There is absolutely no way in hell both of you have interacted with Micheal Julius a little over a thousand times or so and unironically believe Grant Morrison does not interpret dimensions as R>F layers.
What am I even supposed to say to this?
I have no idea what rumor you're referring to, but I've never heard of MJ's face being leaked, I've never seen it, and my choice of profile picture is just a band I really like and it predates my participation on battleboards, and I have no idea how those two things would be related. This is also, entirely off-topic.
Sorry, but whether or not you believe me is immaterial. That is the assertion that I am making.
No R>F layers in this cosmology ? I agree that neither the Sphere of the Gods nor Comic Book Limbo are R>F layers, but the Monitor Sphere should.
I agree that the Monitor Sphere has qualitative superiority, but that isn't the same as an R>F layer.
Viewing creation as infinitesimal and R>F is literary same as I know.
Bruh, R>F and higher dimensions are completely different concepts.
5d superman then ??
Maybe in terms of scaling, or power differential, but being a higher infinity doesn't entail a metafictional relationship with the lower beings.
Grant Morrison has made it exceedingly clear numerous times that these dimensions do relate to higher perspectives that view lower ones as fiction. One of the integral concepts of Hypertime is layered R>F dimensions.
Milhouse? Doesn't ring a bell?
Yeah it's true. It's just a higher dimension bigger and qualitatively superior to the Orrery and sees it as a germ world but doesn't see it as fiction. The inhabitants of the Fifth Dimension see the 3D universe as fiction in Morrison's Crisis Times Five, but this has been retconned over the years and they still seem superior to 3-D and exists out of time, thus perceiving time atemporally, but that's all. They doesn't even seems to see 3-D as fiction or as flat anyone. This is just an example.
I completely disagree with this take.
Aside from the Simpsons character, I have literally no idea what you're referring to, and it would be best if you did not bring up things like this in the middle of a discussion.
Well, not anymore. This may have been true in the past, but that has changed. Just look at my post above. In the old Grant Morrison stories the Fifth Dimension perceived 3-D as fiction, but this has been retconned over the years and now the Fifth Dimension is still qualitatively superior to 3-D but no longer seems to perceive 3-D as fiction. Even in Scott Snyder's stories, Mister Mxyzptlk has not shown that he perceives material reality as fiction. he exists out of time and can perceive the future, but that's all. No R>F anymore.
This means anything?
This doesn't say anything. We're not going to accept there “are” without any solid proof.
Eh.
That is a pretty far-fetched conclusion from that scene, and it completely contradicts all other interactions throughout that storyline that indicate that neither Mxy nor the beings of the Sixth Dimension view any of the denizens of the Orrery as fictional characters.
because they are not in their respective dimensions. Please read these stories closely
Don't tell me to read a comic I've read multiple times simply because I walked away from it with a different opinion than you. Nothing about what I am saying would be alleviated by saying "it was because they weren't in their respective dimensions." The basic premise of Perpetua's arc becomes borderline nonsensical if you take the stance that her relationship with the Multiverse is that of an author looking at a fictional story they created.
It would not.
I don't see how any discussion we have can be productive when you are dogmatically convinced that you are simply informing us of an objective truth, rather than expressing an opinion/interpretation of a set of data we all have, and have interpreted differently from you. Especially if you're convinced that the only reason why we might see it differently is either A) We are ignorant/unaware of the pertinent information or B) Are biased against the verse.
Keyword here: Sufficient evidence. Who is to say what is sufficient, you or me? I can say that the evidence I have seen is sufficient to convince me of my own viewpoint, but obviously, you feel that the evidence is sufficient for your own viewpoint that contradicts mine. And yet, we're discussing the same set of information and evidence. There isn't new scans I could give you to change your mind, we have differing interpretations of the same body of evidence.
Of course it's going to be tiring if you come in with the belief that your argument is objectively correct and that these discussions are little more than formality on the path towards inevitably convincing everyone of the objective truth you have discovered, rather than an exchanging of ideas and arguments all of which are valid from our own perspectives.
That would be the case if Morrison didn’t completely retcon this notion by establishing that Bleed exists within the Orrery.
My response that you quoted wasn’t addressing that point. My response was addressing Aloniks claim that “nothing below the Monitor Sphere can interact with the Bleed” as the Monitors statements are directly called wrong and shown to be wrong at the end of Superman Beyond. That is all.
You keep saying stuff like this but you never post any scans proving the nature of the dimensions/layers being qualitatively superior as Morrison has presented them were retconned.
That is completely factual. The claim that Snyder contradicted Morrisons cosmology works is extremely unfounded.
I will once again, bring up the fact that the actual main points of this thread have not been addressed to warrent a disagreement, i have asked numerous people to continue discussing why this would be incorrect to justify their disagreements and i have gotten 0 responses but people derailing the thread to argue about the full form of the Bleed, which does not fully adress the actual points made towards the Bleed between universes, which people have randomly decided wouldn't scale to Low 1-C when there is an abundance of evidence proving that the Orrery of Worlds does hold 5-D structures.
Perhaps because they have already been addressed, and you were largely just asking people to repeat an argument? I addressed the vision, the bulk, and the Fifth Dimension in my first response, as well as M-Theory, et cetera. It's unfortunate that you were not persuaded by my arguments, but I cannot simply repeat them to you for the sole purpose of having you repeat that you do not find them persuasive (framed, of course, as though this feeling is an objective measure of the argument's quality rather than a subjective opinion) and go in circles forever.
I don't think any profiles need to be changed, personally.
Thats just incorrect. At the very beginning of this thread when you discussed your disagreements i kept arguing with you until you suddenly stopped trying to argue. And now made the claim that everything here has already been responded to, very sneaky to be honest but luckily enough, i have kept up with every reply in this thread.
Yes, but that doesn't mean I didn't address your points. How long, exactly, am I expected to argue for? Am I ever allowed to simply stop arguing?
No, you're misconstruing my words. I am not claiming that I have continually replied to every comment you've made. I am saying that I have given a response to your points, which you claim went unaddressed. I pointed out that your summary post was largely a repeat of what you had already said -- which I already responded to earlier. Do not accuse me of being "sneaky" by misrepresenting my words.
Why would I do that when I have already established my views throughout this thread? You have already addressed my arguments. To be clear, addressing or responding to an argument doesn't automatically make it invalid or require the person expressing them to reply to you in order for their continued disagreement to be valid. Debates are not a last word contest.
The first thing that stands out to me with a question like this is the vagueness of the word "completely." I don't know what you mean by completely. What I can say is that I have expressed my views and disagreement about the subject, including various sub-topics that were brought up in the OP.
I have no idea what is objectively correct or not, I can only tell you what I find most reasonable based on the evidence I have seen and my sense of reason and logic. More importantly, that limitation doesn't uniquely apply to me. That is the only thing anyone can tell you. Someone trying to sell you on being objectively correct is -- outside of a small handful of very straightforward facts on basic subjects -- merely expressing their own emotional attachment to being right.
Bleed's point in its true form is an answer to these points. You have to understand that Bleedspace is a bufferzone between realities, so it will never actually be part of any specific zone within those structures, but rather exist as the framework for all of them.
See, that at no point is it said that "the fifth dimension is fixed in Orrery", but rather that the "guts-of-a-cyborg" architecture in this case rotates through the fifth dimensions, and they're fixed in the orrery of worlds. Why they're? Because those are the syphons drilling ultramenstrum which is bleed in its primitive form. Anyway, this is also explained in the official DC Comics video about the map, they even explain that what gains access to all layers of the multiverse is the House of Heroes, not the Orrery of Worlds.
right here it is said that the House of Heroes can "rotate" through the fifth dimension because of those fixed points in the Orrery, which is literally what the monitors launch "sorties" into the 52 universes, in no context is Orrery placed containing 5D structures, only fixed points that exist in all of the dimensions of the multiverse, It is even said that this is pandimensional.
I am unsure how any of the above debunks the idea that the "creepy guts-of-a-cyborg architecture" exists within the Fifth Dimension, in the Orrery. Which is essentially the entire basis of my argument.
The first scan very clearly is not by Morrison, as it refers to Morrison in the third person. Googling the phrase used, it appears to be from a Comics Alliance article written about Morrison by a guy named David Uzumeri. Also, it is phrased as a "possibly" statement, they "could be" doing that. Per our site standards, that is not an acceptable basis even if it had been stated by Morrison. There's also no indications in the comics of this.
No, this phrasing does not imply that the Fifth Dimension contains the Orrery.
You are making the same mistake you did above, where you refer to an opinion or claim made based on limited evidence as something that has been "proved." I think Alonik has done a much better job making his point about the Bleed.
A non-DC author writing an article about Morrison claiming 5-D beings "might" read ours like a narrative is not "proof" by any stretch of the imagination, and quite probably it isn't evidence at all.
Are you seriously trying to imply that Morrison does not believe that the Fifth Dimension doesn't view the dimensions below it as fictional?
Morrison later incorporates all of this stuff into his comics, in Hypertime. Which he blatantly describes as a multi-layered model, each layer viewing the other as a fictional comicbook, this infamous video from Grant Morrison: Talking with Gods explains this best here.
Wrong, upon removing imagination from existence (Orrery to Monitor Sphere in this context) it was stated that Mxy was going to “unimagine" existence, bringing back existence to sketches, implying that existence is indeed simply imagination in the Fifth Dimension, and implies that imagination is the actual true material that defines the contents the story, further confirmed by the pen on the unimagined page. Something that is already consistent with imagination being the literal blood of the Multiverse, thus, the is the actual form of existence, everything else is a product of imagination. Which completely proves qualitative superiority on a R>F level.
Yeah of course, literally has nothing to do with my reply.
Thats like your whole game, dont come at me when i do it to you.
Why are you asking me this with this exasperated tone when I have very directly said this multiple times in this thread?
It's also influenced by his readings into various religions such as Buddhism, Qabbala, various types of occult magic, philosophies, et cetera.
Be very specific: Which sentence in that video do you believe indicates that he believes the Fifth Dimension views lower dimensions as fictional? And do you have any evidence of this being reflected in the comics? As that is a requirement for author statements to be used.
Nothing about that implies that "existence is imagination in the fifth dimension" and starting out a sentence with "wrong" is very immature.
If you say so.
You need to chill out. I have no idea why you're getting emotional about this.
Correct, You're getting the hang of it
It indicates that Morrison does indeed view dimensions as layered spaces, each one viewing the other as fictional.
Indeed, 4 years after Batman: The Return of Bruce Wayne Vol 1 #2, in Multiversity: Pax Americana, Quantum Superman also shows that the 3rd dimension views the 2nd dimension as fictional.
We know that Imagination is the literal blood of the Multiverse.
Im not angry or emotional in the slightest. But i apologise if i seemed like a dick.
I'm asking which sentence or phrase in that video led you to that assessment?
I don't share that opinion of Quantum Superman's words. He's just saying that he can see time forwards and backwards, like a comic book. Not that it's fictional. He has Dr Manhattan's powers, Dr Manhattan famously views his entire timeline simultaneously.
That has nothing to do with a metafictional R>F layer between them rather than Imagination just being a basic foundation of existence which, when removed, causes the destruction of things.
A comic book is fiction, yes.
Imagination is referred to as the "blood" of the Multiverse, suggesting that it is the vital force that gives life and shape to the various elements and contents of existence. Where removing imagination causes the contents of the story to be removed from existence, implying existence is literally a product of imagination, a product of the thing that shapes said contents of the story. It is R>F
