Sailor Moon AP Upgrade: Low 1-C

[HenshinIntervention]

Completely disagree with the hypertimeline argument though.

Do you have your reasoning on why?

 

[Qawsedf234]

I'm done for today. I'll just wait for Qaws to respond and any other mods.

@Qawsedf234 what do you think?

Sorry for the delay in responding. I sorta just kept putting this on the back burner to do IRL stuff and I ended up forgetting to respond.

I'm confused here? Do you mean 5D not 4D?

No. What you're arguing here is that because Space-Time "holds" a space with four spatial dimensions, it itself must also have four spatial dimensions. Because it is of infinite size, all of space-time should be 4D+1. I'm saying that because Mercury's dimension is insignificant in size, the totality of space-time can be 3D+1 with a compacted 5th dimension and still contain everything.

I am then arguing that the universe, it made of 4D structures, contained in a timeline. That would make the universe 5D, and make the spacetime holding the universes and mercury's dimension significant.

This would only work if that 4D space was itself embedded in the same space-time as the normal universe. Your scan states that they're extra-dimensional, meaning that they come from a separate space-time. Which is why the second page also says that they come from a distant space-time.

Actually, it's not even that it has four spatial axes. You see, Mercury uses a "time axis" (that she allegedly establishes) to leave their normal 3-dimensional world to go to this other space. Now OP thinks that this implies that Mercury went to a world with 4 spatial axes.

So here's the thing, your logic would only work if the space-time itself were big. The wiki's tiering system is an attempt to make a bunch of things mostly fit it, but none of them do it perfectly. If time does not give them +1D (it doesn't because the dimension is small), the only way the line in Japanese works is to assume it has more spatial axis to my understanding.

Maybe in-universe it's 3D+1, which makes it 4D. But on the wiki, it's not significant, so to be 4D, it has to have an additional direction of movement.

This hypertimeline would signify the insignificant 5D that exists because of Mercury's Dimension.

Here is the tally. I didn't place Helper of Qaws yet, as they seemed to be open to arguments. But they can finally give their ratings now.

To my eternal dismay, I do understand the temporal axis for the wiki. Having said that @Planck69 does seem to be correct that this is not a hyper-timeline by our standards. To just copy-paste the FAQ:

Q: How do temporal dimensions impact tiering?​

A: The relationship between the spatial dimensions of a universe and the additional temporal dimension(s) may be visualized as something akin to the frames of a movie placed side-by-side. Basically, the time-like direction may be thought of as a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the whole universe at any given moment, with the set of all such events comprising the totality of spacetime.

This structure can then be generalized to any number of dimensions, which is why destroying a spacetime continuum is a greater feat than destroying only the contents of the physical universe (Low 2-C, rather than 3-A or High 3-A).

A spacetime continuum with two time axes, instead of just one, could likewise be visualized as a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points, each of which is a static "snapshot" of the entire regular timeline with 3 space and 1 time dimension. It would hence be one uncountably infinite level above a timeline and as such baseline Low 1-C. Similarily, adding even more time dimensions would add one level of dimensional superiority each time.

Outside of explanations which state that multiple time dimensions exist it is difficult to show that a work of fiction has more than one. The key point that has to be established is that there is a kind of time that flows in a different direction than the past or the future or any of the spatial directions.

Things like timelines having time that passes at different rates would not qualify, as even the theory of general relativity already establishes that with just one regular time dimension time can flow at different rates in different places. Time flowing backwards in another universe would also not qualify it to have an additional time dimension, as it would still use the same directions of past and future as regular time, just with events playing out in reverse. For the same reasons, statements about independent time streams or of separate kinds of time, which could flow parallel to the original time, would not qualify.
Neither would dimensions that are timeless voids or are described as beyond spacetime in general qualify. Unless they contradict themselves, these realms should not have a time dimension at all, with change in them happening according to other principles. If they, on the other hand, do contradict themselves, the statement of them not having regular time would inherently not be reliable, making the idea equally unusable.

Of particular consideration are instances in which timelines as a whole are changed, such that there is a timeline (or multiple timelines) before they were changed and after they were changed or created / destroyed. As the timelines as a whole are changed, the before and after in this context can't be the past and future the timelines usually use, but should be a separate direction.

However, caution is necessary. As explained above, we require that the additional time dimension is "a line comprised of uncountably infinitely many points." If new versions of timelines are only created if they are changed, due to time travel for example, then the number of "snapshots" of the timeline would be far more limited. The amount of snapshots would be one more than the times the timeline was changed. So, for example, if the timeline is rewritten 2 times, there would be 3 snapshots of the timeline: the original, the timeline after the first rewrite and the timeline after the second rewrite. That are far less than the required uncountably infinitely many.

Aside from direct statements, the easiest way to confirm that the line is comprised of uncountably infinitely many points/"snapshots" is to show that the development of the timelines is time-like. I.e. typically one would want a statement indicating that the alteration of the timelines is subject to its own flow of time, or that special time travel can go to prior versions of the timelines instead of the past. The keyword in the latter case is time travel, as that specifies that the action happens through movement through something like time. Note that such statements can be considered contradicted if the fiction specifies that new versions of the timeline, i.e. additional snapshots, are only created when the timeline is altered or similar.
One other pitfall to consider is the case of branching timelines, where one can return to a past with fewer timelines by just going back to a point in the regular past that was before the split happened. In such cases one has to decide based on context if that is meant or if a prior version where the splits also didn't exist in the regular future is meant. The former case doesn't qualify for an additional time dimension, while the latter might if it meets the other outlined criteria.

Additionally, to quote the staff thread that is seemingly accepted but has not been applied yet:

Q: How are timelines treated on the wiki?

A: There are broadly speaking three schools of thought regarding time: Eternalism, Presentism, and the Growing Block theory of time. Eternalism is the philosophy that the "past", "present", and "future" all coexist and extend infinitely. Presentism is the philosophy that the "past" and "future" aren't real, as they either have happened or have not happened yet, and the Growing Block philosophy is that the "past" and "present" are real but the future has not happened yet. Per the Universe Page, VSBW treats all franchises as defaulting to Eternalism, so there's an infinite series of temporal snapshots that extend into the past and into the future. However, if a franchise does not follow Eternalism but another temporal philosophy, it will be tiered that way. In such cases, as there's no evidence for an uncountable infinite number of temporal snapshots, those universes would not default to Low 2-C unless they have explicit evidence for a fourth-dimensional axis of significant size.

Aside from direct statements, the easiest way to confirm that the line is comprised of uncountably infinitely many points/"snapshots" is to show that the development of the timelines is time-like. I.e. typically one would want a statement indicating that the alteration of the timelines is subject to its own flow of time, or that timelines are separated from each other by an additional temporal dimension through which a special form of time travel may be used to reach other versions of that timeline. The most important part is that the timelines are separated from each other by an additional temporal axis, as this implies that the initial version of the timeline is merely one "snapshot" out of a continuous, uncountably infinite flow of "snapshots." Note that cases in which the timelines are separated by a spatial axis, are merely branching timelines, or otherwise cannot be demonstrated to have an additional temporal axis separating them would not qualify, and that such statements can be considered contradicted if the fiction specifies that new versions of the timeline, i.e. additional snapshots, are only created when the timeline is altered or similar.

The key point about a second temporal axis is that you have to have a perpendicular time axis.

The evidence given in the OP and in your comment does not support the above. All timelines follow the same temporal "forwards-backwards" motion. You're also not going to previous temporal snapshots of the multiverse when crossing dimensions or time traveling, but to separate space-times entirely.

Now, the greater rift that separates the timelines is grounds for a hyper-timeline if you can show that time travel can take you to a different incarnation of that rift. Since it's connecting to every space-time, traveling to a different iteration of that rift could imply a second temporal axis in the sense of an uncountable infinite number of Low 2-C snapshots. I don't see that now, because from what I'm reading the spatial or timeline distortion don't affect that rift space where Sailor Pluto is at.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Now, the greater rift that separates the timelines is grounds for a hyper-timeline if you can show that time travel can take you to a different incarnation of that rift. Since it's connecting to every space-time, traveling to a different iteration of that rift could imply a second temporal axis in the sense of an uncountable infinite number of Low 2-C snapshots.

There's no example of time travel to a previous iteration of the rift. Time doesn't flow there.

I don't see that now, because from what I'm reading the spatial or timeline distortion don't affect that rift space where Sailor Pluto is at.

Distortions do affect the rift. If they are big enough, they'll create storms in the rift

The key point about a second temporal axis is that you have to have a perpendicular time axis.

I do have a question about this. When you time travel between spacetimes, doesn't there need to be perpendicular time axis in this example. The cast isn't traveling forwards or backwards through time but to parallel time.

 

[Qawsedf234]

There's no example of time travel to a previous iteration of the rift. Time doesn't flow there.

Alright

Distortions do affect the rift. If they are big enough, they'll create storms in the rift

I didn't speak correctly. I meant that I'm not seeing an indication in your scans of multiple instances of the realm Pluto guards.

I do have a question about this. When you time travel between spacetimes, doesn't there need to be perpendicular time axis in this example. The cast isn't traveling forwards or backwards through time but to parallel time.

That's only if it's done solely through a temporal element:

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

That's only if it's done solely through a temporal element:

In the manga, it's explicitly explained as creating a route through spacetime, and then called a time warp. And then again, King Endymion says from any point in time or space, you will time travel to Pluto.

 

[Qawsedf234]

route through spacetime, and then called a time warp. And then again, King Endymion says from any point in time or space, you will time travel to Pluto.

I mean, the manga is pretty consistent with space-time being used. It's not purely a temporal aspect, but a spatial-temporal one (also iirc Pluto's realm is connected to all time anyways).

I'm not seeing a hyper-timeline present under the currently used justifications.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

I mean, the manga is pretty consistent with space-time being used. It's not purely a temporal aspect, but a spatial-temporal one (also iirc Pluto's realm is connected to all time anyways).

I'm not seeing a hyper-timeline present under the currently used justifications.

One final question then: For mercury's dimension, though it's not tierable. We can mark it down as a range feat?

 

[Qawsedf234]

One final question then: For mercury's dimension, though it's not tierable. We can mark it down as a range feat?

Yeah, it'd be Interdimensional / Extradimensional

 

[User_A_98732165489]

Agree for both tallies FRA

 

[RoninSlayer200]

Can this be closed now?

 

[Random-Helper323]

Is everyone okay with closing it at this point?

 

[Planck69]

It seems to have been unanimously rejected, so there shouldn't be any issue.

 

[Random-Helper323]

Closing now. If someone wants it reopened let me know.