• 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.

Infinite 4-D power = Infinite 5-D power = High 2-A???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Basilisk1995

Basilisk1995

VS Battles
Retired
493
38
According to this High Multiverse level+ = Characters who can instantly destroy or create an infinite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums. This category also includes 5-dimensional characters.I used to think destroying or creating an infinite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums and being 5-D is the same thing. But The Everlasting and Promestei assured me in this thread that they aren't. Now,

Character A: Ca destroy or create an infinite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums = High 2-A

Character B: = Has limited 5-D power. = High 2-A

Character C: Has infinite 5-D power = High 2-A???

For someone to be Low 1-C he must have strictly 6-D feat. Infinite 5-D power is not enough for Low 1-C rating.

While I know that we don't have all that many characters who are like Character C but still it is a huge hole in our Tiering System.Giving two characters who have literally infinite degree of power difference same rating is so unfair.

Now according to our Tiering System who can destroy 10^500+ universes but not infinite are rated as 2-A. As The Everlasting said in that thread "that kinda nullifies the need for the regular 2-A category, since most people in it are infintie universal" I also think just because scientists speculate there are 10^500 universes in our multiverse we don't need a separate tier for that.We need to do what's best for our Tiering System. My suggestions are as follows:

2-B = Characters who can create and/or destroy 1001 to any finite number of universal space-time continuums.

2-A = Characters who can instantly destroy or create an infinite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums.

High 2-A = 5-dimensional characters.
 
hmm... in my understanding infinite 4-D constructs Ôëñ an arbitrary 5-D construct (even through feats wise it would always be <, except a very specific case). But as usual I am very willing to let myself be corrected (especially from DarkLK)
 
""1m line is longer than a 5 cm line. Yet both 1m and 5cm have infinite dots in between them. It's just how dimensions work""

One infinite can be larger than another infinite.This has been proved many times over. And yes any line is larger than infinite dots. It's the century old argument " infinitely large picture on a infinitely large paper can never harm you ". The very reason we have High 3-A (infinite 3-D power) and Low 2-C (4-D power) is because of this.
 
@Aurasuke We go by the mathematical definitions of infinity in projective geometry, as detailed in the Tiering System page.

Also, given that you have consistently been an extremely bothersome and time-consuming liability to the wiki, attempting to undermine our entire tiering system is the final straw, as it is extremely against the front page rules.

Given that you have been polite enough, I have repeatedly given you far more leeway than most users, but nevertheless, you give me no good choice except giving you a long block.
 
@Basilisk1995 Well, it is admittedly a bit of a gap in our tiering sytem, but not one that can be easily solved.

Basically, according to some theories alternate universes have to be lined up along an extra spatial axis, and an infinite amount of 4-Dimensional objects can geometrically be fit into any 5-Dimensional space, which is the reason why the two categories overlap.

The higher we get into the hierarchy, the greater amounts of infinity can be fit into each tier. We simply do not remotely have enough categories to fit all possible varations.
 
Antvasima said:
The higher we get into the hierarchy, the greater amounts of infinity can be fit into each tier. We simply do not remotely have enough categories to fit all possible varations.
Click to expand...
On top of that, this is especially true for 1-A, where it can be next to impossible to determine how great the difference between two characters is.
 
I feel that the system we currentl have for the 2-A tier (i'm saying this for both 2-A and the High 2-A version) is good enough for me IMHO. I get what your trying to say here, Basilisk. But i'd rather still go with what we have so far with the current rating.

Ant does admit that we have a bit of a gap in there, but what he says does make sense on why the site here has made it into those two catagories.
 
Also, to follow your suggestion would make categories High 2-B and 2-A overlap too much.

And we do not know of any characters with infinite 5-D power. It would all appear the same to regular people.

However, I could see the logic of something like this:

High 2-B: 10^500 to any finite number of 4-Dimensional universal spacetime continuums.

2-A: An infinite number of 4-Dimensional universal spacetime continuums.

High 2-A: 5-Dimensional characters.
 
That said, it would likely be too much of a bother to severely restructure the tiering system, but I will ask DarkLK what he thinks.
 
Here is what DarkLK replied:

"Parallel universes are called parallel because they exist in parallel to each other. That is, the three-dimensional coordinates of them do not differ from each other, but they are shifted in terms of some other dimension. (Remember we recently asked about Digimon, where it was the same thing, infinite worlds existed within the higher dimension)

You can imagine an infinite number of parallel two-dimensional objects that stand in the infinite-small distance from each other in three-dimensional space.

On the other hand, you can imagine infinite-small three-dimensional object. You try to cut the object to an infinite number of two-dimensional slices.

Both cases are basically the same.

And the same with the parallel universes. Basically Azzy right here ("infinite 4-D constructs Ôëñ an arbitrary 5-D construct"). But we must understand that the infinite power of 5-D is still infinitely more than just endless universes."

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/228985
 
My entire point of this thread was to create a difference between infinite 4-d power and infinite 5-d power in our tiering system.

I have also gone through the thread on Darklk's wall.I think what antvasima suggested earlier is the best solution.

High 2-B: 10^500 to any finite number of 4-Dimensional universal spacetime continuums.

2-A: An infinite number of 4-Dimensional universal spacetime continuums.

High 2-A: 5-Dimensional characters.
 
Alternately we could just incorporate Infinite 5-D power into Low 1-C, as DarkLK suggested.
 
Yes then we will have another issue. Infinite 11-D =infinitely small 12-D= Low 1-B. With all due to Darklk's opinion, I think his solution will serve to create more problems.
 
Hmmmm...

Well Ant just posted to DarkLK by using what i presumed is your plan here. The whole change of "High 2-B", "2-A", and "High 2-A" thing from earlier...
 
That will open a door to so many problems. We will have to make infinite 6-D = 1-C(not just low 1-C).

Infinite 13-D = 1-B (not just low 1-B).We will have to change too many and add to much description.And new users will argue that infinite 3-D power = Low 2-C (not just High 3-A)
 
@Azathoth That could work as well, but we may be on the verge of overcomplicating things. In addition, somebody would have to do the work of redefining the Infinite Universes and 5-D characters to the new system, if we go through with a change.

In any case, we must first hammer out what makes the most sense, and then clear it with Lord Kavpeny.
 
@Basilisk1995 Probably true. The problem is mitigated by the fact that there are no such characters in the wiki, but nevertheless, we would overcomplicate things.

Let's wait to see what DarkLK thinks of my suggestions.
 
IMHO

2-B - can destroy 1001 to any finite number of universes.

2-A - can destroy infinite universes, but exists in this infinite universes' domain.

High 2-A - can destroy infinite universes and exists in the higher domain.
 
Hmm...this truly is a complicated topic, mostly due to the fragile nature of the Tiering System.

However, it is true that while this is not an inaccuracy, it is indeed an ambiguity.

Personally though, the "infinite power" logic can be used to split every single dimension level. The distinction is presently listed only in case of 3-D/4-D gap because of the significance of difference between regular mass-energy destruction and destruction of a d-brane. However, attempting to sub-classify all dimensions levels (such as 6-D, 11-D, etc.) using the "infinite power" logic is nonsensical and a waste of time.

The infinite power split should be listed IMO in case of, as aforementioned, the 3-D/4-D gap, and in case of 2-B (due to our tiering system classifying 2-B as a finite number of 4-dimensional space-time continuums, thereby leading to the necessity to list a tier with an infinite number of 4-dimensional space-time continuums)

With that in mind:

  • 2-B: Characters who can create and/or destroy 1001 to 10^500 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums.
  • 2-A: Characters who can create and/or destroy 10^500 to an infinite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums.
  • High 2-A: Characters who can create and/or destroy 5-dimensional space-time constructs.
As previously stated, we will not be dividing higher dimensions on the basis of "infinite" power.

Agreements/disagrements?
 
^^I agree but what about characters who can create and/or destroy more than 10^500 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums.(I know there are no such character but still a flaw in the definition).

Your 2-A and High 2-A definitions are agreed by me.You might wanna change the definition of 2-B

2-B: Characters who can create and/or destroy 1001 to any finite number of 4-dimensional universal space-time continuums.
 
Changed post slightly.

No, 2-B will remain as it is. 10^500 is a specific number, obtained from the hypothesis of that number of universal space-time continuums being in our own multiverse.
 
I am fine with Lord Kavpeny's suggestion.
 
I agree with Lord Kavpeny's suggestion.
 
Hmm... if we go with Kavpeny's suggestion we would probably have to change most 2-A character from High 2-A to just 2-A. Not that I mind, I just wanted to point it out.
 
well, thats how i thot the system worked at first, but then a bunch of infinite univerals were being put to High 2-A, which i found weird
 
Infact, do we even have a fifth dimensional profile? i'm not so sure we do..

Strictly speaking, for placing infinite universes we need 5-D space.

Because, universe = 4-D (3-D space + time).
 
Yes, but only an unfathomably thin 5-D space. I think that Lord Kavpeny's suggestion is sensible, although somebody will have to change most of the High 2-A profiles to 2-A. (5-Dimensional characters such as Bat-Mite and Mxyzptlk should naturally stay where they are) Is any of the admins or content moderators willing to do so?
 
Yes. I think that is fine. I will change the tiering system page accordingly.
 
I have now changed the tiering system page. You can start converting the High 2-A profiles now if you wish.

This search page should help you to find them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Wankbreaker
  • Locked
Tier 2 hotfix.
Replies
25
Views
3K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Fixxed
  • Locked
Higher D by Transcending Infinite/all level of Power and Existential
Replies
7
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Goshtama
Low 2-C | Finite or Infinite Timelines?
Replies
1
Views
900
Richard5128pm
Richard5128pm
MightyFrogBeyond
Is Tier 2-C/2-B/2-A, technically 5D in personal cosmology?
Replies
11
Views
778
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
MightyFrogBeyond
How to Keep infinite branching timelines as Low 2-C??
Replies
2
Views
288
MightyFrogBeyond
MightyFrogBeyond
Back
Top