Hypertime(line) Standards Clarification (STAFF THREAD)

[PrinceofPein]

Got permission from @Firestorm808 to make this staff thread

Recently, this concept have been used a lot by different verses, and going through the standard, we have vague description of both but no clear cut standard to what qualifies for this and what does not.

HYPERTIME(LINE)
Hypertime logic is that our conventional, one-dimensional time is embedded within a higher-order temporal framework. Logically, it can be understood as a meta-temporal dimension or a "time of timelines" where each complete, internally consistent timeline is treated as a single entity or "snapshot" within this broader sequence.
Since hypertimelines are not physically possible, they are based on logic and theories and here are what I think should be the logic behind them.

Hypertime(line) should be a time that organizes entire timelines. Within each timeline, events follow standard causality; hypertime, by contrast, sequences these entire histories, offering a higher-order ordering without interfering with the internal logic of individual timelines. The extra dimension serves not as another direction in which events unfold, but as a parameter that orders/separate when different timelines emerge or interact. This separation avoids direct causality paradoxes within any given timeline by confining interactions between timelines to the hypertime level. I.e. All timelines should be organized by a higher timeline
More simply, If a verse features characters or events involving time travel, such as going back and forth in time or altering events, without any indication of a higher, organizing time axis, then the time manipulation is simply narrative time travel rather than hypertime.

Proposed Standard for Hypertime(line)
Many verses have been misclassified as hypertime simply because they involve non-linear storytelling or time travel. To avoid this, our core requirement must be that the verse explicitly mentions the existence of a higher time axis, with that axis incorporating the lower timeline(s) as a lesser element within its structure.

1. The verse must clearly state or imply the existence of a temporal dimension above the conventional timeline.
2. The higher time axis must be presented as an overarching construct that encompasses the lower timeline. The lower timeline should be portrayed as a subset or component of this larger temporal framework.
3. The hypertime concept must be a fundamental aspect of the verse’s world-building rather than a one-off or purely metaphorical reference. This ensures that the concept is not used loosely and that it plays a significant role in explaining the verse’s temporal mechanics.
4. The narrative should provide consistent explanation of how the higher time axis interacts with and governs the lower timeline.
5. Merely employing non-linear storytelling, time travel, or parallel timelines does not qualify if these elements are not organized under an overarching higher temporal framework. The presence of multiple timelines must be structured by a higher order of time. i.e If timelines exist independently without a higher governing order (Hypertime) then its not a Hypertime.

These are all supporting evidences, but the core of it should be the explicit mention of a hypertime(line) or higher time axis or something similar. By requiring an explicit mention of a higher time axis, we eliminate ambiguity. Verses that merely employ time travel or parallel timelines without establishing a meta-temporal framework will not be misclassified.

I think I should bring in some anti-feats that will disqualify verses, but I cannot think of much anti-feat that is not already covered by the standard I proposed above.

1. Seeing as this is a higher order of time, organizing multiple timelines at once, a character of lower dimension should not be able to exist in such space without losing their mind.
2. Any narrative that presents contradictory or unsystematic time-related laws, where different parts of the story seem to operate under conflicting rules, suggests that there is no single, unifying higher temporal framework. This inconsistency is a clear disqualifier.
3. When temporal anomalies are used solely for thematic or symbolic purposes rather than being underpinned by an explicit, functional higher time axis, the narrative should not be classified as hypertime.

An Example of a verse that qualifies for this standard is DC Comics Hypertime
There may be more that qualifies but that can be for another day/thread, but DC is something I am familiar with and it qualifies.

Votes
Agree: @LordGriffin1000
Neutral:
Disagree:

 

[KLOL506]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Elizhaa @Planck69 @DarkDragonMedeus @LephyrTheRevanchist @Qawsedf234 @GrathOfLux @Abstractions @Theglassman12 @Sir_Ovens Your input here would be appreciated.

 

[Zaratthustra]

To me it sounds good but maybe add a few more things to what a "Higher Time/Hypertime" means/requirements:

Does it follow its own causality separate from lower timelines? Example, each timeline and its universe have their own causality while the "Higher Time" also have its own or are they the same? Lets say someone transcend the timeline and its causality but there exist a higher structure that got its "Higher Time" and causality that still encompasses them, so it should still count, right?

Can changes in hypertime retroactively alter lower timelines? Example, X erases Y from the Higher Time so Y is retroactively erased from all possible timelines without the need to affect them as they are subordinate to the Hypertime.

If timelines exist independently without a higher governing order (Hypertime) then its not a Hypertime.

If a verse has multiple timelines, isn’t that automatically hypertime? No. Multiple timelines alone do not create hypertime as there must be a higher structure that sequences and governs those timelines. Example, the Sacred Timeline in Marvel.

 

[PrinceofPein]

To me it sounds good but maybe add a few more things to what a "Higher Time/Hypertime" means/requirements:

Does it follow its own causality separate from lower timelines? Example, each timeline and its universe have their own causality while the "Higher Time" also have its own or are they the same? Lets say someone transcend the timeline and its causality but there exist a higher structure that got its "Higher Time" and causality that still encompasses them, so it should still count, right?

Each would have its own causality, I will like to think the hypertimeline causality is independent of what happens in the lower timeline, while the lower timelines are dependent on the causality of the hypertimeline. i.e. changes to a single lower timeline is not supposed to be significant to the hypertimeline while changes to the hyper timeline affects all timelines that is being governed by it. I guess we need to find a way to word this and add to the standard, if you have suggestions please you can let me know
To answer your question, yes such transcendence will count, as transcending the lower timeline but not the hypertimeline.

Can changes in hypertime retroactively alter lower timelines? Example, X erases Y from the Higher Time so Y is retroactively erased from all possible timelines without the need to affect them as they are subordinate to the Hypertime.

Yes, I guess this is answered by the post I made above

If timelines exist independently without a higher governing order (Hypertime) then its not a Hypertime.

Yes, this should be covered by these ones

Merely employing non-linear storytelling, time travel, or parallel timelines does not qualify if these elements are not organized under an overarching higher temporal framework. The presence of multiple timelines must be structured by a higher order of time.

But I will add that behind it for clarification

If a verse has multiple timelines, isn’t that automatically hypertime? No. Multiple timelines alone do not create hypertime as there must be a higher structure that sequences and governs those timelines. Example, the Sacred Timeline in Marvel.

That is correct, another example of hypertime would be the sacred timeline in marvel

 

[DontTalkDT]

Doesn't this already cover standards for the subject?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Doesn't this already cover standards for the subject?

Yeah

 

[PrinceofPein]

Doesn't this already cover standards for the subject?

It doesn't, it covers different time axes, not a hypertime. The only quote there about hypertime, is vague. This is to make a clear and proper guideline we should follow

Edit; I just checked again, there is nothing about hypertime at all, it was still different time axes.

For the record different time axes =/= hypertime

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think I should bring in some anti-feats that will disqualify verses, but I cannot think of much anti-feat that is not already covered by the standard I proposed above.

1. Seeing as this is a higher order of time, organizing multiple timelines at once, a character of lower dimension should not be able to exist in such space without losing their mind.
2. Any narrative that presents contradictory or unsystematic time-related laws, where different parts of the story seem to operate under conflicting rules, suggests that there is no single, unifying higher temporal framework. This inconsistency is a clear disqualifier.
3. When temporal anomalies are used solely for thematic or symbolic purposes rather than being underpinned by an explicit, functional higher time axis, the narrative should not be classified as hypertime.

I also disagree with all three of those. None of them disprove Hypertimeline. The first is a feat for specific characters and not an anti-feat for the cosmology. The 2nd one does not make any sense whatsoever. And the 3rd looks like a bare bones attempt to argue something that tends to be quite simple.

 

[DontTalkDT]

It doesn't, it covers different time axes, not a hypertime. The only quote there about hypertime, is vague. This is to make a clear and proper guideline we should follow

Edit; I just checked again, there is nothing about hypertime at all, it was still different time axes.

For the record different time axes =/= hypertime

Quite frankly, I don't get it.

You talk about higher time axis, which is exactly what the linked thing is about. It's about the case of things like a extra time dimension which has uncountable snapshots each of which are timelines.

If you don't want the thing "ordering" the timelines to be a time-like dimension, then you are just talking about a multiverse in 5D spacetime as usual. And not sure why you would call it hypertime then.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I also disagree with all three of those. None of them disprove Hypertimeline. The first is a feat for specific characters and not an anti-feat for the cosmology.

It is an antifeat if a 3D character was shown to exist in such space without any form of aid.
Unless the character was shown to ascend to become a higher dimension being prior to that.

The 2nd one does not make any sense whatsoever. And the 3rd looks like a bare bones attempt to argue something that tends to be quite simple.

Your arguments are not even arguments at all, you are just trying to dismiss the points without arguing for why properly.
To reiterate the second point you said make no sense.

Any narrative that presents contradictory or unsystematic time-related laws, where different parts of the story seem to operate under conflicting rules, suggests that there is no single, unifying higher temporal framework. This inconsistency is a clear disqualifier.

How does this not make sense to be an antifeat?
To make it simpler, hypertimeline dictates the rules in which timelines follow, if timelines follow different rules which contradicts each other, then it only makes sense there is no single higher temporal framework in place.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

A Hypertimeline is a timeline with more than one temporal dimension. And Timelines containing smaller but individually large enough to be their own timelines would require multiple temporal dimensions. I do not see anything else to counter against that. Why those things don't make sense is because they're "Double Negative fallacy"

 

[PrinceofPein]

A Hypertimeline is a timeline with more than one temporal dimension. And Timelines containing smaller but individually large enough to be their own timelines would require multiple temporal dimensions. I do not see anything else to counter against that. Why those things don't make sense is because they're "Double Negative fallacy"

What you define is not explicitly a hypertimeline. That would be a universe with multiple temporal dimensions.
Yes while a hypertimeline can contain multiple temporal dimensions it is also a time of timelines and how they are connected and interact, which is what it means mainly.

No, timelines can contain multiple other timelines and not be hypertimelines or be of multiple temporal dimensions, hence where branching timelines come in. And anything that contains multiple temporal dimensions is already tier 1. So what counters you will be physics and our standard on timelines and temporal dimensions.
Multiple Temporal dimensions have time flowing in different directions in a single universe, hence another uncountable infinite snapshots, which would grant tier 1.

Point in case, your is something I do not understand. As this is them; you mentioned one of the possible definitions of what a hypertimeline can be, then said something not true about different temporal dimensions and said my antifeat rule makes no sense. Those 3 threes do not correlate in any form.
Please provide proper arguments, you are shotgunning. As you even failed to address why you think a 3D being would survive in a hypertimeline, or why it should be a feat and not an antifeat, a claim you made in your previous post.
That aside, what is double negative fallacy about a rule that says if timeline follows contradicting rules then obviously there is no higher framework in place controlling them. Which is the work of a hypertimeline.

Also, do you have any issue with the proposed standards themselves? Or it is just the antifeats?

 

[PrinceofPein]

Quite frankly, I don't get it.

You talk about higher time axis, which is exactly what the linked thing is about. It's about the case of things like a extra time dimension which has uncountable snapshots each of which are timelines.

If you don't want the thing "ordering" the timelines to be a time-like dimension, then you are just talking about a multiverse in 5D spacetime as usual. And not sure why you would call it hypertime then.

I missed your post previously.
What the linked post is about is multiple temporal dimensions which in turn gives higher than tier 2. None of the different time axis are greater than another.
Hypertimelines are supposed to be timelike dimensions, and I provided an example in the OP and also MCU also.
It is a timelike dimension that governs all other time/timelines in the verse and how they behave.
When they intersect, end or begin e.t.c.

I am not sure what you meant by referring to it as a 5D multiverse, but do you mind clarifying? I know it does sound like a 5D multiverse because it is at least a 5D construct. But the difference is that, it is not a space that just contains universes or timelines, but rather all timelines and time are a subset of it and governed by it.

 

[DontTalkDT]

What the linked post is about is multiple temporal dimensions which in turn gives higher than tier 2. None of the different time axis are greater than another.

In which sense would a time axis be greater than another? You also talked about a meta-temporal dimension, but if that is supposed to mean something different from the time axis on which the change of timelines happens, then I don't know what it is supposed to mean.

Hypertimelines are supposed to be timelike dimensions, and I provided an example in the OP and also MCU also.

Those examples don't really mean much to me, as I'm not really familiar with them. For me they just read like additional time dimension stuff, mixed in with some multiversal spacetime.

It is a timelike dimension that governs all other time/timelines in the verse and how they behave.
When they intersect, end or begin e.t.c.

I am not sure what you meant by referring to it as a 5D multiverse, but do you mind clarifying? I know it does sound like a 5D multiverse because it is at least a 5D construct. But the difference is that, it is not a space that just contains universes or timelines, but rather all timelines and time are a subset of it and governed by it.

To respond to a question with a question: What is the relevance of the distinction?

You talk about "govern"ing other timelines, but what does it mean for a timelike dimension to govern something? And what relevance does it have whether or not it does so?
Do you mean that it is just the realm in which they intersect, end and begin? Because that is exactly what we envision a multiverse as by standard tiering system practice: The place where timelines are gathered and, in case of branching timelines, where they branch out and, potentially, also where timelines meet.

 

[PrinceofPein]

In which sense would a time axis be greater than another? You also talked about a meta-temporal dimension, but if that is supposed to mean something different from the time axis on which the change of timelines happens, then I don't know what it is supposed to mean.

To use your example of a universe with multiple temporal dimensions, the overarching timeline of such a universe would be what I am referring to as the hypertime

Those examples don't really mean much to me, as I'm not really familiar with them. For me they just read like additional time dimension stuff, mixed in with some multiversal spacetime.

I understand.
The phrase "hypertimeline" has been thrown around a lot and used to pass threads in the past few months, which was the purpose of this thread as this phrase needs to be properly clarified.
For example, what was referred to as the cube time here would be a hypertimeline, since it simply contains and governs how the time dimensions interact with each other

By simple geometry, the time point extent to create the "line time" or "line space a"<a href="https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/DC_Comics_Cosmology#cite_note-:26-174">[174]</a> representing the linear timeline from beginning to end. Time also extends laterally, so there is the "plane time" or "space b",<a href="https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/DC_Comics_Cosmology#cite_note-:26-174">[174]</a> an immense cosmic loom of converging and separating line times. The perpendicular of plane time is "cube time"<a href="https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/DC_Comics_Cosmology#cite_note-:26-174">[174]</a> which views the inhabitants of the Orrery from a higher-dimensional perspective.

To respond to a question with a question: What is the relevance of the distinction?

In a multiverse, these universes exist concurrently or in parallel, but there’s no inherent structure that orders or connects their timelines. It’s simply the idea that a universe is just one among many, and a multiverse is not automatically 5D unless it contains uncountable infinite universes. Universes exist independently in a multiverse, i.e. time travel/manipulation of any of them do not affect any other universe.

Hypertimelines on the other hand, rather than just having multiple independent timelines or universes, there is a framework that organizes or sequences these timelines. In hypertime, a lower (conventional) timeline is seen as just one component within a larger, structured time axis, whereby changes made to the hypertimeline affects all other universes underneath it.

That is a distinction.

You talk about "govern"ing other timelines, but what does it mean for a timelike dimension to govern something? And what relevance does it have whether or not it does so?
Do you mean that it is just the realm in which they intersect, end and begin? Because that is exactly what we envision a multiverse as by standard tiering system practice: The place where timelines are gathered and, in case of branching timelines, where they branch out and, potentially, also where timelines meet.

If a verse should feature a hypertimeline (governing time dimension), it shows that the story’s structure includes an additional layer of order that’s not present in a standard multiverse like in the DC example I sent above. In most multiverse models, timelines or universes are collected in one space, they branch and intersect without an extra time order overseeing them.
In essence, while a multiverse gathers timelines together, a governing time dimension goes a step further by actively ordering them. This extra level of structure can influence how events are connected and ensures a consistent progression across different timelines, making the verse’s treatment of time more complex.

In summary, a multiverse is simply a space that contains universes or timelines, but in a verse where there is a structure that allows for the order of these timelines, in a way that it is described to be caused by an overarching timeline, then that would be the hypertime, I am trying to explain

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I pretty much agree with the OP so far. Though I'm not particularly knowledgeable regarding tier 1 related topics, I do find the standards being suggested more clearly defined a Hypertimeline in my opinion. I had recently finished an update to a cosmology that involved temporal stuff that possibly aligned with a Hypertimeline and was accepted but looking at the points in the OP, at best I'd be able to prove 2 to 3 out of the five points mentioned but one of the important points that I can't would be the verse actually referring said timeline as a Hypertimeline as a concept and world building which I think is very important.

Sure, a cosmology could have aspects of it, but if they don't actually outright call it that or it lacks a fleshed out structure, it's likely not the intention. Different directions in time and such are one thing but I do think something more about how the verse treats it would come into play. Using DC Comics as an example would also help anyone interested in what an acceptable Hypertimeline is would work as well so I agree with that since it's accepted. I started to notice multiple verses do use the "Hypertimeline" as a means to reach Tier 1 and it seems several users don't like how it's currently being implemented so I do think this discussion is worth it and you can put me down as Agree. I don't really have anything against the suggested update as it can help out, at least in my opinion. And if verses gotta be downgraded, then so be it.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that DontTalk and Medeus make sense in their disagreements here.

 

[Executor_N0]

Since my opinion has been requested, going to give my opinion.

The way I see the tiering system working, we define tiers based on their spatio-temporal structure, size, and complexity (With the high levels of Tier 1 being exactly for those who exist outside the continuity of space-time of the past tiers). The actual functions of how the structure works are often unnecessary for the tiering itself; at best, it can influence how other characters can relate to said structure.

For example, a 5-dimensional structure can be structured as infinite parallel 4-dimensional universes working as a basic multiverse in which each parallel universe had its origin at a single point in space on its own 4-dimensional plane and each universe has no relationship to each other, but it could also just be a single 5-dimensional structure made up of a single 4-dimensional universe that branches out across the 5th dimension with branched timelines occupying different 4-dimensional spaces, or just a single universe that has various pockets of space divided across an extra dimensional axis, like pocket dimensions, dimensional storages, a power source, etc.

All those are basically the same thing under the current tiering system, how a spatio-temporal structure is used or how its sub regions relate to each other in a functional way matters very little. If you are able to describe how many dimensions of space and time such structure needs to accommodate everything that is described in the setting, that really is all that matters.

So I'm on the same boat as DontTalk, I don't see "Hypertimelines" as anything more than extra dimensions, just arranged in such a way to allow for multiple timelines, arrangement of timelines, or versions of timelines to coexist. Ultimately, it's just a term we started to use to describe a narrative structure that commonly occurs in fiction but has no real broader standard to be defined as its own thing, especially when it's easily described by the same spatio-temporal parameters of more generic structures, and as I often say, the more generic our system is, within reason, the better it is to be used as a descriptor to more possible cosmologies in fiction.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you very much for your helpful evaluation here.

So should we close this thread as rejected then? Or is there anything useful that might be applied based on it?

 

[PrinceofPein]

Since my opinion has been requested, going to give my opinion.

The way I see the tiering system working, we define tiers based on their spatio-temporal structure, size, and complexity (With the high levels of Tier 1 being exactly for those who exist outside the continuity of space-time of the past tiers). The actual functions of how the structure works are often unnecessary for the tiering itself; at best, it can influence how other characters can relate to said structure.

For example, a 5-dimensional structure can be structured as infinite parallel 4-dimensional universes working as a basic multiverse in which each parallel universe had its origin at a single point in space on its own 4-dimensional plane and each universe has no relationship to each other, but it could also just be a single 5-dimensional structure made up of a single 4-dimensional universe that branches out across the 5th dimension with branched timelines occupying different 4-dimensional spaces, or just a single universe that has various pockets of space divided across an extra dimensional axis, like pocket dimensions, dimensional storages, a power source, etc.

All those are basically the same thing under the current tiering system, how a spatio-temporal structure is used or how its sub regions relate to each other in a functional way matters very little. If you are able to describe how many dimensions of space and time such structure needs to accommodate everything that is described in the setting, that really is all that matters.

So I'm on the same boat as DontTalk, I don't see "Hypertimelines" as anything more than extra dimensions, just arranged in such a way to allow for multiple timelines, arrangement of timelines, or versions of timelines to coexist. Ultimately, it's just a term we started to use to describe a narrative structure that commonly occurs in fiction but has no real broader standard to be defined as its own thing, especially when it's easily described by the same spatio-temporal parameters of more generic structures, and as I often say, the more generic our system is, within reason, the better it is to be used as a descriptor to more possible cosmologies in fiction.

Thank you and I agree with the sentiment actually, in case you check my wall or past messages, I have always actually dislike the term "hypertimeline" and many users can testify to that, I generally try and shoot down such things since they overcomplicate things and explain how they are just multiverses regardless of how they work. I would not have made this thread if I did not think it is necessary.

In the past 6 months alone more than 10 threads have used the term hypertimeline to try and get revisions passed and many more have been made prior to that. Half of this threads, what is referred to hypertimeline is usually a situation of a timeline inside another timeline or a branching timeline and the bigger branch, there was even a case whereby another timeline was referred to as hypertimeline just because it is called a larger space.

My point is, the term hypertimeline is getting popular and is getting used more and more. The uses of it usually come from fan theories and implications of what they think the author means, which is a cause of concern as that leads to unproductive arguments in circles. We can write it off as simply a multiverse and then keep arguing in the thread which of this would qualify for 5D or higher, but I think it would do more good than harm if we have an actual standard on what would be a hypertimeline.

The same way we have different ways to reach low 2-C, 1-A, e.t.c. Hypertimeline is also a way to reach low 1-C, having a standard that explains what they are and when they qualify for low 1-C is a good idea.

Tldr: I agree with the sentiment that they are just low 1-C multiverse/timeline, but having a section in the FAQ where we explain them better would not hurt. As I have shown nothing in our standard actually explains them or have any provision for them aside the usual, uncountable infinite universes and a space uncountable larger than a timeline make low 1-C. This proposed standards help clear up misconceptions about them and how to get ratings through Hypertimelines.

 

[Elizhaa]

I think oppositions' arguments like DontTalk's make more sense so I also disagree.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Since everyone agrees with DT
DT last message was questions as to why this will be relevant and I tried to answer that. Can someone tag him here one more time maybe he can have a look at the answers.

 

[TWILIGHT-OP]

Can someone tag him here one more time maybe he can have a look at the answers.

@DontTalkDT

 

[KLOL506]

Bump

@DontTalkDT

 

[KLOL506]

Bump again.

@DontTalkDT Really need you to decide what to do with this thread here.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Also, if I recall reading the text correctly, it sounds like the OP is mixing the different between a quantitatively superior dimension and a qualitatively superior layer. The former is what spatio-temporal dimensions are called that warrant tiers ranging from Low 1-C to High 1-B+; and up to Low 1-A with conceptual terms about numerical transcendences. The latter is what we call R>F layers that reach 1-A and above.

The disqualifiers mentioned in the OP are things that would disqualify 1-A and above Hypertimelines; which for that I agree with. But Low 1-C and above are easier to get, and there are plenty of 3-D characters who can reach it via having Low Complex Multiverse level ranges via Dimensional Travel.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Also, if I recall reading the text correctly, it sounds like the OP is mixing the different between a quantitatively superior dimension and a qualitatively superior layer. The former is what spatio-temporal dimensions are called that warrant tiers ranging from Low 1-C to High 1-B+; and up to Low 1-A with conceptual terms about numerical transcendences. The latter is what we call R>F layers that reach 1-A and above.

The disqualifiers mentioned in the OP are things that would disqualify 1-A and above Hypertimelines; which for that I agree with. But Low 1-C and above are easier to get, and there are plenty of 3-D characters who can reach it via having Low Complex Multiverse level ranges via Dimensional Travel.

You could argue that for point 1 but generally a lower D being should not be able to exist in higher D, without some aid or they would lose themselves in it, similar to 3D objects near a black hole (not the best example but nothing else is real and practical as an example)

And yes hypertimeline are minimum low 1-C but can be as high as 1-A or more

 

[DontTalkDT]

To use your example of a universe with multiple temporal dimensions, the overarching timeline of such a universe would be what I am referring to as the hypertime

That's just another time axis.

I understand.
The phrase "hypertimeline" has been thrown around a lot and used to pass threads in the past few months, which was the purpose of this thread as this phrase needs to be properly clarified.
For example, what was referred to as the cube time here would be a hypertimeline, since it simply contains and governs how the time dimensions interact with each other

Still only sounds like multiple time dimensions to me.

In a multiverse, these universes exist concurrently or in parallel, but there’s no inherent structure that orders or connects their timelines. It’s simply the idea that a universe is just one among many, and a multiverse is not automatically 5D unless it contains uncountable infinite universes. Universes exist independently in a multiverse, i.e. time travel/manipulation of any of them do not affect any other universe.

Hypertimelines on the other hand, rather than just having multiple independent timelines or universes, there is a framework that organizes or sequences these timelines. In hypertime, a lower (conventional) timeline is seen as just one component within a larger, structured time axis, whereby changes made to the hypertimeline affects all other universes underneath it.

That is a distinction.

That's just the 5D space that contains the timelines or, if it's ordered in a time-like manner (i.e. future and past version of timelines), it's what another timeaxis is like.

If a verse should feature a hypertimeline (governing time dimension), it shows that the story’s structure includes an additional layer of order that’s not present in a standard multiverse like in the DC example I sent above. In most multiverse models, timelines or universes are collected in one space, they branch and intersect without an extra time order overseeing them.
In essence, while a multiverse gathers timelines together, a governing time dimension goes a step further by actively ordering them. This extra level of structure can influence how events are connected and ensures a consistent progression across different timelines, making the verse’s treatment of time more complex.

In summary, a multiverse is simply a space that contains universes or timelines, but in a verse where there is a structure that allows for the order of these timelines, in a way that it is described to be caused by an overarching timeline, then that would be the hypertime, I am trying to explain

The ordering is not really a relevant property here. You can always order them in some way and a force ordering timelines would just be... well, some multiversal force.
That it is a time axis doing it has only really relevance for the fact that it is a time axis.


So, overall, I still think this is covered by the time axis and multiverse containers rule. It seems more inspired by a thing in a comic than that it feels a truly unexplored niche of a structure.

 

[PrinceofPein]

That's just another time axis.

Still only sounds like multiple time dimensions to me.

That's just the 5D space that contains the timelines or, if it's ordered in a time-like manner (i.e. future and past version of timelines), it's what another timeaxis is like.

The ordering is not really a relevant property here. You can always order them in some way and a force ordering timelines would just be... well, some multiversal force.
That it is a time axis doing it has only really relevance for the fact that it is a time axis.


So, overall, I still think this is covered by the time axis and multiverse containers rule. It seems more inspired by a thing in a comic than that it feels a truly unexplored niche of a structure.

Well this conclusion is fine by me, before this is closed. For clarification, what would be hypertimeline for those who have been using it in their profiles, should either be an actual low 1-C space or another time axis by our definition?
In which case if they do not fit either criteria, they can be removed or downgraded?

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT

So what should we do here?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Well this conclusion is fine by me, before this is closed. For clarification, what would be hypertimeline for those who have been using it in their profiles, should either be an actual low 1-C space or another time axis by our definition?
In which case if they do not fit either criteria, they can be removed or downgraded?

I really wonder what makes people use a made-up word that doesn't come from their respective fiction on profiles, if it isn't officially established on the wiki. But I guess that's besides the point.

To answer your question: It should be removed from the profiles and they should instead say what their fiction actually explains. What that is depends on the fiction in question.
I assume no rating have been given based on this basis alone, given that it never established to begin with, but if they have for some reason the CRTs would presumably have to be redone while referencing the additional timeline / higher dimension / multiverse standards this time and seeing what their particular verse's ideas best fit to.

@DontTalkDT

So what should we do here?

I think the thread can be closed without any changes being required.

 

[Reiner04]

I think the thread can be closed without any changes being required.

Closing.

Edit: OP wanted to sat smth so reopening it.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I really wonder what makes people use a made-up word that doesn't come from their respective fiction on profiles, if it isn't officially established on the wiki. But I guess that's besides the point.

To answer your question: It should be removed from the profiles and they should instead say what their fiction actually explains. What that is depends on the fiction in question.
I assume no rating have been given based on this basis alone, given that it never established to begin with, but if they have for some reason the CRTs would presumably have to be redone while referencing the additional timeline / higher dimension / multiverse standards this time and seeing what their particular verse's ideas best fit to.

Ratings have been given based on this alone actually, here are few threads in which this threads are used.

Arrowverse CRT: Hypertimeline

The multiverse was destroyed and then a new multiverse was created. When the old multiverse was destroyed, the past and the future were destroyed. I'm betting you already tried to go back before Crisis started, and you couldn't, right? That's because that past is from a multi-versal world that...

vsbattles.com

Ben 10: Hypertimeline and Uncountable Branching Timelines

Before starting with the arguments, let's revise the tiering system FAQ (Note: This portion of the FAQ is the same as new one made by Ultima, check it over here) The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something...

vsbattles.com

DBS Timelines reduction application thread

Continuation of this thread and this thread, due to several things, was only able to do this thread now Now that the afterlife is considered only "Likely" Universal in size and Toei is no longer part of the canon multiverse, this thread was is now made to update the ratings of Tier and Speed to...

vsbattles.com

Summer Time Rendering: Possible 6-D cosmology revision

Hi guys, a long time I don't make any CRT. Today, I comeback with a Summer Time Rendering CRT about cosmology. Pls don't be toxic and derailing. Now, let cook and have some fun!!! https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Wikisource/sandbox2?useskin=fandomdesktop Some additional: First...

vsbattles.com

There are many more of this type of CRT which uses hypertimeline which was why I suggested actual standards for them.

Closing.

Edit: OP wanted to sat smth so reopening it.

Just a reply clarifying that threads have been passed using the concept, so it may as well be made into a Real thing

 

[KLOL506]

Is there anything else left to discuss here? The original premise has been rejected at large by most relevant staff. Whatever issues there may be with the verses mentioned above will need to be addressed with separate threads for each individual verse, and it goes beyond the scope of what this thread aimed to do.

If there's nothing else left to clarify, I'll ask staff to close it.

@Reiner04 If you would be so kind...

 

[Reiner04]

Is there anything else left to discuss here? The original premise has been rejected at large by most relevant staff. Whatever issues there may be with the verses mentioned above will need to be addressed with separate threads for each individual verse, and it goes beyond the scope of what this thread aimed to do.

I also think there is no need of discussion over which verse qualifies and which don't here. Standards are clearly laid out in the FAQ over hypertimeline. Still incase @DontTalkDT felt like there is anything needs to be done here then he can reply as per or reopen the thread. That said, closing it.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Ratings have been given based on this alone actually, here are few threads in which this threads are used.

Arrowverse CRT: Hypertimeline

The multiverse was destroyed and then a new multiverse was created. When the old multiverse was destroyed, the past and the future were destroyed. I'm betting you already tried to go back before Crisis started, and you couldn't, right? That's because that past is from a multi-versal world that...

vsbattles.com

Ben 10: Hypertimeline and Uncountable Branching Timelines

Before starting with the arguments, let's revise the tiering system FAQ (Note: This portion of the FAQ is the same as new one made by Ultima, check it over here) The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something...

vsbattles.com

DBS Timelines reduction application thread

Continuation of this thread and this thread, due to several things, was only able to do this thread now Now that the afterlife is considered only "Likely" Universal in size and Toei is no longer part of the canon multiverse, this thread was is now made to update the ratings of Tier and Speed to...

vsbattles.com

Summer Time Rendering: Possible 6-D cosmology revision

Hi guys, a long time I don't make any CRT. Today, I comeback with a Summer Time Rendering CRT about cosmology. Pls don't be toxic and derailing. Now, let cook and have some fun!!! https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User:Wikisource/sandbox2?useskin=fandomdesktop Some additional: First...

vsbattles.com

There are many more of this type of CRT which uses hypertimeline which was why I suggested actual standards for them.

Just as a brief final note: Taking the Dragon Ball and Ben 10 threads as random samples, these actually explicitly reference the additional time dimension standards of the Tiering FAQ, meaning they reason in terms of additional time axis already. So I don't think those were actually passed based on unofficial hypertimeline standards.
Threads need only be revised if they passed based on unofficial standards related to the "hypertimeline"-idea alone without actually acknowledging our standards.

(This note should not be taken as me agreeing with the conclusion of said threads or the evaluation therein)