Worlds, Dimensions and Universes

[Zeldasmash]

This is something I saw mentioned: Shouldn't the Golden Goddesses being 2-C be proof enough?

"Low Multiverse level (She and her sisters created the Downfall Timeline and the Adult Timeline, along with the universes inside said timelines)"

"Universes" being the key word. What universes are the ones stated within the timelines? Because if we are talking Downfall Timeline, there's the established Light World and Dark World. There was a translated image that states that the planet is simply named "Earth" and Hyrule is a country.

If Earth is the planet and Hyrule is a country, what does that make the Light World? Remember, the Golden Goddesses created the Adult and Downfall Timeline (I also assume they created the Child Timeline) which means they also created the Light World and the Dark World which in A Link to the Past the Triforce managed to warp.

 

[Antvasima]

I also think that case by case evaluations seem safest to avoid automatically inflated statistics.

 

[Antvasima]

@Crab

Ultimately Case by Case means nothing without at least some basic guidelines to refer to. Without those it just opens the door for inconsistent handling of statistics.

Can you give some examples for some useful helpful guidelines please? DontTalkDT is obviously also free to help out in this regard.

 

[TriforcePower1]

To prevent a user war, Tri, you know exactly what that context is. Why are you asking for it again when it was specifically explained to you elsewhere?

I'm being more blunt than usual, yes, but that's not explained. I've searched around, and nearly every verse I could find followed the "if it's created alongside the main universe as part of the cosmology, then it's an universe" logic. ESPECIALLY if it was considered a parallel world of an universe.

 

[ZephyrosOmega]

I agree with this.

 

[Tony_di_bugalu]

I honestly agree that it should just depend on the context of the story and that we should not just have some unversal standad. Context is everything. Also please keep things civil you ningen.

I find this to be the best option, no need for more.

 

[Theuser789]

I agree with Op

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Seems like most staff agree on what to do.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Ant Well, one of the factors I can think of is whether it's a cosmology where there's a clear central universe or one where they are shown to be of the same overall status.

I would also say that a world having the same characters as the one the viewers follow with different personalities and experiences could also imply it being a parallel universe

 

[Antvasima]

@Matthew

Yes.

 

[Antvasima]

@Andy

Okay. Perhaps you and DontTalkDT can collaborate to figure something out that Matthew and the others deem risk-free to apply.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Ant Maybe? I am not an expert on this topic tho, I just advocate for basic guidelines because I would for most policies to avoid inconsistencies

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. In that case it may be simplest if we do not impose any new guidelines based on this thread.

 

[Follow_Doctor_Freeman]

Yeah, I agree with Matt. I don't see the point in making guidelines that could be as easily served by looking at the context and interpreting accordingly. That said, a realm created by a Tier 2 makes the said realm much more likely to be of significant size, but that alone doesn't tell the whole story. Just go with whatever interpretation is best in terms of explanatory scope in covering all the relevant issues, explanatory power in having the most evidence backing it up, overall plausibility, illumination in other facets of the lore, and being the less reliant on ad hoc definitions. Sure, what best meets those criteria will be up to some manner of vote, and sometimes what might seem sensible to you isn't agreed on by others, but I think that it's best to leave as much as possible up to user volition, instead of having the equivalent of regulations do all the work. Repealing bad standards can be a big pain, too.

Incidentally, I wouldn't mind having a thoughtful but casual conversation about general ways of reasoning these things -- "epistemology," if you will -- but that's a topic for another time, and I have too much to read before I feel perfectly confident in talking about that sort of thing.

 

[Kepekley23]

Why waste time with this?

If the dimension in question isn't implied to be universe-sized in some form, then it isn't. This is how we'always done it in the past. There is no need to waste time on something that wouldn't change anything.

 

[Antvasima]

So should we close this thread?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

The OP isn't trying to upgrade or downgrade any verses, he's just trying to elaborate how inconsistent, world or dimension mean. I agree with Matt and DonTalk that context and proof is key. Pokemon and Jojo do have proof of the alternate realities being universes such as them being different timelines. But Zelda and Castlevania just pocket realities that aren't quite confirmed to be entire universes.

 

[Crabwhale]

@Crab Ultimately Case by Case means nothing without at least some basic guidelines to refer to. Without those it just opens the door for inconsistent handling of statistics.

I'm not saying we stop applying standards to how things are evaluated, I'm just saying that more regulation just seems moot when you have as diverse a range of discussions as the three words in the OP present.

 

[Warren_Valion]

My opinion on this topic has always been the same.


Any regular universe that exists in a fictional setting should be assumed to be universal in size unless stated or shown to either be larger or smaller within the lore of the franchise.

A Pocket Universe or Personal Realms are different however, there is a reason they are called "pocket universes", they are often times not equivalent to the size of our universe - so a Pocket Universe should have its size determined by numerous differing factors (Starry skys, statments on size, et cetera).


Now determining the using of different words in replacement for the word Universe which have different alternate meanings - like World, which can mean a planet, a universe, or something even bigger, for instance.

That depends entirely on the context of the story.

 

[AKM sama]

I 100% agree with Matt, Kep and Dragonmaster here. The term "world" is used so loosely in fiction and can refer to anything from a planet to a multiverse, no matter who's saying it. There doesn't need to be a hard and fast standard about it. The meaning of the word should be analyzed through the context, like we've always done and already do.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM

Agreed.

 

[Follow_Doctor_Freeman]

@Warren -- This approach sounds interesting to me. What would you say one would do if there's an onscreen creation feat with no expository dialogue about its size or nature, though?

 

[Warren_Valion]

@Warren -- This approach sounds interesting to me. What would you say one would do if there's an onscreen creation feat with no expository dialogue about its size or nature, though?

What's the context of the scene?

Is it a realm being created from some sort of primordial void? If so, then I would say it is Universal.

If it is just a guy who waves his hand and creates an alternate reality, then I would I assume it is a Pocket Reality and try to find other way of determining its size unless a comparasion in size is made.

At the very least, I would just have a low-end and a high-end if I can't figure it out through context and lore.

 

[SinsofMan]

Neutral, but inclined to agree with Matt, DDM, AKM etc

 

[Antvasima]

So is the conclusion here that this suggestion has been rejected?

 

[AKM sama]

Pretty much.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will close this thread then.