- 10,654
- 1,592
- Thread starter
- #361
I will make a thread about it.
-
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.
Changes to 3-A in the tiering system (Staff only)
- Thread starter The_King_of_Prudence
- Start date
- 8,821
- 9,404
Forgive me for I'm not staff but I'd like to bring something up.
Ever since it was brought to my attention, I couldn't stop thinking about a little bit of a problem we have in our tiering system. This has to go with 3-A, High 3-A and low 2-C. Mainly the two last tiers. High 3-A is treated as inferior to low 2-C while it should be the opposite and I'll explain why.
4D is something that's hard to measure because of what it is. It's also seen as infinite. Why? Finite characters like Super Buu and Hades (Kid Icarus) for example are able to break and control space time, but they're not low 2-C. Infinity cannot be divided or subtracted to get a smaller number because it's still Infinite. If a character with AP lower than low 2-C cracks a space time continuum, which is infinitely durable, then that means two different things. Either that character is infinite or space time continuums aren't infinite. Going with the less absurd, space time continuums aren't infinitely durable they just take unquantifiable amounts of energy to destroy. This may seem problematic at first glance and maybe it is. However I have a suggestion.
Merge 3-A and low 2-C into 3-A and make it universe level but it'll be space and time. High 3-A would be an infinite sized space time continuum. This would put all 3-As and low 2-Cs in the same tier while all the high 3-As don't need to be touched because it's superior to 3-A anyway. This removes low 2-C entirely. The reason for this is not only because space time isn't infinite but what a universe generally means. 3-A on the wiki is also just multi galaxy level but bigger really.
The universe is defined as all of space and time and their contents. It's pretty clear that a space time continuum is the universe. It's the general definition and even the Big Bang created time and space since it created the entire universe.
Fiction doesn't even make a difference between 3-A and low 2-C as they usually just say "the universe". Imo it's a little redundant and makes things too redundant and complicated.
If making a new thread is necessary then I'll do so.
Ever since it was brought to my attention, I couldn't stop thinking about a little bit of a problem we have in our tiering system. This has to go with 3-A, High 3-A and low 2-C. Mainly the two last tiers. High 3-A is treated as inferior to low 2-C while it should be the opposite and I'll explain why.
4D is something that's hard to measure because of what it is. It's also seen as infinite. Why? Finite characters like Super Buu and Hades (Kid Icarus) for example are able to break and control space time, but they're not low 2-C. Infinity cannot be divided or subtracted to get a smaller number because it's still Infinite. If a character with AP lower than low 2-C cracks a space time continuum, which is infinitely durable, then that means two different things. Either that character is infinite or space time continuums aren't infinite. Going with the less absurd, space time continuums aren't infinitely durable they just take unquantifiable amounts of energy to destroy. This may seem problematic at first glance and maybe it is. However I have a suggestion.
Merge 3-A and low 2-C into 3-A and make it universe level but it'll be space and time. High 3-A would be an infinite sized space time continuum. This would put all 3-As and low 2-Cs in the same tier while all the high 3-As don't need to be touched because it's superior to 3-A anyway. This removes low 2-C entirely. The reason for this is not only because space time isn't infinite but what a universe generally means. 3-A on the wiki is also just multi galaxy level but bigger really.
The universe is defined as all of space and time and their contents. It's pretty clear that a space time continuum is the universe. It's the general definition and even the Big Bang created time and space since it created the entire universe.
Fiction doesn't even make a difference between 3-A and low 2-C as they usually just say "the universe". Imo it's a little redundant and makes things too redundant and complicated.
If making a new thread is necessary then I'll do so.
- 30,027
- 31,231
It's fine @Zamasu, as long as you're legit trying to help and you had permission from a staff member; You're good.
Anyway, on one hand, you're right about fiction not really treating 3-A or Low 2-C separate, but I don't quite think merging 3-A or Low 2-C would be a good idea. I think the suggestion was brought up a while back on this thread or one of the previous ones and was generally decided not to mess with those.
Space-Time hax isn't the same thing as destroying an entire Space-Time continuum. Yes, tearing fabric in space is common even among characters who are less than Universal, but as mentioned above; it's more so hax rather than Attack Potency. Time in a lot of places are also thought to have no beginning or no end; reason being over 100 Billion years old is clearly not justification for existing before Space-Time. There's still a lot of things to consider for sure.
Space-Time, while infinite might not always be the best word, immeasurable might actually be more accurate for determining space-time destruction. Of course neither 3-D or 4-D is "True Infinity"; that would be more like Infinite-D beings; but there are times where destroying all matter in the universe is clearly different than destroying space-time. Destroying "the universe" has often been used to describe either or, but I also need to point out that most verses with Universal beings don't have many characters in between either. Dragon Ball is one of the few where both 3-A characters and Low 2-C characters exist, and they don't treat it as a literal infinite gap; but the gaps are still really huge at least during the time of Infinite Zamasu. A lot of other verses seems to only have one or the other exist, or have characters go from Tier 6 to Tier 2 and stuff like that.
We won't ultimately decide till over the summer, but I don't quite thing merging the Tiers would still be the best idea.
Anyway, on one hand, you're right about fiction not really treating 3-A or Low 2-C separate, but I don't quite think merging 3-A or Low 2-C would be a good idea. I think the suggestion was brought up a while back on this thread or one of the previous ones and was generally decided not to mess with those.
Space-Time hax isn't the same thing as destroying an entire Space-Time continuum. Yes, tearing fabric in space is common even among characters who are less than Universal, but as mentioned above; it's more so hax rather than Attack Potency. Time in a lot of places are also thought to have no beginning or no end; reason being over 100 Billion years old is clearly not justification for existing before Space-Time. There's still a lot of things to consider for sure.
Space-Time, while infinite might not always be the best word, immeasurable might actually be more accurate for determining space-time destruction. Of course neither 3-D or 4-D is "True Infinity"; that would be more like Infinite-D beings; but there are times where destroying all matter in the universe is clearly different than destroying space-time. Destroying "the universe" has often been used to describe either or, but I also need to point out that most verses with Universal beings don't have many characters in between either. Dragon Ball is one of the few where both 3-A characters and Low 2-C characters exist, and they don't treat it as a literal infinite gap; but the gaps are still really huge at least during the time of Infinite Zamasu. A lot of other verses seems to only have one or the other exist, or have characters go from Tier 6 to Tier 2 and stuff like that.
We won't ultimately decide till over the summer, but I don't quite thing merging the Tiers would still be the best idea.
- 10,748
- 6,476
I doubt most fiction would consider "Destroying time-space itself" as bring weaker or comparable to "destroying all moons and stars of the universe" but alright.
- 30,027
- 31,231
He didn't say weaker, but more or less the same. And he meant destroying time he thinks would be less than destroying what's literally infinite sized space. But again, I don't really like the idea of merging them.
- 8,821
- 9,404
I always found it weird and redundant for characters to have a 3-A and low 2-C rating at the same time. DBS and Kratos for example.
- 8,821
- 9,404
They do?
Wokistan
Bioluminescent African American Working At The CIA
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
Human Resources
- 16,865
- 7,328
Some characters in Warhammer 40,000 and Destiny are noted as powerful not via extremely large physical destruction or whatever, but instead being able to create separate space times even if they aren't the "full" size that would get to tier 2 (or in the case of the latter, not considered as such yet.) Pretty sure the difference was made clear in Magic: The Gathering before as well, though I could be wrong about that. Something about Phyrexia not only destroying all that's in the plane (universe) but annihilating and assimilating a plane itself, meaning its time.
- 32,327
- 20,212
Tldr what is currently being discussed now?
- 6,300
- 1,594
Offtopic to the current discussion, but hubble telescope has officially reached its limit in how far it can see, everything is just inference, and theory at this point including the length of the universe past 13 billion light years. (this goes back to a point i made far above.)
[ https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...the-limits-of-the-hubble-space-telescope/amp/ ]
[ https://www.google.com/search?q=Hub...04_iAhUDLK0KHZX8C2IQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=662 ]
[ https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...the-limits-of-the-hubble-space-telescope/amp/ ]
[ https://www.google.com/search?q=Hub...04_iAhUDLK0KHZX8C2IQ_AUIDigB&biw=1366&bih=662 ]
- 6,300
- 1,594
Another article update: Cosmic inflation theory is a well verified scientific theory. [ https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...-well-has-cosmic-inflation-been-verified/amp/ ]
1st point.)
- "But superseding the Big Bang isn't easy at all. To do so, a new theory would have to do all three of the following:
What inflation specifically hypothesized is that the Big Bang wasn't the beginning, but rather was set up by a prior stage of the Universe. In this early state — dubbed an inflationary state by Guth — the dominant form of energy wasn't in matter or radiation, but was inherent to the fabric of space itself, and possessed a very large energy density.
This would cause the Universe to expand both rapidly and relentlessly, driving any pre-existing matter apart. The Universe would be stretched so large it would be indistinguishable from flat. All the parts that an observer (like us) would be able to access would now have the same uniform properties everywhere, since they originated from a previously-connected state in the past. And since there would be a maximum temperature the Universe achieved when inflation ended, and the energy inherent to space transitioned into matter, antimatter, and radiation, we could avoid the production of leftover, high-energy relics.
All at once, all three of those puzzles that the Big Bang couldn't explain were solved. This was truly a watershed moment for cosmology, and immediately led to a deluge of scientists working to correct Guth's original model in order to reproduce all of the Big Bang's successes. Guth's idea was published in 1981, and by 1982, two independent teams — Andrei Linde and the duo of Paul Steinhardt and Andy Albrecht — had done it.
The key was to picture inflation as a slowly-rolling ball atop a hill.
At last, not only did we have a solution to all of the problems that the Big Bang couldn't resolve, but we could reproduce all of its successes. "
2nd point. )
- " In brief, the six most generic predictions were:
- Only the sixth point has not been tested at all, with a famous POTENTIAL (its something up for debate in the scientific community.) false-positive detection appearing earlier this decade owing to the BICEP2 collaboration.
- The maximum temperature has been verified, by looking at the cosmic microwave background, to be no greater than about 1016 GeV.
- Super-horizon fluctuations have been seen from the polarization data provided by both WMAP and Planck, and are in perfect agreement with what inflation predicts.
- The latest data from structure formation indicates that these early, seed fluctuations are at least 98.7% adiabatic and no more than 1.3% isocurvature, consistent with inflation's predictions.
- But the best test — and what I'd call the most significant confirmation of inflation — has come from measuring the spectrum of the initial fluctuations. As of today, s is approximately 0.965 or so, with an uncertainty of around 0.008. This means there's about a 4-to-5 sigma certainty that s is truly less than 1, a remarkable confirmation of inflatio.
3rd point.)
"Inflation has literally met every threshold that science demands, with clever new tests becoming possible with improved observations and instrumentation. Whenever the data has been capable of being collected, inflation's predictions have been verified. Although it's perhaps more palatable and fashionable to be a contrarian, inflation is the leading theory for the best reason of all: it works. If we ever make a critical observation that disagrees with inflation, perhaps that will be the harbinger of an even more revolutionary theory of how it all began."
Summary:
Cosmic inflation theory has 5 out of 6 points verified with the 6th one being a controversial debate, but that 1 point that is in debate is not as important as the others, but with Ligo running its only a matter of time before they find actual primordial gravitional waves.
1st point.)
- "But superseding the Big Bang isn't easy at all. To do so, a new theory would have to do all three of the following:
- Reproduce all of the successes of the Big Bang, including the creation of an expanding, hot, dense, almost-perfectly uniform Universe.
- Provide a mechanism for explaining those three puzzles — the temperature uniformity, the lack of high-energy relics, and the flatness problem — that the Big Bang has no solution for.
- Finally, and perhaps most importantly it must make new, testable predictions that are different from the standard Big Bang that it's attempting to supersede.
What inflation specifically hypothesized is that the Big Bang wasn't the beginning, but rather was set up by a prior stage of the Universe. In this early state — dubbed an inflationary state by Guth — the dominant form of energy wasn't in matter or radiation, but was inherent to the fabric of space itself, and possessed a very large energy density.
This would cause the Universe to expand both rapidly and relentlessly, driving any pre-existing matter apart. The Universe would be stretched so large it would be indistinguishable from flat. All the parts that an observer (like us) would be able to access would now have the same uniform properties everywhere, since they originated from a previously-connected state in the past. And since there would be a maximum temperature the Universe achieved when inflation ended, and the energy inherent to space transitioned into matter, antimatter, and radiation, we could avoid the production of leftover, high-energy relics.
All at once, all three of those puzzles that the Big Bang couldn't explain were solved. This was truly a watershed moment for cosmology, and immediately led to a deluge of scientists working to correct Guth's original model in order to reproduce all of the Big Bang's successes. Guth's idea was published in 1981, and by 1982, two independent teams — Andrei Linde and the duo of Paul Steinhardt and Andy Albrecht — had done it.
The key was to picture inflation as a slowly-rolling ball atop a hill.
At last, not only did we have a solution to all of the problems that the Big Bang couldn't resolve, but we could reproduce all of its successes. "
2nd point. )
- " In brief, the six most generic predictions were:
- There should be an upper-limit to the maximum temperature the Universe achieves post-inflation; it cannot approach the Planck scale of ~1019 GeV.
- Super-horizon fluctuations, or fluctuations on scales larger than light could have traversed since the Big Bang, should exist.
- The quantum fluctuations during inflation should produce the seeds of density fluctuations, and they should be 100% adiabatic and 0% isocurvature. (Where adiabatic and isocurvature are the two allowed classes.)
- These fluctuations should be almost perfectly scale-invariant, but should have slightly greater magnitudes on larger scales than smaller ones.
- The Universe should be nearly, but not quite, perfectly flat, with quantum effects producing curvature only at the 0.01% level or below.
- And the Universe should be filled with primordial gravitational waves, which should imprint on the cosmic microwave background as B-modes.
- Only the sixth point has not been tested at all, with a famous POTENTIAL (its something up for debate in the scientific community.) false-positive detection appearing earlier this decade owing to the BICEP2 collaboration.
- The maximum temperature has been verified, by looking at the cosmic microwave background, to be no greater than about 1016 GeV.
- Super-horizon fluctuations have been seen from the polarization data provided by both WMAP and Planck, and are in perfect agreement with what inflation predicts.
- The latest data from structure formation indicates that these early, seed fluctuations are at least 98.7% adiabatic and no more than 1.3% isocurvature, consistent with inflation's predictions.
- But the best test — and what I'd call the most significant confirmation of inflation — has come from measuring the spectrum of the initial fluctuations. As of today, s is approximately 0.965 or so, with an uncertainty of around 0.008. This means there's about a 4-to-5 sigma certainty that s is truly less than 1, a remarkable confirmation of inflatio.
3rd point.)
"Inflation has literally met every threshold that science demands, with clever new tests becoming possible with improved observations and instrumentation. Whenever the data has been capable of being collected, inflation's predictions have been verified. Although it's perhaps more palatable and fashionable to be a contrarian, inflation is the leading theory for the best reason of all: it works. If we ever make a critical observation that disagrees with inflation, perhaps that will be the harbinger of an even more revolutionary theory of how it all began."
Summary:
Cosmic inflation theory has 5 out of 6 points verified with the 6th one being a controversial debate, but that 1 point that is in debate is not as important as the others, but with Ligo running its only a matter of time before they find actual primordial gravitional waves.
- 19,605
- 15,960
My view
- Considering multiple AP tierings rely on a RL scientific or provable event (like a planet's GBE or a asteroid impact event), then using the scientifically accurate version of the universe is the best way to go about it. So 10^32. If it nerf some people then it nerf some people
- Imo High 3A is fine as is
- 30,027
- 31,231
For the time being, it looks like we're keeping 3-A, High 3-A and Low 2-C borders the way they are. The only thing that seems agreed to be changed was the high end of High 3-A about "4-Dimensional structures less than universal" being removed.
- 32,327
- 20,212
What is the current description?
- 30,027
- 31,231
It still says this.
Characters who have an infinite degree of 3-dimensional power. Alternately 4-dimensional power that is shown as completely qualitatively superior to 3-Dimensional beings, but is less than universal in scale. Or that allows them to create large parts of a universal continuum. Take note that 4-D power should logically always be superior to countably infinite 3-D power, so characters within this tier are not necessarily comparable. Also take note that we consider most small scale time-space abilities as hax, not as AP.
Since we agreed to remove parts about "4-Dimensional" bits, I'd reword it as something like this.
Characters who have an infinite degree of 3-dimensional power or can destroy an Infinite sized 3-dimensional Space. Take note that the concept of Joules of energy becomes inapplicable for all tiers beyond this point.
I'm also open for more elaboration than that. And the not about time manipulation would probably be moved to the Low 2-C description.
Characters who have an infinite degree of 3-dimensional power. Alternately 4-dimensional power that is shown as completely qualitatively superior to 3-Dimensional beings, but is less than universal in scale. Or that allows them to create large parts of a universal continuum. Take note that 4-D power should logically always be superior to countably infinite 3-D power, so characters within this tier are not necessarily comparable. Also take note that we consider most small scale time-space abilities as hax, not as AP.
Since we agreed to remove parts about "4-Dimensional" bits, I'd reword it as something like this.
Characters who have an infinite degree of 3-dimensional power or can destroy an Infinite sized 3-dimensional Space. Take note that the concept of Joules of energy becomes inapplicable for all tiers beyond this point.
I'm also open for more elaboration than that. And the not about time manipulation would probably be moved to the Low 2-C description.
- 165,151
- 72,085
I suppose that mostly seems fine, but we probably need to adjust the description for tier Low 2-C as well, and include the following text somewhere:
"Take note that we consider most small scale time-space abilities as hax, not as AP."
"Take note that we consider most small scale time-space abilities as hax, not as AP."
- 10,654
- 1,592
- Thread starter
- #385
- Universe level+: ("Low 2-C") This is for characters who can destroy and/or create the entire 4-dimensional space-time of a single universe, not just the physical matter within one. For example, an entire timeline. Please take note that simple statements of transcending and/or overcoming space/time without any further elaboration is not enough to grant a Universe level+ rating. Such statements could be flowery language or at most simply refer to resistance to space-time manipulation. Additionally, take note that we consider most small scale time-space abilities as hax, not as AP.
Similar threads
