, t, w) is called infinite not just the Low 2-C realms themselves (x, y, z, t) which is also described infinite independently.

This reasoning would also apply to an "infinite" multiverse, but the FAQ states an "infinite" multiverse does not surpass 2-A. The Demon World does not have any evidence that makes it distinct from an infinite multiverse.

If u are trying to assert the claim that the DW being infinite means the 5th axis is not explicitly infinite then u may need to prove why it is only talking about the other axes and not all of the axes combined or the structure as a whole.

I do not.

Moreover, if the wiki really needs dimensions of each axis to be this explicitly stated then we need to re-evaluate each and every Tier 3, 2 and 1 verse if they qualify or not.

We would require -- at the very least -- a statement that references all of the dimensions rather than this chain of inferences that you are trying to use for the Demon World such that: (1) Infinite 4D structures must be displaced along a 5D axis (2) Therefore the superset represents the 5D axis (3) Therefore statements of the superset being infinite mean the 5D axis is infinite. If we accepted that reasoning, all statements of an "infinite multiverse" would be Low 1-C. The FAQ is clear that they are not.

However, I agree that we do need to re-evaluate Tier 2 and Tier 1 verses. Many of them are based on bad reasoning.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

This reasoning would also apply to an "infinite" multiverse, but the FAQ states an "infinite" multiverse does not surpass 2-A. The Demon World does not have any evidence that makes it distinct from an infinite multiverse.

Not even infinite sized 4D structures not overlapping eachother is enough? That makes me question the tiering system.

I do not.

How did you somehow miraculously assume its talking about 4D space rather then 5D again?

We would require -- at the very least -- a statement that references all of the dimensions rather than this chain of inferences that you are trying to use for the Demon World such that: (1) Infinite 4D structures must be displaced along a 5D axis (2) Therefore the superset represents the 5D axis (3) Therefore statements of the superset being infinite mean the 5D axis is infinite. If we accepted that reasoning, all statements of an "infinite multiverse" would be Low 1-C. The FAQ is clear that they are not.

That's the point, the FAQ was never clear regarding how to distinguish 2A and L1C realm from the spatial sense in the first place afaik.

However, I agree that we do need to re-evaluate Tier 2 and Tier 1 verses. Many of them are based on bad reasoning.

Absolutely agree on this one. I still can't get behind the idea how the size of a universe being universe sized or "very large" should matter for an L2C structure when the entire concept was regarding uncountably infinite snapshots of these spatial dimensions despite how small they are.

 

[Tanin_iver]

If we accepted that reasoning, all statements of an "infinite multiverse" would be Low 1-C.
This chain of inferences that you are trying to use for the Demon World such that: (1) Infinite 4D structures must be displaced along a 5D axis (2) Therefore the superset represents the 5D axis (3) Therefore statements of the superset being infinite mean the 5D axis is infinite. If we accepted that reasoning, all statements of an "infinite multiverse" would be Low 1-C. The FAQ is clear that they are not.

This isn't the case as Agnaa and I have pointed out. U can fit an infinite number of universes between any finite distance just like u can have an infinite number of rational numbers between any two rational numbers. So bringing this point is irrelevant, we both know why 2-A is 2-A and Low 1-C is Low 1-C. I am specifically saying that the whole 5D structure is called infinite while u are saying that only 4 dimensions are infinite and not 5.

I do not.

Then we can just agree to disagree, if u don't give appropriate reasons as to why it isn't talking about all 5 but only 4. Remember this has nothing to do with 2-A as they are simply composed of relatively 0 volume in their 5th axis.

We would require -- at the very least -- a statement that references all of the dimensions

So if I am understanding correctly, an infinite universe is not High 3-A, an infinite timeline is not Low 2-C, an infinite sized 5D structure is not Low 1-C ...., an infinite sized infinite dimensional structure is not High 1-B because we don't have statements for each and every specific dimension(x, y, z, t ..... omega) so they are all disqualified?
Well fine by me, we just need to strictly enforce this standard.

However, I agree that we do need to re-evaluate Tier 2 and Tier 1 verses. Many of them are based on bad reasoning.

Indeed, we should also take the above into account as well that each specific axis should be stated how long they are otherwise all High 3-A and above verses need to be reevaluated as they haven't been appropriately scrutinized.

 

[Deagonx]

This isn't the case as Agnaa and I have pointed out. U can fit an infinite number of universes between any finite distance just like u can have an infinite number of rational numbers between any two rational numbers. So bringing this point is irrelevant, we both know why 2-A is 2-A and Low 1-C is Low 1-C. I am specifically saying that the whole 5D structure is called infinite while u are saying that only 4 dimensions are infinite and not 5.

We are not in disagreement on that point. We are in disagreement about the fact that you believe the superset of 4-D structures (a "multiverse" for instance) should itself be regarded as "the whole 5-D structure" and statements of it being infinite must therefore apply to the 5-D axis. This reasoning is flawed for reasons I've explained above, but regardless of your perspective on the reasoning, our FAQ is explicit that this is not sufficient.

So if I am understanding correctly, an infinite universe is not High 3-A, an infinite timeline is not Low 2-C, an infinite sized 5D structure is not Low 1-C ...., an infinite sized infinite dimensional structure is not High 1-B because we don't have statements for each and every specific dimension(x, y, z, t ..... omega) so they are all disqualified?
Well fine by me, we just need to strictly enforce this standard.

No, you are not understanding correctly. I am contesting your characterization of infinite multiverses as "infinite sized 5D structures." We know that 4-D structures must be displaced along a 5-D axis of unknown size, that does not mean that the superset of those 5-D structures encompasses that axis in such a way that statements of its infinitude must therefore extend to the 5-D axis. This is self-evident by the FAQ entry I referred to. This is not a case of agreeing to disagree, rather, this is a case of our standards saying one thing and you saying something else. This would need to be a staff thread to override that.

Not even infinite sized 4D structures not overlapping eachother is enough? That makes me question the tiering system.

That would be a matter for a staff thread.

How did you somehow miraculously assume its talking about 4D space rather then 5D again?

In the absence of specification, our universal policy is to accept the "lowest reasonable interpretation" when multiple interpretations are possible. I am being generous here, as regarding the DW as a 5-D space lacks evidence. The DW could merely refer to the 4-D collection of realms, and not necessarily encompass the 5-D axis of unknown size that they are displaced on. Infinitude does not grant an extra dimension, our standards are clear on this.

That's the point, the FAQ was never clear regarding how to distinguish 2A and L1C realm from the spatial sense in the first place afaik.

In the absence of an explicit statement of being 5-D, there would need to be evidence of it being uncountably infinitely larger than an infinite 4D space. Being countably infinitely larger would not grant L1-C.

 

[Tanin_iver]

No, you are not understanding correctly. I am contesting your characterization of infinite multiverses as "infinite sized 5D structures." We know that 4-D structures must be displaced along a 5-D axis of unknown size, that does not mean that the superset of those 5-D structures encompasses that axis in such a way that statements of its infinitude must therefore extend to the 5-D axis.

Where tf have I characterized 2-A infinite multiverses as infinite sized 5D structures? The DW literally talks about size not quantity, I am talking about size not the quantity of the structures. Haven't u understood what I am arguing or are you intentionally misrepresenting me? Where have I argued for quantity of structures equals size I have clarified that I am only talking about the DW which should be a 5D.

This is self-evident by the FAQ entry I referred to. This is not a case of agreeing to disagree, rather, this is a case of our standards saying one thing and you saying something else. This would need to be a staff thread to override that.

In spite of what our intuitions may tell us, destroying or fully affecting multiple infinite-sized multiverses is in fact not better than doing the same to a single infinite multiverse, and thus, not above the "baseline" for 2-A.

Well the FAQ is explicitly talking about the quantity not size, quote the whole thing

The reason is that the total amount of universes contained in a collection of multiple infinitely-sized multiverses (even one consisting of infinitely many of them) is in fact equal to the amount of universes contained in a single one of the multiverses that form this ensemble: It is countably infinite, as the union of countably-many countable sets is itself countable, and thus does not differ in size from its components. The only general difference between multiple infinitely-sized multiverses and a single one is representation. What is considered to be multiple multiverses in one fiction could be considered a single multiverse in another, and vice versa, without the objective properties of those collections of universes changing. The only difference is where an author decided to draw the line between what belongs to the same multiverse and not. Thus, only an uncountably infinite number of universes actually makes any difference in terms of Attack Potency, at this scale.

Let me repeat again, I am talking about size of the 5D structure(DW) that is stated to be infinite not quantity of the structures it encompasses.

 

[SuperSonicTL]

Where tf have I characterized 2-A infinite multiverses as infinite sized 5D structures? The DW literally talks about size not quantity, I am talking about size not the quantity of the structures. Haven't u understood what I am arguing or are you intentionally misrepresenting me? Where have I argued for quantity of structures equals size I have clarified that I am only talking about the DW which should be a 5D.


Well the FAQ is explicitly talking about the quantity not size, quote the whole thing

Let me repeat again, I am talking about size of the 5D structure(DW) that is stated to be infinite not quantity of the structures it encompasses.

This is even further consistent when you factor in it is talking about size for both Human and Demon World simultaneously in the manga panel unless now you also wanna assume it is talking about the infinite space between finite points of Human World which would be really hilarious ngl.

 

[Deagonx]

Where tf have I characterized 2-A infinite multiverses as infinite sized 5D structures? The DW literally talks about size not quantity, I am talking about size not the quantity of the structures.

I'm also referring to size. I am not referring to "an infinite number of multiverses" but rather "an infinite multiverse." A single infinite multiverse is not an infinite sized 5-D structure in our standards.

Destroying or fully affecting multiple infinite-sized multiverses is in fact not better than doing the same to a single infinite multiverse, and thus, not above the "baseline" for 2-A.

Well the FAQ is explicitly talking about the quantity not size, quote the whole thing

This quote says the same thing I'm saying:

The reason is that the total amount of universes contained in a collection of multiple infinitely-sized multiverses (even one consisting of infinitely many of them) is in fact equal to the amount of universes contained in a single one of the multiverses that form this ensemble: It is countably infinite, as the union of countably-many countable sets is itself countable, and thus does not differ in size from its components.

The first bolded phrase says "multiple infinitely sized multiverses" and concludes it's the same tier as "a single one of the [infinitely sized] multiverses" which is 2-A.

From that we can conclude that a single infinitely-sized multiverse is 2-A.

If your reasoning was true, the fact that a multiverse is a collection of 4-D universes, and the fact that 4-D universes must be displaced on a 5-D axis, is sufficient to regard the multiverse (the superset of those universes) as a 5-D structure. Further, the description of this "5-D structure" being infinitely sized would be sufficient to conclude it is infinite along it's 5-D axis, and is therefore Low 1-C.

The problem is that this FAQ clearly contradicts that. The superset of 4-D structures being infinitely sized is just 2-A, so your reasoning is not accepted in our standards. I am not -- as you have claimed -- referring to quantity instead of size nor have I misunderstood your argument. I am stating clearing that evidence of the Demon World being "infinitely sized" as well as it containing infinite Low 2-C realms officially makes it 2-A per our standards. To go beyond that we would need either an express statement of it being 5-D or that it is uncountably infinitely larger than the realms within it.

 

[Tanin_iver]

I am not referring to "an infinite number of multiverses" but rather "an infinite multiverse."

I am contesting your characterization of infinite multiverses as "infinite sized 5D structures.

Where tf have I characterized 2-A infinite multiverses as infinite sized 5D structures?

I was asking a very specific question, where did I state that a single infinite multiverse is an infinite sized 5D structure? U made the claim that I said this so can you show me where specifically I stated that?

I am not referring to "an infinite number of multiverses" but rather "an infinite multiverse." A single infinite multiverse is not an infinite sized 5-D structure in our standards.

I did not even have any mention of infinite multiverse with regards to DW, I only said DW has multiple Low 2-C structures within itself which means it is atleast 5D and the size is stated to be infinite not the quantity of realms/universes. Will u stop putting words in my mouth, please?

I'm also referring to size.

I am also talking about size so then we both agree? I am saying it is Low 1-C because the container is 5D(for having multiple Tier 2 structures) and the size of the container is stated to be infinite, not because the quantity of stuff within the container is infinite.

 

[Deagonx]

I am also talking about size so then we both agree? I am saying it is Low 1-C because the container is 5D(for having multiple Tier 2 structures) and the size of the container is stated to be infinite, not because the quantity of stuff within the container is infinite.

Understood. You quoted the FAQ which says the following:

The reason is that the total amount of universes contained in a collection of multiple infinitely-sized multiverses (even one consisting of infinitely many of them) is in fact equal to the amount of universes contained in a single one of the multiverses that form this ensemble: It is countably infinite, as the union of countably-many countable sets is itself countable, and thus does not differ in size from its components.

The FAQ is also referring to the size of the container. This is evident from the phrase "infinitely-sized multiverse." The FAQ clearly states this is 2-A.

Put simply, a single infinitely-sized container for Low 2-C structures is itself 2-A.

 

[Tanin_iver]

Understood. You quoted the FAQ which says the following:

The FAQ is also referring to the size of the container. This is evident from the phrase "infinitely-sized multiverse." The FAQ clearly states this is 2-A.

Put simply, a single infinitely-sized container for Low 2-C structures is itself 2-A.

What is considered to be multiple multiverses in one fiction could be considered a single multiverse in another, and vice versa, without the objective properties of those collections of universes changing. The only difference is where an author decided to draw the line between what belongs to the same multiverse and not. Thus, only an uncountably infinite number of universes actually makes any difference in terms of Attack Potency, at this scale.
This illustrates some of the more unintuitive properties of sets with infinite elements: Namely, given a set X, it being a subset of another set Y does not imply that Y > X in terms of size. An example of this is how the set of all natural numbers contains both the odd numbers and even numbers, yet all of these sets in fact have the same number of elements.

Similar to Attack Potency, affecting multiple multiverses by default can not be considered a feat of superior Range to affecting a single one. As mentioned before there is no real difference between the size or properties of one or multiple multiverses. Hence there can be no objective difference in range either. This is made even worse by the fact that what we considered multiversal range, as the distance between universes or the distances between things in or between multiverses, is usually not directly stated or quantifiable in fiction, but instead is approximated by the number of universes.

No, it is talking size with respect to cardinality not spatial size of the container of the multiverse.

 

[Deagonx]

No, it is talking size with respect to cardinality.

Cardinality is an aspect being discussed, yes. Increased cardinality is one way to increase dimensionality.
But you've ignored the majority of my comment which I believe is the heart of the matter. Do we agree that the FAQ regards a single "infinitely sized multiverse" as 2-A?

 

[Tanin_iver]

But you've ignored the majority of my comment which I believe is the heart of the matter. Do we agree that the FAQ regards a single "infinitely sized multiverse" as 2-A?

No, I haven't. Here infinitely sized means infinite number(cardinality) as the whole heading of the FAQ even implies it.

Is destroying multiple infinite multiverses a better feat than destroying a single one?​

The whole thing is talking about quantity and cardinality when referring to size and whether some higher quantity of universes will imply a higher dimesnionality and it clarified that yes it would only when the quantity is uncountably infinite or higher. So, no to any reference for spatial size in that FAQ?