simple Multiverse tier question

[KaramcaS]

if an omniverse has an infinite number of realities (universes) and each of these realities has a multiverse with infinite universes. Will Omniverse's tier be 2-A or Low 1-C?

 

[UnixIV]

I understand that what you just did is this:

Omniverse
|
▼
Realities
|
▼
Infinite multiverses
|
▼
Infinite universes

Are infinities always countable? If so, it is 2-A. If at least at some point in the hierarchy it reaches uncountable infinity (Aleph-1), then it is Low 1-C.

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

if an omniverse has an infinite number of realities (universes) and each of these realities has a multiverse with infinite universes. Will Omniverse's tier be 2-A or Low 1-C?

It's merely a matter or arrangement, so 2-A. FAQ:

Q: Is destroying multiple infinite multiverses a better feat than destroying a single one?​

A: In spite of what our intuitions may tell us, destroying or fully affecting multiple infinite-sized multiverses is in fact not better than doing the same to a single infinite multiverse, and thus, not above the "baseline" for 2-A.

The reason is that the total amount of universes contained in a collection of multiple infinitely-sized multiverses (even one consisting of infinitely many of them) is in fact equal to the amount of universes contained in a single one of the multiverses that form this ensemble: It is countably infinite, as the union of countably-many countable sets is itself countable, and thus does not differ in size from its components. The only general difference between multiple infinitely-sized multiverses and a single one is representation. What is considered to be multiple multiverses in one fiction could be considered a single multiverse in another, and vice versa, without the objective properties of those collections of universes changing. The only difference is where an author decided to draw the line between what belongs to the same multiverse and not. Thus, only an uncountably infinite number of universes actually makes any difference in terms of Attack Potency, at this scale.

 

[PHANtomFELdway]

It's merely a matter or arrangement, so 2-A. FAQ:

I think you are going about that wrong since this is more about the container of infinite 2-A structures rather than the destruction of them

 

[Astral_Trinity439]

I think you are going about that wrong since this is more about the container of infinite 2-A structures rather than the destruction of them

Check this. The result is the same.
Tho if the Space itself is directly called infinite and it's infinity is not derived from the amount of universes that it contains, that may change things.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

Infinity x infinity = infinity

Still 2-A.

Only infinity^infinity will give you low 1-C

 

[Dark_Soul20189]

Infinity x infinity = infinity

Still 2-A.

Only infinity^infinity will give you low 1-C

Pretty much this.

My little Pony would be an example for this.

 

[Iamunanimousinthat]

The MCU is also another example too!

 

[Peter1129]

Iirc in order to get a Low 1-C multiverse you’d have to get something like

An already existing infinite number of universes in the multiverse

Each universe can branch into infinite universes for any and all possibilities whether it’s big or small

Each branched universe can still branch into even more infinite universes ad infinitely for every possibility that exist

Just having an infinite number of realities with each being an infinite multiverse with infinite universes is still just 2-A. Don’t remember if that can be counted as infinite x infinite times baseline 2-A or still just baseline 2-A though.