• 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.

New profile posts

What's new Featured content New posts New media New media comments New profile posts Latest activity
Dragongod224
Hello, can you please give your input on this dxd ability thread? It's been months since this thread was created, and only one staff member has given their input. Since you also help with other dxd threads, it would be appreciated, if you could give your input, Thanks."
Dragongod224
Hello, can you please give your input on this thread? It's been months since this thread was created, and only one staff member has given their input. So, if you could give your input, it would be appreciated. Thanks."
Unoriginal777
Hello Astral,

You probably recognize me as the random guy from the Infinite Multiversal Space Container thread, but I wanted to take a moment out to say that I really liked your take on the issue in your own comment and found it to be a well thought out and informed addition to the conversation. Now that being said I am curious about your thoughts as to my take on the issue found in my aforementioned first comment.

In any case, thank you in advance for hearing me out.

Sincerely,
Unoriginal777
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Glad you liked it!
Now, moving on to your post:
Now that being said, after carefully reviewing the wiki standards I have what I think to be a slight criticism of the current tier 2 standards. Namely when those standards move beyond the basic Low 2-C reference point. So say someone is trying to push for 2-A which is represented by characters who can “significantly affect, create and/or destroy a countably infinite number of separate space-time continuums." Now I think we would all agree that the space/void which fits these timelines would itself be 2-A at least (given what it fits). However, say you have a verse that has the void and the statement of being infinitely greater than the notion of space-time continuums. Well to my shock, what typically happens is people take the following view.
Click to expand...
Well, strictly speaking, a Void is something that lacks space and time, per the Void Manipulation page, and things like Empty spaces that exist in-between universes are not classified as voids in the literal sense, they are just called that out of convenience.

Now, regarding your statement itself, if we assume a Void as lacking Spatio-temporal characteristics, then a void that is such and yet also infinitely bigger is bound to be 1-A instead, per our BDE2 definitions, provided there are no anti-feats, of course.

However, looking at the CRT you linked, the only proof I see is of said Demon World being infinite in size, it does not suggest anything like it containing the human world or another separate space-time, just some pocket dimensions that are never confirmed to be different space-times all in all.
As such, even if the verse in question logically could/should be eligible to fit those infinite space-times in the container, because the container itself doesn’t specify a multiverse, it is then rejected and placed subjectively into 2-C as being "vaguely" above Low 2-C. This notion is one which has always struck me as strangely peculiar seeing as the logic when applied to other tiers that deal in similarly infinite spaces/pocket dimensions doesn’t hold up. For example, at the High-3A tier it is not required that a specified infinite content is demonstrated/shown as much as the fact that the cosmological structure/space itself stretches on infinitely regardless of its demonstrated contents.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much staff opinion, and all in all, it does not go against the standards, strictly speaking, as there are no set standards for Infinite spaces outside Space-times. However, technically speaking, per what I think, if Space exists outside a Space-Time that contains that Space-Time and is bigger than it, then it is bound to be 2-A by mathematics. And in case it is also infinite, that is naturally low 1-C.
For example, from what I’ve heard from hearsay (even in this thread) the typical reasoning why simply being “infinite” in comparison to a confirmed 2-C space is “not enough” for tier 2-A is the fact that because the distance between tier 2 constructs is technically infinite (seeing as tier 2 constructs are themselves infinite due to their 4D status for lack of better term) a claim to being infinitely larger then a space-time continuum should then be ignored as follows.
Click to expand...
And I disagree with that, too, for the same reason as what I described in the CRT itself.
A line is, for example, infinite, and the space between two non-overlapping lines in a 2-A plane, despite being finite and insignificant in 2-D perspective, is enough to fit a countably infinite amount of such lines.
Extending that to 4D space-times embedded inside 5D Space, a 5D insignificant space that contains multiple space-times should also be 2-A.
Nevertheless, I think there’s a problem with this line of reasoning as well in that it fails from a perspectival sense. Think of it this way, we all acknowledge that time-spaces are infinite given their 4D constitution with the addition of a temporal axis. However, the fact we can count said universes which are infinite constructs in blatantly finite terms in all tier 2 standards (as seen in tiers, Low 2-C, 2-C, 2-B, and 2-A) means that it shouldn’t have to be a blurry topic when we have a confirmed Low 2-C space and a space containing it which is infinitely larger then it as by acknowledging the notion of a space-time continuum at all an author is technically taking a God’s eye view from a 4D perspective which trivializes the 4D construct to a finite object to count. This is a very similar concept to how one counts higher infinities and differentiates them from say the infinite amount of decimals between 1 and 2 and the infinite amount of decimals between 1 and infinity; a cornerstone of VSBW as a whole given what we know of Set Theory.

So for the sake of consistency I believe the best path forward would be to alter the tier 2-C, 2-B, and 2-A standards with the add-on that a verse may also qualify for these rankings should they prove capable of affecting spaces/pocket dimensions that can imitate a multiverse containing 2 to 1000 universes, 1001 to any higher finite amount, and especially spaces that can contain infinite universes despite not showing direct evidence of containing said amount of universes in their expanse because size is the be all, end all of the issue when scaling a dimension of sorts. Not the inside contents or else we'd need to turn that level of scrutiny towards standards for scaling similarly infinite spaces like those in the High 3-A classification.
Click to expand...
Same as what I said at the start, so we share nearly the same sentiment in this.
Tho, note that, for the highlighted 3 words, I would like to assume that you meant 4D Space-times there, which I agree to. Though, Spaces outside the Universe that are shown to be literally infinite should straight up be low 1-C.
Unoriginal777
Unoriginal777
Hello Astral,

Thank you for your gracious response. I appreciate that you took the time to engage in this dialogue. That being said, DMC's DW does have established evidence of not only being infinitely greater then the HW, but also having in the past encompassed it when the HW was originally born barring outside interference which split the worlds, quite directly if I might add. Not to mention the HW would be the lowest in a spectrum of differing realms in the DW like the mirror realm, a carbon copy of the HW operating on different spatio-temporal laws then the HW which also would've emerged from the DW like the HW or Mundus's palace which can contain a universe which even by 1's metrics is a continuum I think the DW contains/encompasses space time continuums and can contain an infinite amount at that.

That aside, I can assert that the 3 words were meant to speak of 4D space-times. Sorry for my lack of clarification.
Lort15
Ddm made his respond sir ovens liked my miraculous post is this enough for my crt to get accepted?
TWILIGHT-OP
TWILIGHT-OP
Liking isn't enough, need his approval in crt.
Lort15
Lort15
Ah damn, then we have to wait
KaydeeX
hey considering the way you index tiers
7-B | At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B, at least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B with Byakugō
Click to expand...
won’t it be better as
7-B | At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B, higher with Byakugō
Click to expand...
since it gets rid of unnecessary spaces (it’s the same tier only a bit higher)
I noticed this in tsunade, hashirama and minato (could be more)
MinatoSparkle
MinatoSparkle
It's kinda important cause different values are listed, but ig I could only do that for the AP section and not the tiers idk. I'll bring it up and see what others think in the thread later.
Dereck03
If you asked me for input in a thread and I haven't answered these days, sorry, I'm working and the internet is also garbage (less than a MBps). I have seen a lot of bumps and threads already finished, so you better post your request again on my wall. I will try to check it as soon as possible.

🙇🙇
Kavopaco
Hi, whenever you got time, could you check this really short calc? It uses a method you previously approved, and i was wondering if its still usable.
Omnificence
Happy New Year & belated birthday; sorry I missed it. Thanks for taking up my suggestion in the laser/light CRT, btw!
Back
Top