What you posted says
具現化, which means
materialization. I honestly don’t understand how you extrapolate this into a “portal” interpretation being more fitting. I’m telling you out that materializing outer space still means creating it.
As a matter of fact, pages later the Japanese text strictly and directly states:
宇宙空間すら即座に創造しうる性能な, which translates as:
“(a capability) that can instantly create even outer space.”
創造しうる means “capable of creating.”
That leaves no room for any blatant downplay or for forcing a portal interpretation.
Honestly the debate shouldn't even go beyond this, because at this point I'm just debating your incredulity.
Materialization CAN mean creation but it also can mean just bringing forth the area of space into existence, once you accept this word into being present in the raws you can no longer really claim that strict creation of matter
If you were to bring forth outer space or materialise that within the seretei via a portal you would be perfectly matching up with how it is described
also is this shit not weird? everytime I use this logic against you make arguments based on inferring things even tho you're hell bent on the idea that portals need to be stated, what is it really dude? are statements obligatory for everything or is it not?
we SEE a portal infront of our very eyes, I don't need statements for sth logically consistent and SHOWN infront of our faces
like this isnt some vague light novel verse we are scaling where only statements are the only material to gauge all the scaling of it with, it's an on screen feat showing that shit exists, you dont see a cow and call it a cat because it is not stated to be a cow
Also this another scene saying creation doesn't change much tho? I never said it only ever says materialization, I said it has this as one of it's descriptions, if you can interpret the scan I sent as creation I can similarly interpret it to be used synonymously with materialization in the sense of gremmy "producing" an area of outer space within the seretei, now there's two equal interpretations here and yours falls flat because it's more assumptive
mind giving me citations?
That’s not even what I argued, you know that, right? I never said I needed a statement saying it’s a galaxy. What I said is that what Kubo drew doesn’t look like a galaxy to me and looks more like a star cluster. Not to mention the whole part where I say if you take the manga alone the galaxy interpretation can make sense, simply the anime debunks it.
You’re trying really hard to frame this as if I’m using “double standards,” when I never did.
Honestly, it’s getting tiring having to respond to arguments I never made, but let’s keep going.
This is not what I targeted, I targeted something you see visually and deny simply because it's not stated
idk why you just blatantly tried to spin it like I was calling double standards for sum else lmao, when that 100% applies to what you said
Because that’s not even how Gremmy fights. It’s pretty obvious to anyone that he likes to create random things to harm people, like trapping Zaraki inside a bubble of water. In fact, he never even created an arrow to begin with.
That doesn’t mean the things he creates lose their natural properties. The meteor still retains the classic ablation effect of meteors, the gun he created has mechanical components and engine and create explosion when fired, and the space he created still behaved like space as well the water he created, guess what? It acted like water.
So yes, they keep those properties, and the fact that he can enhance them doesn’t change that. Moreover, the outer space doesn't have to be enhanced at all to kill.
Yeah obv he didnt make an arrow, I know he didnt make an arrow
I never claimed he made an arrow, can you make one argument that doesn't involve making it sound like I'm arguing something I'm not?
the next part you just yapped a bit and said
"hey theyre natural but they also have this supernatural quality I arbitrarily inserted with no evidence whatsoever but they're still natural" and you just walked off with a contradictory idea
it's either natural or it's not, you don't get to argue both sides + your burden to prove
Actually, a bullet reach like 500 joules, to reach a Multi-Continent/Continent the difference is exponential and massive, you would need to jump like by 10^27 times for the joules value, water is even less than a bullet.
To jump from a Meteor to MSS is still like 10^28. So yeah, it's a faulty comparison using "earthly tiers". This even not counting all the plethora of arguments that can be made for enhancing, exponential growth and so on.
The meteor should be an outlier, how did Gremmy multiplied his own strength by 10^27 times to go from guns to a country wiping meteor? Clearly an outlier.
you're not supposed to use joule values as a basis for determining these things, the way jumps in order of magnitudes function are drastically different from what traditional meta based jumps are, it's a reason why we don't take energy values into account in the outliers page, they work vaslty different compared to traditional exponential jumps
they still are earthly tiered attacks at the max which would be consistent with everyone relative also showing similar feats
Garganta is a physical distance; people walk and run in it. Despite that, Menos and Zaraki himself in SAFWY were able to open a tear to space and break through a dimension. So why wouldn’t it be possible to replicate it?
not what I asked for, I asked you to prove this applies here, not why a fanfiction needs to have contradictions for it to be treated as truth
True, I forgot the downgrade, 4B is still good and support me, regardless S0 now scale to Galaxy level anyway, so my argument doesn't change.
it does not support when it's less? from characters far beyond gremmy anyway
isnt the senna feat something she herself doesnt even scale to? i havent peeped the movie myself so this is a question rather than an argument
This doesn’t counter what I’m saying. I know you can choke someone even without creating space, that’s pretty obvious. But that’s not what Gremmy did; he actually created it. In fact, choking someone is far less impressive than creating a meteor or even machine guns.
However, by Gremmy's own efforts, clones numbers, authors etc. this put the space creation above, a fire-ridden meteor capable of destroying a country. Why would they do that if the point was just to choke him? Simply put, the creation itself was the main point about his imagination being so great, that’s why it’s impressive. It’s not just about choking; it’s about the fact that he created outer space as we see it, as Kubo himself drew it, intentionally with a cosmic background, and as it is stated.
And that’s why it required more effort from Gremmy as well.
Honestly, there are way more arguments I could make, but I’ll stop here.
he's not looking to impress, hes looking to put zaraki in an area without form because everytime he tried countering the guy physically he got negged so sth akin to a void works in favor of his agenda
this point does not make any sense, why hes tryna kill zaraki not impress anyone, you can be impressive for BFRing someone into space, that's impressive enough for narrative glaze and can neg diff more than 80% of fictional characters (not to mention the two feats were mentioned in tandem with each other to be equally impressive)
another thing is.......this part does not refute the argument one bit
his main goal can be fulfilled by any 3 of the interpretations, two of them require several dozen orders of magnitude less strength, no reason to do it whatsoever
so many sections of your response just insert the same line of "oh but it created space" where it doesnt aid the argument
"why should we interpret x instead of y"
"actually because x happened!, the writer made x happen"
so a big chunk of these arguments are just weightless fluff bro
Above, I’ve already explained why the "less energy" argument doesn’t make any sense. And honestly, it’s just your assumptions again. I’m sticking with what the actual source material says, he created outer space instantly.
this is again parroting the same thing, refuted at the start of this and the previously reply, you're not sticking to what the source material says you're using the most highballed interpretation that's logically inconsistent with everything else
