• 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.

Additions to the HDE page (Staff Thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Going off of what DT said, why should being bigger or having ontological differences give you HDE? It sounds like just giving participation trophies for beings who have tier 1 without an extra-spatial axes.
If you are space-time continuum itself (which is in matter of fact a 4D in its nature), you get HDE for that which is a large size type 8 as well
 
Going off of what DT said, why should being bigger or having ontological differences give you HDE?
Because if you become a bigger infinity than a certain infinity (i.e. Aleph-0 for example) then you have to gain a new dimensional axis. Because an area with the size of Aleph-1 must have 4 spatial dimensions. And so it goes on like this

Sometimes I think people are not reading the FAQ page
 
Do you mean something of a size comparable to that of the space-time continuum, but distinct from it? (as in, for not being space-time continuum itself?)

I agree with you, although it is not often depicted in fiction in such a complex manner. Perhaps you could consider adding a prominent note to provide further clarification on the matter.
 
Because if you become a bigger infinity than a certain infinity (i.e. Aleph-0 for example) then you have to gain a new dimensional axis. Because an area with the size of Aleph-1 must have 4 spatial dimensions. And so it goes on like this

Sometimes I think people are not reading the FAQ page
That's not true in anyway. R^4 is still Aleph-1. The R in R^n refers to real number line, which is Aleph-1. If you are bigger than the R^3, then you can just be X^3, where X is a number system where R is a subset of it, such as the Complex numbers. You still wouldn't have to gain a new dimensional axis. Also things with HDE can be any size.

edit: meant aleph-1

Do you mean something of a size comparable to that of the space-time continuum, but distinct from it? (as in, for not being space-time continuum itself?)

I agree with you, although it is not often depicted in fiction in such a complex manner. Perhaps you could consider adding a prominent note to provide further clarification on the matter.
That's fine. You can just have an example on HDE: "Being a spacetime continuum can allow a character to have HDE, but simply being bigger or the same size a spacetime doesn't necessitate having HDE, unless it is stated the character has an extra-dimensional axis."
 
Last edited:
R^5 is still Aleph-0.
Not according to current wiki standards and not in terms of pure size.

A new dimensional axis = Uncountable infinite size.

So basically what I mean is that if you become a bigger infinity than the infinity of an infinite(in size) 3D structure, that structure becomes 4D because this refers to a qualitative superiority. And this is valid for every structure with 4 spatial dimensions. Because (as i said) this means there is a qualitative superiority between them.
 
Not according to current wiki standards and not in terms of pure size.

A new dimensional axis = Uncountable infinite size.

So basically what I mean is that if you become a bigger infinity than the infinity of an infinite(in size) 3D structure, that structure becomes 4D because this refers to a qualitative superiority. And this is valid for every structure with 4 spatial dimensions. Because (as i said) this means there is a qualitative superiority between them.
I am uncertain as to the reason for the exclusion of the temporal dimension, as it does not seem to provide any significant qualitative superiority, particularly in comparison to its inclusion in tier 2.
 
Not according to current wiki standards and not in terms of pure size.

A new dimensional axis = Uncountable infinite size.

So basically what I mean is that if you become a bigger infinity than the infinity of an infinite(in size) 3D structure, that structure becomes 4D because this refers to a qualitative superiority. And this is valid for every structure with 4 spatial dimensions. Because (as i said) this means there is a qualitative superiority between them.
Our wiki equates the power of destroying a bigger infinity as 4D, but being infinitely bigger doesn't automatically give you an additional space axis. That's not how it works. You'll just be infinitely bigger in 3 axes of space. Which is why they shouldn't get HDE.
 
Being uncountable infinite bigger does give you an additional dimension, from tier 3 to tier 2. Yes
 
Our wiki equates the power of destroying a bigger infinity as 4D, but being infinitely bigger doesn't automatically give you an additional space axis. That's not how it works. You'll just be infinitely bigger in 3 axes of space.
I'm not talking about being infinitely bigger than something, which can mean different things. I'm talking about being a bigger infinity than the infinity of something. Like Aleph-1, which is a bigger infinity than Aleph-0.

It's not really difficult to understand. Unless you say that a bigger infinity than the infinity of Aleph-0 is still Aleph-0 :coffee:
 
I'm not talking about being infinitely bigger than something, which can mean different things. I'm talking about being a bigger infinity than the infinity of something. Like Aleph-1, which is a bigger infinity than Aleph-0.

It's really not very difficult to understand. Unless you say that a bigger infinity than the infinity of Aleph-0 is still Aleph-0 :coffee:
R^n is all Aleph-0. Our wiki starts Aleph-1 at Low 1-A.
 
R^n is all Aleph-0. Our wiki starts Aleph-1 at Low 1-A.
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with what you're saying. We're talking about size. What you're saying is the number of spatial dimensions.

Something the size of Aleph-0 cannot contain 4 spatial dimensions. Because according to wiki standards, we consider the size of an infinitely big 3D structure to be Aleph-0. And if you get uncountably bigger (which means being a bigger infinity than infinity of something) than Aleph-0, in the sense of pure size, that gives you an extra dimensional axis. This is what we call qualitative superiority.
 
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with what you're saying. We're talking about size. What you're saying is the number of spatial dimensions
And like I said earlier, being bigger size doesn't equate to an additional spatial dimension. Being infinitely bigger than R^4 will just be X^4 where X is a set where R is a subset of X.

This is... mathematical. What else are we talking about when I mention infinity?
Being infinitely bigger doesn't automatically give you an extra axis of dimensions. You can just be infinitely bigger in the same direction.
 
And like I said earlier, being bigger size doesn't equate to an additional spatial dimension. Being infinitely bigger than R^4 will just be X^3 where X is a set where R is a subset of X.
We are not talking about a simple case of being big. It's being uncountably infinitely big. By denying this, you are directly denying the qualitative superiority that we accept in wiki standards.

It's also cringe-worthy that you took part of what I said and ignored where I actually made a point.

Sigh Anyways, I don't want to lose my IQ anymore. And if I talk further, ig Pein will kick my ass.
 
We are not talking about a simple case of being big. It's being uncountably infinitely big. By denying this, you are directly denying the qualitative superiority that we accept in wiki standards.
And I like said earlier, being uncountable infinitely bigger in size doesn't equate to an additional spatial dimension. Being uncountably infinitely bigger than R^4 will just be X^4 where X is a set where R is a subset of X.

You can still have qualitative superiority, but that doesn't mean an extra dimensional axis exists. Hence why Qualitative Superiority shouldn't automatically give a character HDE.
 
And I like said earlier, being uncountable infinitely bigger in size doesn't equate to an additional spatial dimension.
This is a qualitative superiority, so yes. It gives another dimensional axis.
You can still have qualitative superiority, but that doesn't mean an extra dimensional axis exists.
It gives it in terms of size. If these statements like being uncountably infinitely big are in terms of power, yes, that only gives AP, not HDE. But what we are talking about here is size.

And even DT has confirmed this in the messages above. So it doesn't mean anything if you say it won't;
If you contain a 4D structure, you're probably 4D (some exceptions exist), but if you contain just a 3D structure as infinitely small thing, then you are not necessarily 4D. You just need to be infinitely bigger than it in one of the many ways fiction imagines qualitative superiority.
 
This is a qualitative superiority, so yes. It gives another dimensional axis.
Here is what DT says:


Seeing reality as fiction doesn't mean that your body has an additional dimensional axis. Beings that look in reality as fiction are frequently portrayed as regular 3-dimensional beings (i.e. they often have a human shape), just that they are "more real".
Not necessarily. In fiction you can be larger than stuff in many ways, not all of the involving higher dimensions. Like... any kind of higher plane stuff, basically, where the lower plane is just reduced to some insignificant thing.
You can be larger than n-dimensional space in many ways, not all of them are having more dimensional axis. So in terms of size / AP, yes, but not necessarily geometrically.


And even DT has confirmed this in the messages above. So it doesn't mean anything if you say it won't;
And in the one thing you quoated, DT also said:


If you contain a 4D structure, you're probably 4D (some exceptions exist), but if you contain just a 3D structure as infinitely small thing, then you are not necessarily 4D. You just need to be infinitely bigger than it in one of the many ways fiction imagines qualitative superiority.
Which kind of contradicts the next line, so idk, they will have to explain the distinction between that. BUt there are other statements, as I have posted above.



It does, WHAT? This is the whole point of uncountable infinite.
You can be uncountably bigger in the same direction, that doesn't automatically mean the creation of a new axis of space.
 
You've got to be kidding me.....

In the messages you quoted, DT is talking about a normal R>F example and a simple size comparison. Not uncountably infinitely big as in the message I quoted.
The second and third messages I quoted are speaking about size.

And this semantic argument of bigger vs. uncountably infinitely bigger isn't useful because R is already uncountably big, and anything bigger than it would automatically be uncountably bigger. You cannot be countably bigger than an uncountable infinity.
 
The second third messages I quoted, are speaking about size.
Yeah, you definitely don't understand what you read
634084819881426954.webp
 

You can stack an uncountably infinite amount of squares next to each other and they will forever create an bigger and bigger square. Only when you stack the squares in a new direction parallel to the second dimension, will it become a cube.

OR for more visual representation:

AAAAAAA

I can keep adding an uncountably infinite amount of As to that String of letters. Each letter can be represented by 1 dimension in terms of position (x).

AAAAAA
AAAAAA

By adding a new direction of As (going down and up), to that string of letters, I can now represent each A by two dimensions in terms of position (x,y).
 
Last edited:
What did DontTalk think that we should do here?
 
Can you remind us regarding what is currently being discussed here please?
 
Okay. Can you elaborate regarding the greater context please?
 
Okay. Can you elaborate regarding the greater context please?
Our HDE page are for those who are higher dimensioned in the word sense. i.e. those with an extra geometry axis
so we should add this notes to the HDE page
Note: The Higher-Dimensional Existence is for Objects and Entities that are Higher-Dimensional in a proper mathematical sense i.e. the regular 3-Dimensional axis + 1 or more dimensional axis. The following will not qualify for this criteria
1. Viewing 3-Dimensional objects, entities or constructs as fiction; Viewing something as fiction does not mean your body has an extra dimensional axis, as the beings are still portrayed as regular 3-Dimensional beings, they are just 'more real'
2. Holding ontological difference over 3-Dimensional objects, entities or construct; Most times this is a measure of power and will not equate to having an extra dimensional axis
3. Stated to be larger than or contain 3-Dimensional objects, entities or construct; there are numbers of ways fictions portrays infinitely larger than a 3-Dimensional construct but not all of it would mean an extra dimensional axis; being uncountable infinite larger than a 3-Dimensional construct or something similar will mean qualitative superiority as fictions tends to portray it as so, but without further contexts, it should not mean an extra-dimensional axis
4. Stated to be Higher Dimensional or a Higher Plane or a Higher Existence; without further contexts that shows it to be in the virtue of them having an extra dimensional axis to 3-Dimensional entities or objects.
5. Stated to be Extra-Dimensional; the literal meaning of this is an entity or object that comes from outside the regular 3-D space,; this does not mean these entities or objects have an extra dimensional axis in contrast to 3-Dimensional objects, without further contexts.
6. Stated to transcends space or transcend space and time; there are lots of ways a character can transcend without having an extra-dimensional axis or in relation to the geometry of the Object.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top