• 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-sized Dimensions and Pocket Realms (Staff Only)

Sera_EX

Sera_EX

She Who Dabbles in Fiction
VS Battles
Retired
6,104
5,106
As discussed in this thread, there seems to be confusion on whether or not a dimension or realm containing billions of galaxies (which is otherwise Multi-Galactic scale) is enough to be considered universal scale (3-A).

As you all should be aware of, baseline 3-A is the observable universe which is currently considered to contain two trillion galaxies and span over around 93 billion light years. Obviously 2 trillion is considerably greater than "several-billions", so should those realms be considered only Multi-Galactic size? Or, is requiring other-dimensional realities to be outright the exact same size as the observable universe too strict? (keep in mind that billion is used far more than trillion).

For further context, this affects whether or not certain realities can reach Tier 2 as well. Having multiple universe-sized realms outside the normal universe(s)' time-space is generally treated as 2-C and above. It's been decided by the staff that a time-space will not be considered Low 2-C unless it is universal in size. This is why the size of dimensions/realms matters. At a glance, there are a couple verses with realms that are only multi-galactic in size, however, some do have the attribute of being beyond time-space. The issue is we specified "universal" in size, not multi-galactic+.

Last but certainly not least, I am aware the new system's more accurate measurement of dimensional scales (mathematically speaking) makes it clear that multiple 3-A sized realms are still not enough to reach 2-C, since even Low 2-C is uncountably Times greater than High 3-A. However, we are assuming the realms themselves are outside the time-space of normal universes, and again, are universal in size (in layman's terms, comparable to a parallel universe).

TL;DR: How big must a dimension be to be considered universe-sized? Is the upper bound of Multi-Galaxy+ enough? If so, is a dimension containing a multitude of these universe-sizes realms enough to be considered 2-C or above if they are part of their own time-space?
 
Look, if a """pocket dimension""" is to the point where it's full of galaxies, claiming it's just limited to a couple of galaxy and not meant to be a universe is really the epitome of nitpicking.

Honestly I'd even argue that 4-A-sized worlds being considered to just stop after a few stars to be a bit silly, but multiple galaxies is, to me, a quite blatant proof that the world is meant to be a universe and not just some pocket of space with galaxies.

Of course it might be different if the dimension has explicitly only a few galaxies like say, DBGT's world, but that's rare.
 
I strongly agree with you there, Saikou. Now what about the 2-C bit?
 
I agree very much with Matt and Saikou.

Edit : Oops, Staff Only. Feel free to delete the post ^^.
 
Hm. there is a case in a Verse when the dimension is stated to being an Universe and another Space-Time continuum but due to the dimension only showing a galaxy, people who scale are currently rated as "at least Galaxy level"

I've wondered a long time ago if they should be rated more than they are currently
 
Normal universes are always assumed to be 3-A. "Entire" universe feats are Low 2-C though.
 
It really depends on case by case scenarios; usually if it has a lot of galaxies, then they would likely be universes. I know Cyberworld in Mega Man Battle Network was both stated to be a universe as well as shown to contain numerous galaxies, so that's generally a universe. I know that verse used to simply be 3-A but was upgraded to 2-C, but I don't know the full details so not arguing for or against.

If the individual "Worlds", "Dimensions", Alternate realities, or Universes are consistently stated to be infinite in size by reliable sources, I'd most definitely advocate that they are indeed universes. Especially if time is shown to work differently in those "Endless bodies of spaces".

For stuff like "Worlds and dimensions made of dreams" and/or "Worlds where dreams are turned into entire worlds", those are a bit more case by case. Dimensions containing smaller dimensions are definitely a thing, but it really depends on context. If individual sub dimensions are stated and/or shown to be entire universes, and/or even individual dream worlds are shown to be as big as the real world, then they would be a multiverse. But if only the entirety of Dream world is stated to be a universe with the individual sub dimensions simply stating to be worlds; and not really having enough context to be "Universes". Or that the entirety of the Dream World is stated to be equal to the Real World, then there would be a lack of context to be 2-B. And then it could either be 3-A or Low 2-C to effect the Dream World; thus it could either be 3-A or 2-C to "effect all dreams and reality".
 
I think whether or not a world/dimension should be considered a universe mainly depends on context.

Now obviously, just being called a world or dimension in itself isn't nearly enough to call it a universe, especially if this is an artificial pocket dimension created by a character.

But if it's something like "another/alternate/parallel world or dimension" that would imply sharing similar qualities to the main setting by attributing it to being a world/dimension. If we recognize the main setting as being a universe, then the other world/dimension would be a universe as well.
 
In all honesty, If a dimension has shown to have Multiple Galaxies, it should be 3-A/Low 2-C. I'm not sure same can be same if only one galaxy was shown.

If it's a world, depending on a context, it could also be Low 2-C/3-A/Whatever
 
Agree with Matt/Saikou on the size requirements.

On 2-C, I think those realms having separate space-time continuums is the most restrictive requirement I'm comfortable with for them.
 
Well, the only real requirement should be them being a space-time different from the normal universe. Each individual realm doesn't exactly need to be "separate time-spaces" from each other. In most cases, there's almost nonexistent evidence for that. However, something should be separating the realms. That way we know it isn't just a time-space stretching for infinite light years.
 
@Cal

Sera EX said:
I think if it's called a universe, showing to contain a galaxy is safe enough to consider it's universe-sized.

Any other term (dimension/realm/reality/etc.) would be rated as 3-C.
Click to expand...
 
The real cal howard said:
Sera, I'm asking if it's called a parallel world (emphasis on parallel, but also emphasis on world instead of universe), but has the first paragraph's qualifications. It is the "any other term" but the definition of parallel comes into play here.
Click to expand...
This plus "alternate" is also my question.

EDIT: sorry I just saw this was a staff discussion.
 
@Cal

Parallel is a word thrown around all the time. Parallel Dimensions are a thing and they aren't always universes. But if there's a galaxy within, I suppose it counts.
 
> Of course it might be different if the dimension has explicitly only a few galaxies like say, DBGT's world, but that's rare.

Considering the fact that the narrator of GT at one point states that there is a "boundless" number of galaxies in the universe, I believe this was quite a bad example to use. (I know 'dis out of topic, but couldn't resist the temptation of responding)

As for the topic, it's heavily case-by-case, but I generally agree with what Sera outlined.
 
@Saikou, "4 Galaxies" was a big mistranslation; it simply said 4 quadrants. In actuality, it says there are countless galaxies as Kepekley said. Also, the Kaizenshuu says Universe 7 is infinite in size
 
So what are the conclusions here?
 
I believe the general sentiment is that if a dimension/world has shown the presence of numerous galaxies in it, then it's logical to assume it is universe-sized.

However, if it just shows a night sky filled with stars, there isn't remotely any evidence to conclude it is universe-sized. It could be treated as solar system or galaxy sized depending on further evidence.

My main issue with that is what if the world/dimension shows a very limited number of galaxies...like say 5 or 10 galaxies vaguely in the sky? Should it be considered enough evidence to assume the world/dimension is universe-sized?
 
I imagine just a few select galaxies being shown would at best justify Multi-Galaxy level. Showing a generally unquantified but still notably massive amount of galaxies should probably be enough for it to be considered a universe.
 
I thought we simply go by what's shown, or else we're just being wank-y. Dots in the sky (after proving them to be real stars) = the world is 4-A. Multiple galaxies = the world is 3-B. The observable universe as baseline is for affecting physical matter, so a 93 bly dimension is not enough to be Low 2-C as the baseline for that is uncountably infinitely greater than 3-A in size.
 
I think that all 3 of you make good points.
 
@AKM sama

Galaxies aren't visible in the sky. Remember I said it's called a universe, showing to contain a few galaxies should be enough. You don't need them to actually claim it's countless galaxies, it's clear it's meant to be a universe. However, if it's described as anything else, it's 3-B.

@Crzer07

You missed the part when I directly specified it containing numerous galaxies and is a time-space. That should be enough for Low 2-C. Time-space already implies fourth-dimensional shenanigans. The only reason why say, a "country-sized time-space", isn't considered Low 2-C is because the description "beyond space-time" gets thrown around a lot in fiction for realms outside the ordinary setting, and we'd have to upgrade many verses with nothing even close to Universe level+ feats to Low 2-C, high-balling our already inflated profiles.
 
Ya I agree with your point if it's straight up called a universe. My question was regarding when it's called something else like a world/dimension/plane etc.

Showing numerous galaxies should be enough to consider it universe-sized imo. I just wanted consensus among staff on when it shows a limited number of galaxies like 5 or 10.
 
if a world has no term then 3B-3A ain't it, we all have to apply context and some different measures as well, not much. but of course if the series heavily indicate it's a universe one way or the other it could be accepted as 3-A

if a pocket dimension/realm has multiple solar sytems and a galaxy/galaxies it could possibly be accepted as 3-A but like others said it's likely at least galaxy more often than not.

now what about when a "world" is a plane/realm existing on another realm/plane that contaiins other worlds that are classified as universes hmm?

68c
what do we do about that?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MightyFrogBeyond
Creating an infinite sized universe?
Replies
3
Views
549
ArcaneAbyss
Wankbreaker
  • Locked
Tier 2 hotfix.
Replies
25
Views
4K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Shiroiyo
Lifting Strength in pocket dimensions.
Replies
1
Views
407
Accelerated_Evolution
Accelerated_Evolution
GarrixianXD
  • Locked
Setting Standard Sizes for Pocket Dimensions
Replies
5
Views
1K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Laxxius
Post your personal Tiering System here
Replies
0
Views
153
Laxxius
Laxxius
Back
Top