- 30,046
- 31,269
I agree to this.Kepekley23 said:
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Marvel Comics: Revising the Cosmic Hierarchy
- Thread starter Kepekley23
- Start date
- Status
- 1,050
- 491
To Kep (apologies for the bad formatting, but I could just not get the site word processor to work properly)
>No to all of that except the Living Tribunal being the core, and even then that's just because he is the embodiment of the multiverse and all its entities.
All the quote means is that The Living Tribunal is responsible for maintaining the cosmic cycle and keeping it stable. We know for a fact that it isn't talking about him actually maintaining creation in any form. The tribunal died three times, and all of the three times resulted in absolutely nothing multiversal in terms of Attack Potency. Feats override statements, every single time, especially when it comes to vague flowery language from the narrator that has one million interpretations.
Nothing multiversal happened because those are M-Bodies, Kep. We know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
>...Yes. Because Eternity is literally ust one among the many entities that compose The Tribunal. This is completely and utterly meaningless as far as establishing AP.
And how is this supposed to explain why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity?
>This is headcanon. It is never ever stated that it was an M-Body. His dead corpse was found in every single reality and dimension of the multiverse, proving it was the true Tribunal. The story never, ever specifies that it wasn't the full Tribunal. The fact that TOAA has to replace him proves beyond any debate it isn't.
Do you think that M-Bodies can only exist in one reality at at a time or something? Otherwise, the Living Tribunal's dead corpse being found in "every single reality and dimension of the multiverse" doesn't really prove much. Especially since that isn't even true, as the alternate universe Adam Warlock, IIRC, managed to absorb his universe's M-Body of the Living Tribunal.
The TOAA didn't even replace the Living Tribunal that died, just allowed that other-universe Adam Warlock to become an M-Body for him.
Again, we know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
>This is just circular reasoning and begging the question. My point literally is that the multiverse didn't collapse upon his death. You can't throw it back at me with your interpretation and act like it's evidence of anything, especially when the actual story says otherwise. The actual feats in this case completely override vague flowery language from the narrator.
Except it isn't.
When Beyonder killed Death, the concept of death was totally removed from the multiverse, on a fundamental level. When the Living Tribunal was supposedly killed...nothing much happened. The multiverse didn't suddenly become nothing.
>1. No, he doesn't. This is yet another case of rewriting what is actually stated in the scan to make it closer to a pre-stated belief. The terms "reality and "duality" are not synonymous with each other, so this is just wishful thinking from your part.
Except "opposing realities" and "dualities", in the context of that scan (especially given how the Tribunal defines order and chaos as "opposing realities"), are clearly the same thing.
Your desires and wishes will not change that.
>2. That's literally...the vaguest possible quote you could choose to establish him as a Transdual entity. But as I pointed out in great detail, even if he were Transdual, it'd be meaningless in terms of proving him to be a 1-A transdual.
So stating that he exists beyond duality is "too vague" as evidence for transduality? What?
You seem to like using the terms "vague" and "flowery language" even when they don't apply, as if anything but the most blunt and explicit statements are unusable for evidence, when context clues should suffice.
>Okay. A bunch of Low 2-C to High 2-A scans that belong absolutely nowhere in a High 1-B's profile, as we have established, with the word "realm" being the vaguest possible word to use for an upgrade, considering its vast array of meanings. In fact, fictionally, "realm" can range from a country to a full-on multiverse when the context is a physical location, and, in the context of Tribunal's statement, can be assumed to be referring to "boundaries". So "the boundaries of space and time".
The exact same quote untouched would be present in a High 2-A's justification, so it is meaningless for someone of TLT's level.
Except that since the Living Tribunal spoke of "opposing realities" in the very next sentence, it's clear that this refers to the Living Tribunal's standing in relation to the very concepts of space and time in the cosmic hierarchy of Marvel, and not just the "boundaries" of universal or 4D spacetime.
>Or, perhaps, like I spent multiple wall of texts pointing out in the text
2. The first scan is an ephemeral statement, from the Silver Surfer, who states that he realized "all the infinite dualities from Galactus in his war against the In-Betweener". That's literally all there is to it. No further elaboration or context is provided here, so I trust everyone to have some common sense in this regard and realize this is utterly unusable for absolutely anything. There is zero context on what these dualities are; if anything, this is presented as fancy wording for the contrast in point of views between both sides of the war, and the senseless fighting that results.
3. In terms of definition, the word "duality" does not merely extend to the mathematical definition that our Transduality page is based off of - it also refers to any mere difference in two point of views, two polar opposites. For example; Good and Evil in many religions represent a duality, for they are opposites, standing in contrast to each other. The Living Tribunal's very job is to safeguard the mystical balance between good and evil throughout the multiverse, being more than willing to obliterate universes to prevent the balance from becoming unstable. Therefore, contextually, whenever the Tribunal states he "judges the dualities", it is far, FAR more likely that he is referring to this definition of duality. On that account, all of those scans are meaningless in terms of Tiering.
The first bullet point is literally headcanon (and how "duality" morphed into "contrast in point of views between both sides of the war" in your mind is beyond me), while for the second:
Good and evil is just one duality. The Silver Surfer speaks of an infinite number of dualities. The Living Tribunal speaks of how he exists beyond all the "opposing realities" (I.e. dualities).
I'm sure you can do the math for yourself on that one.
>4. Most importantly, even taking them to refer to the conceptual dualities, which they aren't - there are many types of Transduality in our system, including ones where the characters are simply superior to a dual system within a certain scope of reality. It requires a much more elaborate and detailed explanation than the Tribunal's vaguest-in-all-fiction scans to establish 1-A levels of Transduality, so, all in all, literally nothing about those scans is applicable as far as getting anything remotely above High 1-B goes.
Maybe so, but the fact that the Living Tribunal is clearly referring to transcending duality as a concept, coupled with his statements of transcendence of space-time, makes me lean quite far towards a 1-A interpretation.
>As I have elaborated, there is absolutely no evidence that he transcends duality in our sense.
In fact, it is established multiple times throughout Marvel that the In-Betweener is the embodiment of Moral Dualism and Balance - ie, the aforementioned definition of duality that I mentioned - things such as the duality of good and evil, life and death. This is the context behind the "dualities" that the Tribunal judges - there needs to exist a cosmic balance between good and evil and etc., or else the universe's balance is threatened. This literally couldn't be said in clearer words by Chaos;
"Yes...and with the In-Betweener's dualities at his command, Korvac has multiplied the parameters of his power immeasurably." "I hereby decree that as punishment for the crimes Korvac of Earth has committed against the cosmic balance of the universe - Earth must die!" So, as I hope we can have established, the In-Betweener's "dualities" that Silver Surfer mentioned have absolutely nothing to do with the 1-A Transduality we mentioned earlier.
You can inform yourself more on our standards for Transduality, but at the very most the Tribunal fits Type 2 as outlined there. All of your scans, even taken at face value (which they shouldn't be), would result in no more than the Tribunal being a Type 2 Transdual. That is nowhere near 1-A.
How is the "moral" dualism that the In-Betweener embodies (and that the Living Tribunal transcends) not duality in "our" sense? It's, as you yourself explained, literally just a conglomeration of dual systems, like good and evil, life and death, order and chaos, etc.
Transduality, of all types, is defined as transcendence of dual systems, so I don't see what is the problem here, or how that doesn't relate to transduality.
And if you're talking type 3 transduality, then the statements of the Living Tribunal as beyond space and time, coupled with his transcendence and clear hierarchical superiority to the High 1-B In-Betweener, should be sufficient enough.
>Indeed, existence and nonexistence form a duality. Oblivion, as established by the comics themselves, is unfathomably superior to Eternity, Infinity, Death. The Chaos King is the avatar of nonexistence who is equal to Multi-Eternity, and the Chaos King was stated by Oblivion himself to be no more than an infinitesimal aspect in the infinite cosmic void that he represents. So you can not try to make them comparable. Their importance in the Cosmic Hierarchy is comparable, yes. Their power? Not at all.
By the same logic, you can't compare the Tribunal and Oblivion without direct consistent statements in the comic, of which there are...zero.
Who said that was Multi-Eternity that the Chaos King threatened? Who said he even threatened the totality of the Marvel multiverse, and not some layer of the multiverse?
>There are many reasons, all of which I outlined in my post. You can't just brush it off and say it is because you believe it is. The terminology used clearly points to the term "dimension" meaning only universe or parallel dimension in-context. Much more evidence is required for it to mean higher-dimensions, and Marvel consistently provides said evidence in other references to higher layers of existence - there is no reason to give the Beyonder special treatment, pretending he is above evidence.
Well okay then. The Beyonder is quite clearly explained as being beyond the multiverse, and everything that composes it, in its totality.
Every time the abstracts and cosmic entities, many of which are High 1-B, speak of the Beyonder Realm, they speak of it as beyond the multiverse.
And keep in kind that "Marvel" is not some unified block, but a collection of people, and of writers, each with their own different writing styles. I bring this up because "Marvel" not explicitly stating that Beyonder is 1-A or whatever doesn't mean much when all the in-universe context clues support the notion.
>1. This principle is completely false, as being outside ("beyond" and "outside" mean the exact same thing) a High 1-B multiverse doesn't translate to being infinitely higher, much like timeless voids/dimensions in verses with a linear 4-D universe/timeline doesn't at all translate to said voids transcending the normal universe. Just having different properties. The Beyonder's universe is never described as being trancendental to the multiverse in a level that warrants 1-A. Never.
2. The actual story says otherwise. It is stated that the Beyonder, and by extension the Beyond Realm, is an infinite-dimensional entity in his true state.
1. The Beyond Realm is almost never portrayed as merely qualitatively independent of the multiverse (like your timeless void/dimension example), but as qualitatively superior to the Marvel multiverse as a whole, to the point that all the Marvel cosmics, except the Living Tribunal, fear him.
2. It may seem so, but then the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, and being surprised at the limitations thereof. Strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
>Thsi is completely false. The quote is talking about the Beyonder descending from the Beyond-Realm into our universe, and as a result descending from his usually infinite-dimensional state into a mere three-dimensional domain. It is blatantly referring to his true self. It's impossible to claim otherwise.
Again, when the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, he is surprised at the limitations thereof, which wouldn't happen in a simple avatar-creation. Again, strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
>No.
This scan right here states the same thing - that the Beyond Realm is outside "all the infinite adjacent dimensions which make up the multiverse", yet it is blatantly referring to dimensions in the sense of parallel universes, since it uses the adjective "adjacent" to describe said dimensions (adjacent means "parallel" or "neighbouring", thus "parallel dimensions"). Therefore, interpreting the scan you posted - which I posted a rebuttal to on the OP as well - as referring to spatiotemporal dimensions isn't necessary. As I have pointed out many times, literally every single mention of a spatial dimension was made clear in Marvel, with analogies to hammer the point home, and explicit, non-ambiguous adjectives, such as "16-dimensional superspace", "5.82839 spatial dimensions" and etc.
Even other quotes involving the Beyonder have used such analogies to refer to him as an infinite-dimensional being. Why not include them here, unless it isn't talking about higher-dimensions? Which it, to be fair, blatantly isn't, considering the surrounding context.
The scans really don't say the same thing.
Let's compare the two.
"Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!"
https://m.imgur.com/rSZqTbS
"Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
In the first quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to the term "universe", as a synonym for the term "universe", which is why they're described as adjacent.
In the second quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to "time" and "space", as coordinates of a given mathematical space.
The two statements aren't comparable.
>A quote that would belong in a High 2-A, or heck, even a Low 2-C's profile is somehow proof of 1-A. Not.
Simply saying so doesn't make it true. Keep in mind that the Beyonder race have also been stated to not be constrained by space or energy or "anything within reason", so them existing "beyond reality" only adds to that, and "beyond anything you could imagine" is further contextualized by such.
https://m.imgur.com/a/Laf4phz
As far as I'm concerned, pre-retcon Beyonder and the Beyonders are type 1 beyond-dimensional existences, while the Living Tribunal is a type 2 beyond-dimensional existence.
>Literally no one in the story had any qualms about using the word "multiverse" or "multiversal" to describe the Beyonders' actions throughout creation. But suddenly, them using "universal" is just "figurative speech". Nevermind the fact that it is repeatedly established they were killing the Celestials a universe at a time, thus proving they couldn't have killed the full Abstracts all at once.
Different contexts.
This was one man who had admittedly gone mad and was talking about "universal genocide", which could mean genocide across the universe, or genocide of the universe, or something else entirely.
Hence, poetic language.
And maybe there were specific Celestial populations in specific universes, and not others, which is why the Beyonders destroyed them "one universe at a time". Not all cosmics have to exist in multiple places at once.
The other quotes (which already contradict your preferred one), in their contexts talk about how the Beyonders are devastating the multiverse, in very clear terms. Very little, if any poetic language required.
>Apparently the multiple assertions that they are powerless, that MM is the only one capable of fighting him in equal grounds, and everyone being awed when he appears doesn't get the point across well enough. We need to focus on semantics now.
You know that wasn't my actual point. Standing aside to let two people talk is not necessarily proof of subservience or inferiority to either one.
>Literally absolutely no scans that state or imply it to be subject to the Tribunal. One of them is literally the Tribunal describing the entities that are subject to him one at a time, failing to mention Oblivion, and the dude on that thread saying "it makes sense that Oblivion is the only face left that he didn't mention!" to make up for it. Not only that, the guy tries to equate a random statement about the "fathomless void" to mean the domain of Oblivion, when the full sentence makes it plain that it is merely talking about the background void of a universe
All-in-all...no.
The full sentence had "fathomless void" as a clear contrast to matter, just like the "nebulous netherworld" that can apparently exist solely either "in time" or "in space".
I'm sure that a void being described as qualitatively different to material existence is something to consider.
That respect thread also talks about how Death and Oblivion are intertwined, sometimes even equated. The Living Tribunal commands Death, so he most likely commands Oblivion.
The Living Tribunal generally doesn't command Oblivion because Oblivion isn't *of* the multiverse, although he is still subject to the cosmic balance that the Tribunal sustains, as the Rune/Silver Surfer segment of this respect thread elaborates on.
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com/forums/index.php?topic=17.15
>No to all of that except the Living Tribunal being the core, and even then that's just because he is the embodiment of the multiverse and all its entities.
All the quote means is that The Living Tribunal is responsible for maintaining the cosmic cycle and keeping it stable. We know for a fact that it isn't talking about him actually maintaining creation in any form. The tribunal died three times, and all of the three times resulted in absolutely nothing multiversal in terms of Attack Potency. Feats override statements, every single time, especially when it comes to vague flowery language from the narrator that has one million interpretations.
Nothing multiversal happened because those are M-Bodies, Kep. We know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
>...Yes. Because Eternity is literally ust one among the many entities that compose The Tribunal. This is completely and utterly meaningless as far as establishing AP.
And how is this supposed to explain why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity?
>This is headcanon. It is never ever stated that it was an M-Body. His dead corpse was found in every single reality and dimension of the multiverse, proving it was the true Tribunal. The story never, ever specifies that it wasn't the full Tribunal. The fact that TOAA has to replace him proves beyond any debate it isn't.
Do you think that M-Bodies can only exist in one reality at at a time or something? Otherwise, the Living Tribunal's dead corpse being found in "every single reality and dimension of the multiverse" doesn't really prove much. Especially since that isn't even true, as the alternate universe Adam Warlock, IIRC, managed to absorb his universe's M-Body of the Living Tribunal.
The TOAA didn't even replace the Living Tribunal that died, just allowed that other-universe Adam Warlock to become an M-Body for him.
Again, we know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
>This is just circular reasoning and begging the question. My point literally is that the multiverse didn't collapse upon his death. You can't throw it back at me with your interpretation and act like it's evidence of anything, especially when the actual story says otherwise. The actual feats in this case completely override vague flowery language from the narrator.
Except it isn't.
When Beyonder killed Death, the concept of death was totally removed from the multiverse, on a fundamental level. When the Living Tribunal was supposedly killed...nothing much happened. The multiverse didn't suddenly become nothing.
>1. No, he doesn't. This is yet another case of rewriting what is actually stated in the scan to make it closer to a pre-stated belief. The terms "reality and "duality" are not synonymous with each other, so this is just wishful thinking from your part.
Except "opposing realities" and "dualities", in the context of that scan (especially given how the Tribunal defines order and chaos as "opposing realities"), are clearly the same thing.
Your desires and wishes will not change that.
>2. That's literally...the vaguest possible quote you could choose to establish him as a Transdual entity. But as I pointed out in great detail, even if he were Transdual, it'd be meaningless in terms of proving him to be a 1-A transdual.
So stating that he exists beyond duality is "too vague" as evidence for transduality? What?
You seem to like using the terms "vague" and "flowery language" even when they don't apply, as if anything but the most blunt and explicit statements are unusable for evidence, when context clues should suffice.
>Okay. A bunch of Low 2-C to High 2-A scans that belong absolutely nowhere in a High 1-B's profile, as we have established, with the word "realm" being the vaguest possible word to use for an upgrade, considering its vast array of meanings. In fact, fictionally, "realm" can range from a country to a full-on multiverse when the context is a physical location, and, in the context of Tribunal's statement, can be assumed to be referring to "boundaries". So "the boundaries of space and time".
The exact same quote untouched would be present in a High 2-A's justification, so it is meaningless for someone of TLT's level.
Except that since the Living Tribunal spoke of "opposing realities" in the very next sentence, it's clear that this refers to the Living Tribunal's standing in relation to the very concepts of space and time in the cosmic hierarchy of Marvel, and not just the "boundaries" of universal or 4D spacetime.
>Or, perhaps, like I spent multiple wall of texts pointing out in the text
2. The first scan is an ephemeral statement, from the Silver Surfer, who states that he realized "all the infinite dualities from Galactus in his war against the In-Betweener". That's literally all there is to it. No further elaboration or context is provided here, so I trust everyone to have some common sense in this regard and realize this is utterly unusable for absolutely anything. There is zero context on what these dualities are; if anything, this is presented as fancy wording for the contrast in point of views between both sides of the war, and the senseless fighting that results.
3. In terms of definition, the word "duality" does not merely extend to the mathematical definition that our Transduality page is based off of - it also refers to any mere difference in two point of views, two polar opposites. For example; Good and Evil in many religions represent a duality, for they are opposites, standing in contrast to each other. The Living Tribunal's very job is to safeguard the mystical balance between good and evil throughout the multiverse, being more than willing to obliterate universes to prevent the balance from becoming unstable. Therefore, contextually, whenever the Tribunal states he "judges the dualities", it is far, FAR more likely that he is referring to this definition of duality. On that account, all of those scans are meaningless in terms of Tiering.
The first bullet point is literally headcanon (and how "duality" morphed into "contrast in point of views between both sides of the war" in your mind is beyond me), while for the second:
Good and evil is just one duality. The Silver Surfer speaks of an infinite number of dualities. The Living Tribunal speaks of how he exists beyond all the "opposing realities" (I.e. dualities).
I'm sure you can do the math for yourself on that one.
>4. Most importantly, even taking them to refer to the conceptual dualities, which they aren't - there are many types of Transduality in our system, including ones where the characters are simply superior to a dual system within a certain scope of reality. It requires a much more elaborate and detailed explanation than the Tribunal's vaguest-in-all-fiction scans to establish 1-A levels of Transduality, so, all in all, literally nothing about those scans is applicable as far as getting anything remotely above High 1-B goes.
Maybe so, but the fact that the Living Tribunal is clearly referring to transcending duality as a concept, coupled with his statements of transcendence of space-time, makes me lean quite far towards a 1-A interpretation.
>As I have elaborated, there is absolutely no evidence that he transcends duality in our sense.
In fact, it is established multiple times throughout Marvel that the In-Betweener is the embodiment of Moral Dualism and Balance - ie, the aforementioned definition of duality that I mentioned - things such as the duality of good and evil, life and death. This is the context behind the "dualities" that the Tribunal judges - there needs to exist a cosmic balance between good and evil and etc., or else the universe's balance is threatened. This literally couldn't be said in clearer words by Chaos;
"Yes...and with the In-Betweener's dualities at his command, Korvac has multiplied the parameters of his power immeasurably." "I hereby decree that as punishment for the crimes Korvac of Earth has committed against the cosmic balance of the universe - Earth must die!" So, as I hope we can have established, the In-Betweener's "dualities" that Silver Surfer mentioned have absolutely nothing to do with the 1-A Transduality we mentioned earlier.
You can inform yourself more on our standards for Transduality, but at the very most the Tribunal fits Type 2 as outlined there. All of your scans, even taken at face value (which they shouldn't be), would result in no more than the Tribunal being a Type 2 Transdual. That is nowhere near 1-A.
How is the "moral" dualism that the In-Betweener embodies (and that the Living Tribunal transcends) not duality in "our" sense? It's, as you yourself explained, literally just a conglomeration of dual systems, like good and evil, life and death, order and chaos, etc.
Transduality, of all types, is defined as transcendence of dual systems, so I don't see what is the problem here, or how that doesn't relate to transduality.
And if you're talking type 3 transduality, then the statements of the Living Tribunal as beyond space and time, coupled with his transcendence and clear hierarchical superiority to the High 1-B In-Betweener, should be sufficient enough.
>Indeed, existence and nonexistence form a duality. Oblivion, as established by the comics themselves, is unfathomably superior to Eternity, Infinity, Death. The Chaos King is the avatar of nonexistence who is equal to Multi-Eternity, and the Chaos King was stated by Oblivion himself to be no more than an infinitesimal aspect in the infinite cosmic void that he represents. So you can not try to make them comparable. Their importance in the Cosmic Hierarchy is comparable, yes. Their power? Not at all.
By the same logic, you can't compare the Tribunal and Oblivion without direct consistent statements in the comic, of which there are...zero.
Who said that was Multi-Eternity that the Chaos King threatened? Who said he even threatened the totality of the Marvel multiverse, and not some layer of the multiverse?
>There are many reasons, all of which I outlined in my post. You can't just brush it off and say it is because you believe it is. The terminology used clearly points to the term "dimension" meaning only universe or parallel dimension in-context. Much more evidence is required for it to mean higher-dimensions, and Marvel consistently provides said evidence in other references to higher layers of existence - there is no reason to give the Beyonder special treatment, pretending he is above evidence.
Well okay then. The Beyonder is quite clearly explained as being beyond the multiverse, and everything that composes it, in its totality.
Every time the abstracts and cosmic entities, many of which are High 1-B, speak of the Beyonder Realm, they speak of it as beyond the multiverse.
And keep in kind that "Marvel" is not some unified block, but a collection of people, and of writers, each with their own different writing styles. I bring this up because "Marvel" not explicitly stating that Beyonder is 1-A or whatever doesn't mean much when all the in-universe context clues support the notion.
>1. This principle is completely false, as being outside ("beyond" and "outside" mean the exact same thing) a High 1-B multiverse doesn't translate to being infinitely higher, much like timeless voids/dimensions in verses with a linear 4-D universe/timeline doesn't at all translate to said voids transcending the normal universe. Just having different properties. The Beyonder's universe is never described as being trancendental to the multiverse in a level that warrants 1-A. Never.
2. The actual story says otherwise. It is stated that the Beyonder, and by extension the Beyond Realm, is an infinite-dimensional entity in his true state.
1. The Beyond Realm is almost never portrayed as merely qualitatively independent of the multiverse (like your timeless void/dimension example), but as qualitatively superior to the Marvel multiverse as a whole, to the point that all the Marvel cosmics, except the Living Tribunal, fear him.
2. It may seem so, but then the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, and being surprised at the limitations thereof. Strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
>Thsi is completely false. The quote is talking about the Beyonder descending from the Beyond-Realm into our universe, and as a result descending from his usually infinite-dimensional state into a mere three-dimensional domain. It is blatantly referring to his true self. It's impossible to claim otherwise.
Again, when the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, he is surprised at the limitations thereof, which wouldn't happen in a simple avatar-creation. Again, strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
>No.
This scan right here states the same thing - that the Beyond Realm is outside "all the infinite adjacent dimensions which make up the multiverse", yet it is blatantly referring to dimensions in the sense of parallel universes, since it uses the adjective "adjacent" to describe said dimensions (adjacent means "parallel" or "neighbouring", thus "parallel dimensions"). Therefore, interpreting the scan you posted - which I posted a rebuttal to on the OP as well - as referring to spatiotemporal dimensions isn't necessary. As I have pointed out many times, literally every single mention of a spatial dimension was made clear in Marvel, with analogies to hammer the point home, and explicit, non-ambiguous adjectives, such as "16-dimensional superspace", "5.82839 spatial dimensions" and etc.
Even other quotes involving the Beyonder have used such analogies to refer to him as an infinite-dimensional being. Why not include them here, unless it isn't talking about higher-dimensions? Which it, to be fair, blatantly isn't, considering the surrounding context.
The scans really don't say the same thing.
Let's compare the two.
"Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!"
https://m.imgur.com/rSZqTbS
"Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
In the first quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to the term "universe", as a synonym for the term "universe", which is why they're described as adjacent.
In the second quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to "time" and "space", as coordinates of a given mathematical space.
The two statements aren't comparable.
>A quote that would belong in a High 2-A, or heck, even a Low 2-C's profile is somehow proof of 1-A. Not.
Simply saying so doesn't make it true. Keep in mind that the Beyonder race have also been stated to not be constrained by space or energy or "anything within reason", so them existing "beyond reality" only adds to that, and "beyond anything you could imagine" is further contextualized by such.
https://m.imgur.com/a/Laf4phz
As far as I'm concerned, pre-retcon Beyonder and the Beyonders are type 1 beyond-dimensional existences, while the Living Tribunal is a type 2 beyond-dimensional existence.
>Literally no one in the story had any qualms about using the word "multiverse" or "multiversal" to describe the Beyonders' actions throughout creation. But suddenly, them using "universal" is just "figurative speech". Nevermind the fact that it is repeatedly established they were killing the Celestials a universe at a time, thus proving they couldn't have killed the full Abstracts all at once.
Different contexts.
This was one man who had admittedly gone mad and was talking about "universal genocide", which could mean genocide across the universe, or genocide of the universe, or something else entirely.
Hence, poetic language.
And maybe there were specific Celestial populations in specific universes, and not others, which is why the Beyonders destroyed them "one universe at a time". Not all cosmics have to exist in multiple places at once.
The other quotes (which already contradict your preferred one), in their contexts talk about how the Beyonders are devastating the multiverse, in very clear terms. Very little, if any poetic language required.
>Apparently the multiple assertions that they are powerless, that MM is the only one capable of fighting him in equal grounds, and everyone being awed when he appears doesn't get the point across well enough. We need to focus on semantics now.
You know that wasn't my actual point. Standing aside to let two people talk is not necessarily proof of subservience or inferiority to either one.
>Literally absolutely no scans that state or imply it to be subject to the Tribunal. One of them is literally the Tribunal describing the entities that are subject to him one at a time, failing to mention Oblivion, and the dude on that thread saying "it makes sense that Oblivion is the only face left that he didn't mention!" to make up for it. Not only that, the guy tries to equate a random statement about the "fathomless void" to mean the domain of Oblivion, when the full sentence makes it plain that it is merely talking about the background void of a universe
All-in-all...no.
The full sentence had "fathomless void" as a clear contrast to matter, just like the "nebulous netherworld" that can apparently exist solely either "in time" or "in space".
I'm sure that a void being described as qualitatively different to material existence is something to consider.
That respect thread also talks about how Death and Oblivion are intertwined, sometimes even equated. The Living Tribunal commands Death, so he most likely commands Oblivion.
The Living Tribunal generally doesn't command Oblivion because Oblivion isn't *of* the multiverse, although he is still subject to the cosmic balance that the Tribunal sustains, as the Rune/Silver Surfer segment of this respect thread elaborates on.
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com/forums/index.php?topic=17.15
- 32,327
- 20,213
Let the guy speak. He is being polite and being very passionate about it, putting for good posts.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #48
> Nothing multiversal happened because those are M-Bodies, Kep. We know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.j
As I pointed out in my other post, this is false and headcanon.
> And how is this supposed to explain why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity?
Eternity is just a fragment of TLT...
> Especially since that isn't even true, as the alternate universe Adam Warlock, IIRC, managed to absorb his universe's M-Body of the Living Tribunal.
...So, literally proving what I said. He absorbed the essence of the dead Tribunal in his universe.,
> The TOAA didn't even replace the Living Tribunal that died, just allowed that other-universe Adam Warlock to become an M-Body for him.
This is blatantly false.
It is explicitly stated that Adam Warlock replaced the full entity. It's hilarious how literally every statement made since TLT's original death is irrelevant and false to you just because of random stuff about Death. As if Marvel is consistent when it comes to their abstracts. Guess Multi-Eternity > TLT, and every single statement showing otherwise is false.
> Again, we know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
"All of reality - the multiverse taken form. They battled. They raged. The same fight taking place across all realities at the same time. And when The Living Tribunal lived no more, it fell from the heavens, and it landed on a rock, one sliver for each reality."
No.
> When Beyonder killed Death, the concept of death was totally removed from the multiverse, on a fundamental level. When the Living Tribunal was supposedly killed...nothing much happened. The multiverse didn't suddenly become nothing.
Once again, stop throwing the argument I'm making back at me as if it's actually evidence of your contention. The multiverse not collapsing is exactly my point to begin with.
> Except "opposing realities" and "dualities", in the context of that scan (especially given how the Tribunal defines order and chaos as "opposing realities"), are clearly the same thing. Your desires and wishes will not change that
So your "evidence" is just reaffirming that what you said is true because you said so, ignoring the rebuttals against your point. Stellar.
Definition of realities.
Definition of duality.
They aren't going to be the same thing just because you want them to be. Sorry.
> So stating that he exists beyond duality is "too vague" as evidence for transduality? What?
I'd love to see the time he actually said that he transcended all conceptual dualities. I am one-hundred percent sure such a statement doesn't exist and never existed, but since you say it does, you can bring it here. I'll concede immediately if you do.
> You seem to like using the terms "vague" and "flowery language" even when they don't apply, as if anything but the most blunt and explicit statements are unusable for evidence
Yes, indeed!
Our standards completely reject explanations that are not extremely specific. Vague flowery that never approaches the likes of "he transcends the concept of dimensions and space and time" isn't nearly enough.
> Except that since the Living Tribunal spoke of "opposing realities" in the very next sentence, it's clear that this refers to the Living Tribunal's standing in relation to the very concepts of space and time in the cosmic hierarchy of Marvel, and not just the "boundaries" of universal or 4D spacetime.
The statement: "I transcend the realms of space and time - and all the opposing realities!"
Your interpretation: "He transcends the very concepts of space and time and is completely unbound by the very concept of dimensions themselves"
My interpretation: "He transcends space and time."
We can see which one fits what is actually stated.
> Good and evil is just one duality. The Silver Surfer speaks of an infinite number of dualities. The Living Tribunal speaks of how he exists beyond all the "opposing realities" (I.e. dualities).
Once more, that's you rewriting the statement. That is stated nowhere. Silver Surfer spoke of dualities in the exact same panel - there is no need for the Tribunal not to use the exact same wording if that's what he meant.
All the Tribunal says is that he is beyond the realms of Death, Eternity, Order and Chaos, which is something we've always known - those entities are just fragments of the totality that is the LT, afterall. None of that remotely approaches evidence for Type 3 Transduality, especially taking context into account.
> Maybe so, but the fact that the Living Tribunal is clearly referring to transcending duality as a concept, coupled with his statements of transcendence of space-time, makes me lean quite far towards a 1-A interpretation.
The Living Tribunal never ever stated he transcended the concept of duality. This is yet another fake statement that is never uttered by any character in the franchise.
He stated he transcended the realms of space and time and all their opposing realities - a High 2-A statement that doesn't even remotely begin to approach the proof required for Transduality or 1-A as a whole. We've been over this. Find an explicit statement instead of vague flowery with 10 interpretations all at once.
> How is the "moral" dualism that the In-Betweener embodies (and that the Living Tribunal transcends) not duality in "our" sense? It's, as you yourself explained, literally just a conglomeration of dual systems, like good and evil, life and death, order and chaos, etc.
The moral dualism embodied by the In-Betweener is not equivalent to the specific dualism of the concepts of space and time, hence not the 1-A Transduality you have been trying to push for TLT. Even taking all your evidence at face-value, no more than Type 2 Transduality is warranted. This is just an exercise in futility and a waste of time.
> And if you're talking type 3 transduality, then the statements of the Living Tribunal as beyond space and time, coupled with his transcendence and clear hierarchical superiority to the High 1-B In-Betweener, should be sufficient enough.
High 2-A statement = \ = 1-A Transduality. We've been over this.
> Who said that was Multi-Eternity that the Chaos King threatened? Who said he even threatened the totality of the Marvel multiverse, and not some layer of the multiverse?
Eternity himself said so. Are you going to call him a liar or try to say it was "just a M-Body!" like you did with the Tribunal?
The Chaos King was directly stated to have erased 99% of the multiverse within the storyline. Not just some layer of it.
> Well okay then. The Beyonder is quite clearly explained as being beyond the multiverse, and everything that composes it, in its totality. Every time the abstracts and cosmic entities, many of which are High 1-B, speak of the Beyonder Realm, they speak of it as beyond the multiverse.
And none of that is remotely 1-A. Being beyond a High 1-B multiverse is High 1-B.
> I bring this up because "Marvel" not explicitly stating that Beyonder is 1-A or whatever doesn't mean much when all the in-universe context clues support the notion.
There is really not a single statement in Secret Wars I and II that can be interpreted as 1-A for the Beyonder.
Statements required for 1-A:
The Beyonder is explicitly stated to contain "millions of times" more power than that within the multiverse, "thousands" at one other point, and he himself states that he is simply "larger" than the multiverse.
He is nowhere near a 1-A entity. He just dwarves a High 1-B multiverse. Still doesn't come even close to fulfilling the criteria for 1-A.
> 1. The Beyond Realm is almost never portrayed as merely qualitatively independent of the multiverse (like your timeless void/dimension example), but as qualitatively superior to the Marvel multiverse as a whole, to the point that all the Marvel cosmics, except the Living Tribunal, fear him.
I. The Beyond Realm was never portrayed as conceptually superior to the Multiverse in Pre-Retcon Beyonder storylines. Seriously, there are several quotes that state it is linearly larger. The narrator saying The Beyonder is "millions of times more than the multiverse and all the awesome power within", half of his power being stated to be "thousands of times all of existence" in power, the Beyonder himself stating that he is "larger" than the multiverse - every direct comparison makes it clear that he is merely larger than a High 1-B multiverse.
II. The Beyonder is explicitly superior to the Tribunal, this is unquestionable and undebatable. TLT was present every single time it was stated that the Beyonder was the most powerful being, and Molecule Man was stated at least three times to be the most powerful being in the whole multiverse in the direct presence of the Tribunal.
> 2. It may seem so, but then the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, and being surprised at the limitations thereof. Strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
Dimensionally-bound entities can't change their dimensionality? I guess the thousands of times Universal Eternity, Infinity and Death were shown as 4-D to 5-D entities despite their multiversal forms being infinite-dimensional never happened. I guess the concept of M-Bodies no longer exists either!
> In the first quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to the term "universe", as a synonym for the term "universe", which is why they're described as adjacent. In the second quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to "time" and "space", as coordinates of a given mathematical space
The first statement: ""Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!""
The second statement: ""Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
The first quote and the second one are intertwined, as both talk of "all known existence/all known dimensions". The first quote shows that the second one can have multiple interpretations.
Besides, even taking it at face value, it isn't a 1-A quote, as I elaborated on above.
> Simply saying so doesn't make it true. Keep in mind that the Beyonder race have also been stated to not be constrained by space or energy or "anything within reason", so them existing "beyond reality" only adds to that, and "beyond anything you could imagine" is further contextualized by such.
None of those statements are 1-A, once again.
To draw a comparison; here is yet another of those "the Beyonders transcend everything" statements. This scan states that the Beyond Realm "transcends all there is", that it is an "incomprehensible featureless level", that, within there, there is an "infinity of objects oscilating between nonexistence and existence", with the characters right off the bat stating that they are beyond "Eternity itself". This is much more explicit than what you posted.
...Yet even the scan I posted above is no more than above 4-Dimensional in scale, and only referencing Universal Entity. They outright mention that the Beyond Realm and the void beyond it are separated by a mere 4-D dimensional barrier, meaning that the Beyond-Realm is being treated as 4-D on that scan, despite the impressive descriptions given.
Those vague statements you think are 1-A can be even lower than High 2-A. Heck, there are verses with the exact same statements regarding duality and time and space that are rated as merely 2-C, not even High 2-A.
> The other quotes (which already contradict your preferred one), in their contexts talk about how the Beyonders are devastating the multiverse, in very clear terms. Very little, if any poetic language required.
Because the literal exact thing I said was happening (that they were devastating the multiverse one universe at a time) somehow contradicts my "preferred" quote. How that can be discerned from the statements is beyond me, but alright.
> You know that wasn't my actual point. Standing aside to let two people talk is not necessarily proof of subservience or inferiority to either one.
If you want me to quote the 6+ statements that say everyone else is shit-tier compared to the Beyonder and Molecule Man, I can do so, but I'd hate to focus on semantics.
> The full sentence had "fathomless void" as a clear contrast to matter
As if that isn't the literal point of my argument; as if it isn't to show that it has absolutely nothing to do with Oblivion.
This is the statement. Literally anyone can see it isn't talking about an entity that was introduced two decades after the statement, and that in-context it is just contrasting the matter within dimensions to the background void.
> That respect thread also talks about how Death and Oblivion are intertwined, sometimes even equated. The Living Tribunal commands Death, so he most likely commands Oblivion.
No, Death and Oblivion aren't intertwined nor equated. Literally zero quotes say or imply as much, unless you try to spin random "void" quotes 20 years before Oblivion's introduction to be talking about him. Death is pitiful and insignificant compared to Oblivion, since even an infinitesimal M-Body (The Chaos King) of his is equal to Multi-Eternity.
As I pointed out in my other post, this is false and headcanon.
> And how is this supposed to explain why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity?
Eternity is just a fragment of TLT...
> Especially since that isn't even true, as the alternate universe Adam Warlock, IIRC, managed to absorb his universe's M-Body of the Living Tribunal.
...So, literally proving what I said. He absorbed the essence of the dead Tribunal in his universe.,
> The TOAA didn't even replace the Living Tribunal that died, just allowed that other-universe Adam Warlock to become an M-Body for him.
This is blatantly false.
It is explicitly stated that Adam Warlock replaced the full entity. It's hilarious how literally every statement made since TLT's original death is irrelevant and false to you just because of random stuff about Death. As if Marvel is consistent when it comes to their abstracts. Guess Multi-Eternity > TLT, and every single statement showing otherwise is false.
> Again, we know from Beyonder destroying Death what happens when an abstract is *truly* killed in Marvel, so the fact that nothing happened all three times the Tribunal was killed is sufficient to show that those were M-Bodies.
"All of reality - the multiverse taken form. They battled. They raged. The same fight taking place across all realities at the same time. And when The Living Tribunal lived no more, it fell from the heavens, and it landed on a rock, one sliver for each reality."
No.
> When Beyonder killed Death, the concept of death was totally removed from the multiverse, on a fundamental level. When the Living Tribunal was supposedly killed...nothing much happened. The multiverse didn't suddenly become nothing.
Once again, stop throwing the argument I'm making back at me as if it's actually evidence of your contention. The multiverse not collapsing is exactly my point to begin with.
> Except "opposing realities" and "dualities", in the context of that scan (especially given how the Tribunal defines order and chaos as "opposing realities"), are clearly the same thing. Your desires and wishes will not change that
So your "evidence" is just reaffirming that what you said is true because you said so, ignoring the rebuttals against your point. Stellar.
Definition of realities.
Definition of duality.
They aren't going to be the same thing just because you want them to be. Sorry.
> So stating that he exists beyond duality is "too vague" as evidence for transduality? What?
I'd love to see the time he actually said that he transcended all conceptual dualities. I am one-hundred percent sure such a statement doesn't exist and never existed, but since you say it does, you can bring it here. I'll concede immediately if you do.
> You seem to like using the terms "vague" and "flowery language" even when they don't apply, as if anything but the most blunt and explicit statements are unusable for evidence
Yes, indeed!
Our standards completely reject explanations that are not extremely specific. Vague flowery that never approaches the likes of "he transcends the concept of dimensions and space and time" isn't nearly enough.
> Except that since the Living Tribunal spoke of "opposing realities" in the very next sentence, it's clear that this refers to the Living Tribunal's standing in relation to the very concepts of space and time in the cosmic hierarchy of Marvel, and not just the "boundaries" of universal or 4D spacetime.
The statement: "I transcend the realms of space and time - and all the opposing realities!"
Your interpretation: "He transcends the very concepts of space and time and is completely unbound by the very concept of dimensions themselves"
My interpretation: "He transcends space and time."
We can see which one fits what is actually stated.
> Good and evil is just one duality. The Silver Surfer speaks of an infinite number of dualities. The Living Tribunal speaks of how he exists beyond all the "opposing realities" (I.e. dualities).
Once more, that's you rewriting the statement. That is stated nowhere. Silver Surfer spoke of dualities in the exact same panel - there is no need for the Tribunal not to use the exact same wording if that's what he meant.
All the Tribunal says is that he is beyond the realms of Death, Eternity, Order and Chaos, which is something we've always known - those entities are just fragments of the totality that is the LT, afterall. None of that remotely approaches evidence for Type 3 Transduality, especially taking context into account.
> Maybe so, but the fact that the Living Tribunal is clearly referring to transcending duality as a concept, coupled with his statements of transcendence of space-time, makes me lean quite far towards a 1-A interpretation.
The Living Tribunal never ever stated he transcended the concept of duality. This is yet another fake statement that is never uttered by any character in the franchise.
He stated he transcended the realms of space and time and all their opposing realities - a High 2-A statement that doesn't even remotely begin to approach the proof required for Transduality or 1-A as a whole. We've been over this. Find an explicit statement instead of vague flowery with 10 interpretations all at once.
> How is the "moral" dualism that the In-Betweener embodies (and that the Living Tribunal transcends) not duality in "our" sense? It's, as you yourself explained, literally just a conglomeration of dual systems, like good and evil, life and death, order and chaos, etc.
The moral dualism embodied by the In-Betweener is not equivalent to the specific dualism of the concepts of space and time, hence not the 1-A Transduality you have been trying to push for TLT. Even taking all your evidence at face-value, no more than Type 2 Transduality is warranted. This is just an exercise in futility and a waste of time.
> And if you're talking type 3 transduality, then the statements of the Living Tribunal as beyond space and time, coupled with his transcendence and clear hierarchical superiority to the High 1-B In-Betweener, should be sufficient enough.
High 2-A statement = \ = 1-A Transduality. We've been over this.
> Who said that was Multi-Eternity that the Chaos King threatened? Who said he even threatened the totality of the Marvel multiverse, and not some layer of the multiverse?
Eternity himself said so. Are you going to call him a liar or try to say it was "just a M-Body!" like you did with the Tribunal?
The Chaos King was directly stated to have erased 99% of the multiverse within the storyline. Not just some layer of it.
> Well okay then. The Beyonder is quite clearly explained as being beyond the multiverse, and everything that composes it, in its totality. Every time the abstracts and cosmic entities, many of which are High 1-B, speak of the Beyonder Realm, they speak of it as beyond the multiverse.
And none of that is remotely 1-A. Being beyond a High 1-B multiverse is High 1-B.
> I bring this up because "Marvel" not explicitly stating that Beyonder is 1-A or whatever doesn't mean much when all the in-universe context clues support the notion.
There is really not a single statement in Secret Wars I and II that can be interpreted as 1-A for the Beyonder.
Statements required for 1-A:
- Transcending the very concept of dimensions
- Transcending the concepts of space and time
- Being dimensionless
- A realm with dimensions is literally nonexistent in comparison
- Dimensions of time, space, physical matter and energy have zero influence and can't at all interact in the slightest
The Beyonder is explicitly stated to contain "millions of times" more power than that within the multiverse, "thousands" at one other point, and he himself states that he is simply "larger" than the multiverse.
He is nowhere near a 1-A entity. He just dwarves a High 1-B multiverse. Still doesn't come even close to fulfilling the criteria for 1-A.
> 1. The Beyond Realm is almost never portrayed as merely qualitatively independent of the multiverse (like your timeless void/dimension example), but as qualitatively superior to the Marvel multiverse as a whole, to the point that all the Marvel cosmics, except the Living Tribunal, fear him.
I. The Beyond Realm was never portrayed as conceptually superior to the Multiverse in Pre-Retcon Beyonder storylines. Seriously, there are several quotes that state it is linearly larger. The narrator saying The Beyonder is "millions of times more than the multiverse and all the awesome power within", half of his power being stated to be "thousands of times all of existence" in power, the Beyonder himself stating that he is "larger" than the multiverse - every direct comparison makes it clear that he is merely larger than a High 1-B multiverse.
II. The Beyonder is explicitly superior to the Tribunal, this is unquestionable and undebatable. TLT was present every single time it was stated that the Beyonder was the most powerful being, and Molecule Man was stated at least three times to be the most powerful being in the whole multiverse in the direct presence of the Tribunal.
> 2. It may seem so, but then the story talks about him taking three dimensional form, and being surprised at the limitations thereof. Strictly speaking, dimensionally bound entities cannot simply *change* their dimensionality, certainly not via sheer force of will. This seems to suggest that the Beyonder, at his truest nature, is beyond-dimensional.
Dimensionally-bound entities can't change their dimensionality? I guess the thousands of times Universal Eternity, Infinity and Death were shown as 4-D to 5-D entities despite their multiversal forms being infinite-dimensional never happened. I guess the concept of M-Bodies no longer exists either!
> In the first quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to the term "universe", as a synonym for the term "universe", which is why they're described as adjacent. In the second quote, the term "dimension" clearly relates to "time" and "space", as coordinates of a given mathematical space
The first statement: ""Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!""
The second statement: ""Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
The first quote and the second one are intertwined, as both talk of "all known existence/all known dimensions". The first quote shows that the second one can have multiple interpretations.
Besides, even taking it at face value, it isn't a 1-A quote, as I elaborated on above.
> Simply saying so doesn't make it true. Keep in mind that the Beyonder race have also been stated to not be constrained by space or energy or "anything within reason", so them existing "beyond reality" only adds to that, and "beyond anything you could imagine" is further contextualized by such.
None of those statements are 1-A, once again.
To draw a comparison; here is yet another of those "the Beyonders transcend everything" statements. This scan states that the Beyond Realm "transcends all there is", that it is an "incomprehensible featureless level", that, within there, there is an "infinity of objects oscilating between nonexistence and existence", with the characters right off the bat stating that they are beyond "Eternity itself". This is much more explicit than what you posted.
...Yet even the scan I posted above is no more than above 4-Dimensional in scale, and only referencing Universal Entity. They outright mention that the Beyond Realm and the void beyond it are separated by a mere 4-D dimensional barrier, meaning that the Beyond-Realm is being treated as 4-D on that scan, despite the impressive descriptions given.
Those vague statements you think are 1-A can be even lower than High 2-A. Heck, there are verses with the exact same statements regarding duality and time and space that are rated as merely 2-C, not even High 2-A.
> The other quotes (which already contradict your preferred one), in their contexts talk about how the Beyonders are devastating the multiverse, in very clear terms. Very little, if any poetic language required.
Because the literal exact thing I said was happening (that they were devastating the multiverse one universe at a time) somehow contradicts my "preferred" quote. How that can be discerned from the statements is beyond me, but alright.
> You know that wasn't my actual point. Standing aside to let two people talk is not necessarily proof of subservience or inferiority to either one.
If you want me to quote the 6+ statements that say everyone else is shit-tier compared to the Beyonder and Molecule Man, I can do so, but I'd hate to focus on semantics.
> The full sentence had "fathomless void" as a clear contrast to matter
As if that isn't the literal point of my argument; as if it isn't to show that it has absolutely nothing to do with Oblivion.
This is the statement. Literally anyone can see it isn't talking about an entity that was introduced two decades after the statement, and that in-context it is just contrasting the matter within dimensions to the background void.
> That respect thread also talks about how Death and Oblivion are intertwined, sometimes even equated. The Living Tribunal commands Death, so he most likely commands Oblivion.
No, Death and Oblivion aren't intertwined nor equated. Literally zero quotes say or imply as much, unless you try to spin random "void" quotes 20 years before Oblivion's introduction to be talking about him. Death is pitiful and insignificant compared to Oblivion, since even an infinitesimal M-Body (The Chaos King) of his is equal to Multi-Eternity.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #49
The Beyonder:
- Was stated that half of his power was "equal to all the other energy in existence times a thousand"
- Stated that he was simply larger than the multiverse and more powerful than all of its forces, not remotely that he transcended it to the point that the multiverse is literally nonexistent in comparison to him and that its very concept amounts to absolutely nothing.
- The Beyond Realm was linked to the normal multiverse by Molecule Man.
- The Beyond Realm was linked to the normal multiverse by Doctor Doom, and energy from it spilled over into our realm.
- 30,046
- 31,269
Yeah High 1-B Beyonder is legit.
- 1,050
- 491
>As I pointed out in my other post, this is false and headcanon.
Based on what? Your preconceived notions?
>Eternity is just a fragment of TLT...
Which still doesn't explain why TLT's perspective and motives are unfathomable to Eternity.
Just because one character is a fragment of another doesn't mean that the other character isn't incomparably beyond the first one.
>...So, literally proving what I said. He absorbed the essence of the dead Tribunal in his universe.
How can dead Tribunal bodies still have a noticeable essence?
What I meant was that when Adam Warlock absorbed his universe's Tribunal, he did it while that Tribunal was still alive.
>This is blatantly false.
Your predecessor thought so, yet it fell victim to the Beyonders. It is explicitly stated that Adam Warlock replaced the full entity. It's hilarious how literally every statement made since TLT's original death is irrelevant and false to you just because of random stuff about Death. As if Marvel is consistent when it comes to their abstracts. Guess Multi-Eternity > TLT, and every single statement showing otherwise is false.
Some throwaway line about predecessors means absolutely nothing. Dream of the Endless "died" and was replaced, and yet everyone who is informed on the specifics of the nature of the Endless would know that only an aspect of Dream "died".
And it is the same here.
That "random stuff" about Death is a display of the fundamental relationship between the abstracts and the multiverse, and what happens if an abstract is destroyed in full.
Guess what, their concept goes with them. Some mumbling about "inconsistencies" (as if that scene was ever contradicted) will not change that at all.
>"All of reality - the multiverse taken form. They battled. They raged. The same fight taking place across all realities at the same time. And when The Living Tribunal lived no more, it fell from the heavens, and it landed on a rock, one sliver for each reality."
No.
And this is supposed to prove...what exactly? It's not like M-Bodies cannot be made to administer to multiple levels of reality at once.
>Once again, stop throwing the argument I'm making back at me as if it's actually evidence of your contention. The multiverse not collapsing is exactly my point to begin with.
Because that point of yours works against you.
Assuming that the Living Tribunal is just the embodiment of the Marvel multiverse in full, and he was destroyed as completely as Death was, then his concept should have been removed from the multiverse that instant.
His concept being the multiverse itself.
If he wasn't an M-Body, but the full being, the work of the Beyonders should have been done the moment they killed him the first time, as the multiverse would have instantly winked out of existence.
>So your "evidence" is just reaffirming that what you said is true because you said so, ignoring the rebuttals against your point. Stellar.
Definition of realities.
Definition of duality.
They aren't going to be the same thing just because you want them to be. Sorry.
Setting aside your absurdly pedantic interpretation of both "realities" and "dualities", all I need to say is: look at the context clues.
Every time the Living Tribunal speaks of opposing realities, he speaks of dual systems, as in dualities:
Space and Time Eternity and Death Order and Chaos
Therefore, the context clues would seem to suggest that when the Living Tribunal speaks of "opposing realities", he speaks of dualities.
>I'd love to see the time he actually said that he transcended all conceptual dualities. I am one-hundred percent sure such a statement doesn't exist and never existed, but since you say it does, you can bring it here. I'll concede immediately if you do.
You mean the statements posted in this thread weren't enough already? It's only through sheer pedantry that they're being contested right now.
>Yes, indeed!
In fact, to truly qualify for this term, the definition or application of a given cosmological structure must be very specific Our standards completely reject explanations that are not extremely specific. Vague flowery that never approaches the likes of "he transcends the concept of dimensions and space and time" isn't nearly enough.
I want to ask how many of the other 1-A characters catalogue in this site have "flowery language" descriptions as the basis of their ranking.
I presume quite a few.
And how are the Tribunal's statements "vague" or (too) "flowery" anyway? Connecting the dots, the statement of the Living Tribunal being beyond the "realm" of space and time (which Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively), coupled with his motivation (and by extension, perspective) being unfathomable to Eternity, along with his statements of transcending dualities...
It all adds up to a very clear picture, one that has the Living Tribunal as 1-A.
>The statement: "I transcend the realms of space and time - and all the opposing realities!"
Your interpretation: "He transcends the very concepts of space and time and is completely unbound by the very concept of dimensions themselves"
My interpretation: "He transcends space and time."
We can see which one fits what is actually stated.
I don't see what is the contradiction here.
>Once more, that's you rewriting the statement. That is stated nowhere. Silver Surfer spoke of dualities in the exact same panel - there is no need for the Tribunal not to use the exact same wording if that's what he meant.
I have not rewritten anything. I have described the statements exactly as Silver Surfer and the Living Tribunal said them:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6I4jTZdAXUk/VoTgpwMwcaI/AAAAAAAAWLw/ksFEkETO6OU/s1600-Ic42/RCO025.jpg
And why is it somehow necessary for the Living Tribunal to use the exact same wording?
>All the Tribunal says is that he is beyond the realms of Death, Eternity, Order and Chaos, which is something we've always known - those entities are just fragments of the totality that is the LT, afterall. None of that remotely approaches evidence for Type 3 Transduality, especially taking context into account.
And those entities embody concepts, which are put in the context of dual systems, even those as far-reaching as life/existence (Eternity) and death/nonexistence (Death). The Living Tribunal completely transcends them, to the point that his perspective is unfathomable from theirs.
>The Living Tribunal never ever stated he transcended the concept of duality. This is yet another fake statement that is never uttered by any character in the franchise.
He stated he transcended the realms of space and time and all their opposing realities - a High 2-A statement that doesn't even remotely begin to approach the proof required for Transduality or 1-A as a whole. We've been over this. Find an explicit statement instead of vague flowery with 10 interpretations all at once.
The only one arguing about how that statement somehow admits to multiple interpretations is you.
In fact, let's look at the other TLT nonduality scan again:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6I4jTZdAXUk/VoTgpwMwcaI/AAAAAAAAWLw/ksFEkETO6OU/s1600-Ic42/RCO025.jpg
"I knew it! I knew that everything in the multiverse is connected to something else! Death and Eternity in this dimension--Chaos and Order in the Sphere of Magick--
--Galactus taught me the infinite dualities in his war with the In-Betweener!"
"I am he who safeguards the multiverse from mystical imbalance Silver Surfer! I transcend the realms of Death and Eternity, Order and Chaos--
--all the opposing realities!"
Literally everything in the multiverse is connected to "something else" (i.e. its opposite), including concepts. And the Living Tribunal transcends all of that.
"High 2-A statement" my foot.
"Vague" my ass.
>The moral dualism embodied by the In-Betweener is not equivalent to the specific dualism of the concepts of space and time, hence not the 1-A Transduality you have been trying to push for TLT. Even taking all your evidence at face-value, no more than Type 2 Transduality is warranted. This is just an exercise in futility and a waste of time.
Except the Living Tribunal is above space and time too, so even if the In-Betweener doesn't embody *that* duality (and he does, as per his literal description, which wouldn't suddenly limit itself from encompassing space and time), it wouldn't have been relevant anyway.
>High 2-A statement = \ = 1-A Transduality. We've been over this.
Collection of statements altogether providing clear evidence, if not proof, of 1-A Transduality =/= High 2-A statement
>Eternity himself said so. Are you going to call him a liar or try to say it was "just a M-Body!" like you did with the Tribunal?
Talking about how how the Chaos King was the chaos "before existence itself" doesn't really prove much by itself, since Eternity could just be talking about "conventional" multiversal existence just one layer above the Earth-616 universe.
And yes, it probably was an M-Body, especially considering how the Chaos King himself is a glorified M-Body for Oblivion, and yet he "walks hand in hand" with Eternity himself, and seems to be connected to Eternity is some way, a dualistic way, while, at the same time, in higher levels of reality, Infinity (who is Eternity's sister and equal) herself can be seen talking to Oblivion rather forthrightly, discussing their contract and the fact that he, by her estimate, broke it:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/wB0TUseUQ...cua-vYflLa_DFulmdO2iQQHQVhJclD-sLMB6R44=s1600
What I'm saying is that the Chaos King is only the dualistic opposite of a lower-level manifestation of Eternity, and that on higher levels, Oblivion is actually the dualistic opposite of Eternity (in the sense of an existence-nonexistence duality; Eternity seems to have acquired many "opposites", each for a different perspective of him, over the years).
>The Chaos King was directly stated to have erased 99% of the multiverse within the storyline. Not just some layer of it.
You come in talking about vagueness and yet you suddenly fail to understand how in Marvel Comics, the term "multiverse" can mean several different things depending on the context, from the infinite layers of the complete multiverse to the layer of reality "just beyond" the Earth-616 universe.
>And none of that is remotely 1-A. Being beyond a High 1-B multiverse is High 1-B.
And who says the Marvel Multiverse is just High 1-B?
I don't believe that the Marvel multiverse is just high 1-B, but possibly even some level of 1-A, considering the intricacies of the multiverse being based, in one aspect, on Cantorian set theory. But that's just me.
>There is really not a single statement in Secret Wars I and II that can be interpreted as 1-A for the Beyonder.
Statements required for 1-A:
Transcending the very concept of dimensions Transcending the concepts of space and time Being dimensionless A realm with dimensions is literally nonexistent in comparison Dimensions of time, space, physical matter and energy have zero influence and can't at all interact in the slightest Literally zero of these criteria are met with the Beyonder and his universe. They are simply located outside of the Marvel multiverse.
The Beyonder is explicitly stated to contain "millions of times" more power than that within the multiverse, "thousands" at one other point, and he himself states that he is simply "larger" than the multiverse.
He is nowhere near a 1-A entity. He just dwarves a High 1-B multiverse. Still doesn't come even close to fulfilling the criteria for 1-A. And who says those statements need be in Secret Wars I and II?
Multiple times has the Beyonder said that, without him, the Beyonder Realm isn't even really a place, rather just some featureless blank canvas.
>I. The Beyond Realm was never portrayed as conceptually superior to the Multiverse in Pre-Retcon Beyonder storylines. Seriously, there are several quotes that state it is linearly larger. The narrator saying The Beyonder is "millions of times more than the multiverse and all the awesome power within", half of his power being stated to be "thousands of times all of existence" in power, the Beyonder himself stating that he is "larger" than the multiverse - every direct comparison makes it clear that he is merely larger than a High 1-B multiverse.
It may seem so, but in the greater context, these are merely figures if speech taking on a limited aspect of the Beyonder's power.
>II. The Beyonder is explicitly superior to the Tribunal, this is unquestionable and undebatable. TLT was present every single time it was stated that the Beyonder was the most powerful being, and Molecule Man was stated at least three times to be the most powerful being in the whole multiverse in the direct presence of the Tribunal.
And?
It's not like I can't argue that it was an M-Body regardless.
>Dimensionally-bound entities can't change their dimensionality? I guess the thousands of times Universal Eternity, Infinity and Death were shown as 4-D to 5-D entities despite their multiversal forms being infinite-dimensional never happened. I guess the concept of M-Bodies no longer exists either!
You're misinterpreting my statements. When the abstracts appear in a lower-dimensional form, they don't get surprised at being lower dimensional because those forms are just manifestation bodies created to interact with lower beings. Their "base" dimensionality doesn't change.
When the Beyonder took on a lower-dimensional form, he was actually surprised at the "lacking" nature of such a form, suggesting that he actually lowered his base dimensionality from infinity to three. And back again. This suggests that, at his core, the Beyonder is a dimensionless entity.
>The first statement: ""Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!""
The second statement: ""Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
The first quote and the second one are intertwined, as both talk of "all known existence/all known dimensions". The first quote shows that the second one can have multiple interpretations.
Besides, even taking it at face value, it isn't a 1-A quote, as I elaborated on above.
Except "dimensions" refer to different things in both cases. They aren't that intertwined at all. The first quote certainly doesn't prove that the second can have different interpretations; homonyms are a thing, after all.
>None of those statements are 1-A, once again.
To draw a comparison; here is yet another of those "the Beyonders transcend everything" statements. This scan states that the Beyond Realm "transcends all there is", that it is an "incomprehensible featureless level", that, within there, there is an "infinity of objects oscilating between nonexistence and existence", with the characters right off the bat stating that they are beyond "Eternity itself". This is much more explicit than what you posted.
...Yet even the scan I posted above is no more than above 4-Dimensional in scale, and only referencing Universal Entity. They outright mention that the Beyond Realm and the void beyond it are separated by a mere 4-D dimensional barrier, meaning that the Beyond-Realm is being treated as 4-D on that scan, despite the impressive descriptions given.
Those vague statements you think are 1-A can be even lower than High 2-A. Heck, there are verses with the exact same statements regarding duality and time and space that are rated as merely 2-C, not even High 2-A.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NDaj0mrp...cHXJK-hB1Qgc4x-WKGNlxwCHMYCw/s1600/RCO055.jpg
Looking at the scan again, it should actually be clear what is occurring here.
They are crossing the "4th-dimensional space-time barrier" not to go to the void beyond the Beyonder Realm, but to go downwards, to shrink down into the "submicroscopic quantum level" where they can see individual quarks pop in and out of existence.
It doesn't mean that the Beyonder realm literally only exists on a 4-D axis in the storyline.
>Because the literal exact thing I said was happening (that they were devastating the multiverse one universe at a time) somehow contradicts my "preferred" quote. How that can be discerned from the statements is beyond me, but alright.
You don't decimate an infinite multiverse via one universe at a time, unless you have infinite or immeasurable speeds.
And while the Beyonders probably do have those, it like still wouldn't allow them to pose such a threat that the Living Tribunal himself had to step in, something he didn't even do for the Chaos King.
>If you want me to quote the 6+ statements that say everyone else is shit-tier compared to the Beyonder and Molecule Man, I can do so, but I'd hate to focus on semantics.
Don't. They aren't relevant anyway.
>As if that isn't the literal point of my argument; as if it isn't to show that it has absolutely nothing to do with Oblivion.
All the dimensions - each nebulous netherworld which exists either in time or in space - either as matter, or as a fathomless void. This is the statement. Literally anyone can see it isn't talking about an entity that was introduced two decades after the statement, and that in-context it is just contrasting the matter within dimensions to the background void.
I think we were talking past each other.
I interpreted the "background void" as nothingness, as contrasted with the "somethingness" of matter. You seem to have interpreted it as the vacuum of space, even though, in context, the Living Tribunal was comparing and contrasting the spectrum of the types of "nebulous netherworld" that he reigned over, which is why he mentioned netherworld that somehow existed either solely in time or in space.
>No, Death and Oblivion aren't intertwined nor equated. Literally zero quotes say or imply as much, unless you try to spin random "void" quotes 20 years before Oblivion's introduction to be talking about him. Death is pitiful and insignificant compared to Oblivion, since even an infinitesimal M-Body (The Chaos King) of his is equal to Multi-Eternity.
The Chaos King isn't equal to Multi-Eternity, just a small sliver of Multi-Eternity, basically just a higher layer of regular Eternity. And since Oblivion literally embodies the void, then, if the Living Tribunal has authority over the void, then he has authority over Oblivion.
The G.L.A. #1-4 + Special segment of this respect thread makes it very clear how Death is linked to Oblivion.
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com/forums/index.php?topic=17.15
Based on what? Your preconceived notions?
>Eternity is just a fragment of TLT...
Which still doesn't explain why TLT's perspective and motives are unfathomable to Eternity.
Just because one character is a fragment of another doesn't mean that the other character isn't incomparably beyond the first one.
>...So, literally proving what I said. He absorbed the essence of the dead Tribunal in his universe.
How can dead Tribunal bodies still have a noticeable essence?
What I meant was that when Adam Warlock absorbed his universe's Tribunal, he did it while that Tribunal was still alive.
>This is blatantly false.
Your predecessor thought so, yet it fell victim to the Beyonders. It is explicitly stated that Adam Warlock replaced the full entity. It's hilarious how literally every statement made since TLT's original death is irrelevant and false to you just because of random stuff about Death. As if Marvel is consistent when it comes to their abstracts. Guess Multi-Eternity > TLT, and every single statement showing otherwise is false.
Some throwaway line about predecessors means absolutely nothing. Dream of the Endless "died" and was replaced, and yet everyone who is informed on the specifics of the nature of the Endless would know that only an aspect of Dream "died".
And it is the same here.
That "random stuff" about Death is a display of the fundamental relationship between the abstracts and the multiverse, and what happens if an abstract is destroyed in full.
Guess what, their concept goes with them. Some mumbling about "inconsistencies" (as if that scene was ever contradicted) will not change that at all.
>"All of reality - the multiverse taken form. They battled. They raged. The same fight taking place across all realities at the same time. And when The Living Tribunal lived no more, it fell from the heavens, and it landed on a rock, one sliver for each reality."
No.
And this is supposed to prove...what exactly? It's not like M-Bodies cannot be made to administer to multiple levels of reality at once.
>Once again, stop throwing the argument I'm making back at me as if it's actually evidence of your contention. The multiverse not collapsing is exactly my point to begin with.
Because that point of yours works against you.
Assuming that the Living Tribunal is just the embodiment of the Marvel multiverse in full, and he was destroyed as completely as Death was, then his concept should have been removed from the multiverse that instant.
His concept being the multiverse itself.
If he wasn't an M-Body, but the full being, the work of the Beyonders should have been done the moment they killed him the first time, as the multiverse would have instantly winked out of existence.
>So your "evidence" is just reaffirming that what you said is true because you said so, ignoring the rebuttals against your point. Stellar.
Definition of realities.
Definition of duality.
They aren't going to be the same thing just because you want them to be. Sorry.
Setting aside your absurdly pedantic interpretation of both "realities" and "dualities", all I need to say is: look at the context clues.
Every time the Living Tribunal speaks of opposing realities, he speaks of dual systems, as in dualities:
Space and Time Eternity and Death Order and Chaos
Therefore, the context clues would seem to suggest that when the Living Tribunal speaks of "opposing realities", he speaks of dualities.
>I'd love to see the time he actually said that he transcended all conceptual dualities. I am one-hundred percent sure such a statement doesn't exist and never existed, but since you say it does, you can bring it here. I'll concede immediately if you do.
You mean the statements posted in this thread weren't enough already? It's only through sheer pedantry that they're being contested right now.
>Yes, indeed!
In fact, to truly qualify for this term, the definition or application of a given cosmological structure must be very specific Our standards completely reject explanations that are not extremely specific. Vague flowery that never approaches the likes of "he transcends the concept of dimensions and space and time" isn't nearly enough.
I want to ask how many of the other 1-A characters catalogue in this site have "flowery language" descriptions as the basis of their ranking.
I presume quite a few.
And how are the Tribunal's statements "vague" or (too) "flowery" anyway? Connecting the dots, the statement of the Living Tribunal being beyond the "realm" of space and time (which Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively), coupled with his motivation (and by extension, perspective) being unfathomable to Eternity, along with his statements of transcending dualities...
It all adds up to a very clear picture, one that has the Living Tribunal as 1-A.
>The statement: "I transcend the realms of space and time - and all the opposing realities!"
Your interpretation: "He transcends the very concepts of space and time and is completely unbound by the very concept of dimensions themselves"
My interpretation: "He transcends space and time."
We can see which one fits what is actually stated.
I don't see what is the contradiction here.
>Once more, that's you rewriting the statement. That is stated nowhere. Silver Surfer spoke of dualities in the exact same panel - there is no need for the Tribunal not to use the exact same wording if that's what he meant.
I have not rewritten anything. I have described the statements exactly as Silver Surfer and the Living Tribunal said them:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6I4jTZdAXUk/VoTgpwMwcaI/AAAAAAAAWLw/ksFEkETO6OU/s1600-Ic42/RCO025.jpg
And why is it somehow necessary for the Living Tribunal to use the exact same wording?
>All the Tribunal says is that he is beyond the realms of Death, Eternity, Order and Chaos, which is something we've always known - those entities are just fragments of the totality that is the LT, afterall. None of that remotely approaches evidence for Type 3 Transduality, especially taking context into account.
And those entities embody concepts, which are put in the context of dual systems, even those as far-reaching as life/existence (Eternity) and death/nonexistence (Death). The Living Tribunal completely transcends them, to the point that his perspective is unfathomable from theirs.
>The Living Tribunal never ever stated he transcended the concept of duality. This is yet another fake statement that is never uttered by any character in the franchise.
He stated he transcended the realms of space and time and all their opposing realities - a High 2-A statement that doesn't even remotely begin to approach the proof required for Transduality or 1-A as a whole. We've been over this. Find an explicit statement instead of vague flowery with 10 interpretations all at once.
The only one arguing about how that statement somehow admits to multiple interpretations is you.
In fact, let's look at the other TLT nonduality scan again:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6I4jTZdAXUk/VoTgpwMwcaI/AAAAAAAAWLw/ksFEkETO6OU/s1600-Ic42/RCO025.jpg
"I knew it! I knew that everything in the multiverse is connected to something else! Death and Eternity in this dimension--Chaos and Order in the Sphere of Magick--
--Galactus taught me the infinite dualities in his war with the In-Betweener!"
"I am he who safeguards the multiverse from mystical imbalance Silver Surfer! I transcend the realms of Death and Eternity, Order and Chaos--
--all the opposing realities!"
Literally everything in the multiverse is connected to "something else" (i.e. its opposite), including concepts. And the Living Tribunal transcends all of that.
"High 2-A statement" my foot.
"Vague" my ass.
>The moral dualism embodied by the In-Betweener is not equivalent to the specific dualism of the concepts of space and time, hence not the 1-A Transduality you have been trying to push for TLT. Even taking all your evidence at face-value, no more than Type 2 Transduality is warranted. This is just an exercise in futility and a waste of time.
Except the Living Tribunal is above space and time too, so even if the In-Betweener doesn't embody *that* duality (and he does, as per his literal description, which wouldn't suddenly limit itself from encompassing space and time), it wouldn't have been relevant anyway.
>High 2-A statement = \ = 1-A Transduality. We've been over this.
Collection of statements altogether providing clear evidence, if not proof, of 1-A Transduality =/= High 2-A statement
>Eternity himself said so. Are you going to call him a liar or try to say it was "just a M-Body!" like you did with the Tribunal?
Talking about how how the Chaos King was the chaos "before existence itself" doesn't really prove much by itself, since Eternity could just be talking about "conventional" multiversal existence just one layer above the Earth-616 universe.
And yes, it probably was an M-Body, especially considering how the Chaos King himself is a glorified M-Body for Oblivion, and yet he "walks hand in hand" with Eternity himself, and seems to be connected to Eternity is some way, a dualistic way, while, at the same time, in higher levels of reality, Infinity (who is Eternity's sister and equal) herself can be seen talking to Oblivion rather forthrightly, discussing their contract and the fact that he, by her estimate, broke it:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/wB0TUseUQ...cua-vYflLa_DFulmdO2iQQHQVhJclD-sLMB6R44=s1600
What I'm saying is that the Chaos King is only the dualistic opposite of a lower-level manifestation of Eternity, and that on higher levels, Oblivion is actually the dualistic opposite of Eternity (in the sense of an existence-nonexistence duality; Eternity seems to have acquired many "opposites", each for a different perspective of him, over the years).
>The Chaos King was directly stated to have erased 99% of the multiverse within the storyline. Not just some layer of it.
You come in talking about vagueness and yet you suddenly fail to understand how in Marvel Comics, the term "multiverse" can mean several different things depending on the context, from the infinite layers of the complete multiverse to the layer of reality "just beyond" the Earth-616 universe.
>And none of that is remotely 1-A. Being beyond a High 1-B multiverse is High 1-B.
And who says the Marvel Multiverse is just High 1-B?
I don't believe that the Marvel multiverse is just high 1-B, but possibly even some level of 1-A, considering the intricacies of the multiverse being based, in one aspect, on Cantorian set theory. But that's just me.
>There is really not a single statement in Secret Wars I and II that can be interpreted as 1-A for the Beyonder.
Statements required for 1-A:
Transcending the very concept of dimensions Transcending the concepts of space and time Being dimensionless A realm with dimensions is literally nonexistent in comparison Dimensions of time, space, physical matter and energy have zero influence and can't at all interact in the slightest Literally zero of these criteria are met with the Beyonder and his universe. They are simply located outside of the Marvel multiverse.
The Beyonder is explicitly stated to contain "millions of times" more power than that within the multiverse, "thousands" at one other point, and he himself states that he is simply "larger" than the multiverse.
He is nowhere near a 1-A entity. He just dwarves a High 1-B multiverse. Still doesn't come even close to fulfilling the criteria for 1-A. And who says those statements need be in Secret Wars I and II?
Multiple times has the Beyonder said that, without him, the Beyonder Realm isn't even really a place, rather just some featureless blank canvas.
>I. The Beyond Realm was never portrayed as conceptually superior to the Multiverse in Pre-Retcon Beyonder storylines. Seriously, there are several quotes that state it is linearly larger. The narrator saying The Beyonder is "millions of times more than the multiverse and all the awesome power within", half of his power being stated to be "thousands of times all of existence" in power, the Beyonder himself stating that he is "larger" than the multiverse - every direct comparison makes it clear that he is merely larger than a High 1-B multiverse.
It may seem so, but in the greater context, these are merely figures if speech taking on a limited aspect of the Beyonder's power.
>II. The Beyonder is explicitly superior to the Tribunal, this is unquestionable and undebatable. TLT was present every single time it was stated that the Beyonder was the most powerful being, and Molecule Man was stated at least three times to be the most powerful being in the whole multiverse in the direct presence of the Tribunal.
And?
It's not like I can't argue that it was an M-Body regardless.
>Dimensionally-bound entities can't change their dimensionality? I guess the thousands of times Universal Eternity, Infinity and Death were shown as 4-D to 5-D entities despite their multiversal forms being infinite-dimensional never happened. I guess the concept of M-Bodies no longer exists either!
You're misinterpreting my statements. When the abstracts appear in a lower-dimensional form, they don't get surprised at being lower dimensional because those forms are just manifestation bodies created to interact with lower beings. Their "base" dimensionality doesn't change.
When the Beyonder took on a lower-dimensional form, he was actually surprised at the "lacking" nature of such a form, suggesting that he actually lowered his base dimensionality from infinity to three. And back again. This suggests that, at his core, the Beyonder is a dimensionless entity.
>The first statement: ""Here we are beyond Earth's universe and all the infinite adjacent dimensions that make up the multiverse--in other words, beyond all known existence!""
The second statement: ""Meanwhile, in a universe beyond time, space, and all dimensions known to any in our universe"
The first quote and the second one are intertwined, as both talk of "all known existence/all known dimensions". The first quote shows that the second one can have multiple interpretations.
Besides, even taking it at face value, it isn't a 1-A quote, as I elaborated on above.
Except "dimensions" refer to different things in both cases. They aren't that intertwined at all. The first quote certainly doesn't prove that the second can have different interpretations; homonyms are a thing, after all.
>None of those statements are 1-A, once again.
To draw a comparison; here is yet another of those "the Beyonders transcend everything" statements. This scan states that the Beyond Realm "transcends all there is", that it is an "incomprehensible featureless level", that, within there, there is an "infinity of objects oscilating between nonexistence and existence", with the characters right off the bat stating that they are beyond "Eternity itself". This is much more explicit than what you posted.
...Yet even the scan I posted above is no more than above 4-Dimensional in scale, and only referencing Universal Entity. They outright mention that the Beyond Realm and the void beyond it are separated by a mere 4-D dimensional barrier, meaning that the Beyond-Realm is being treated as 4-D on that scan, despite the impressive descriptions given.
Those vague statements you think are 1-A can be even lower than High 2-A. Heck, there are verses with the exact same statements regarding duality and time and space that are rated as merely 2-C, not even High 2-A.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NDaj0mrp...cHXJK-hB1Qgc4x-WKGNlxwCHMYCw/s1600/RCO055.jpg
Looking at the scan again, it should actually be clear what is occurring here.
They are crossing the "4th-dimensional space-time barrier" not to go to the void beyond the Beyonder Realm, but to go downwards, to shrink down into the "submicroscopic quantum level" where they can see individual quarks pop in and out of existence.
It doesn't mean that the Beyonder realm literally only exists on a 4-D axis in the storyline.
>Because the literal exact thing I said was happening (that they were devastating the multiverse one universe at a time) somehow contradicts my "preferred" quote. How that can be discerned from the statements is beyond me, but alright.
You don't decimate an infinite multiverse via one universe at a time, unless you have infinite or immeasurable speeds.
And while the Beyonders probably do have those, it like still wouldn't allow them to pose such a threat that the Living Tribunal himself had to step in, something he didn't even do for the Chaos King.
>If you want me to quote the 6+ statements that say everyone else is shit-tier compared to the Beyonder and Molecule Man, I can do so, but I'd hate to focus on semantics.
Don't. They aren't relevant anyway.
>As if that isn't the literal point of my argument; as if it isn't to show that it has absolutely nothing to do with Oblivion.
All the dimensions - each nebulous netherworld which exists either in time or in space - either as matter, or as a fathomless void. This is the statement. Literally anyone can see it isn't talking about an entity that was introduced two decades after the statement, and that in-context it is just contrasting the matter within dimensions to the background void.
I think we were talking past each other.
I interpreted the "background void" as nothingness, as contrasted with the "somethingness" of matter. You seem to have interpreted it as the vacuum of space, even though, in context, the Living Tribunal was comparing and contrasting the spectrum of the types of "nebulous netherworld" that he reigned over, which is why he mentioned netherworld that somehow existed either solely in time or in space.
>No, Death and Oblivion aren't intertwined nor equated. Literally zero quotes say or imply as much, unless you try to spin random "void" quotes 20 years before Oblivion's introduction to be talking about him. Death is pitiful and insignificant compared to Oblivion, since even an infinitesimal M-Body (The Chaos King) of his is equal to Multi-Eternity.
The Chaos King isn't equal to Multi-Eternity, just a small sliver of Multi-Eternity, basically just a higher layer of regular Eternity. And since Oblivion literally embodies the void, then, if the Living Tribunal has authority over the void, then he has authority over Oblivion.
The G.L.A. #1-4 + Special segment of this respect thread makes it very clear how Death is linked to Oblivion.
https://outskirtsbattledomewiki.com/forums/index.php?topic=17.15
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #52
I'm going to sleep right now, will debunk that after I wake up.
- 30,046
- 31,269
Posts that are more than 100 paragraphs long isn't really a good sign to be honest.
- 818
- 140
What's funny is Eternity isn't just the embodiment of infinite dimensional space which is just headcanon but the embodiment of all space, time and dimensional existence. So logically any character who is beyond Multi Eternity would be 1-A by default due to them transcending Time, Space and Dimensions conceptually.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #55
...No. That's not remotely how our Tiering System works. Not only that; that's outright false.
Eternity is the embodiment of time, Infinity is the embodiment of space. They are both parts of the The Living Tribunal. So TLT is High 1-B.
Eternity is the embodiment of time, Infinity is the embodiment of space. They are both parts of the The Living Tribunal. So TLT is High 1-B.
- 165,195
- 72,153
Well, Infinity was recently removed from the equation after the last Secret Wars/during the Ultimates storyline. Eternity is currently apparently the embodiment of both time and space within the multiverse. The Never Queen essentially fills the position of counterpart to Eternity now.
- 818
- 140
The 7th iteration of multiverse is both Eternity and Infinity which is true. However they are one and the same as shown when U.N destroyed the Multi Eternity(multiverse) it not just affected Eternity but also infinity .
However the 8th iteration of the multiverse is eternity being the embodiment of time and space.
However the 8th iteration of the multiverse is eternity being the embodiment of time and space.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #58
That was after the seventh multiverse was destroyed.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #59
The point still stands though, regardless of Eternity's standing. He embodies Time and Space; The Living Tribunal embodies Time, Space, Death, Chaos and Order throughout the multiverse.
They are both High 1-B multiversal embodiments, the only difference is that TLT is a more complete embodiment of the multiverse.
They are both High 1-B multiversal embodiments, the only difference is that TLT is a more complete embodiment of the multiverse.
- 818
- 140
The Living Tribunal contains them and transcend them . it's just the same on how AAO contains everything and transcend them. Not only that TLT was stated to transcend time and space as well as it is stated that everything is a part of the Living Tribunal yet he is apart of all. this obviously includes both time and space and eternity and infinity
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #62
Random "transcends space and time" quotes don't constitute as worthwhile evidence for 1-A, once again.
1-A standards;
The Tribunal meets none of them. He is merely the sum totality of a High 1-B multiverse and all its entities. The only 1-A characters in Marvel are Oblivion and TOAA's avatar form.
1-A standards;
The Tribunal meets none of them. He is merely the sum totality of a High 1-B multiverse and all its entities. The only 1-A characters in Marvel are Oblivion and TOAA's avatar form.
- 818
- 140
Look he transcend both the realms of time and space and Eternity and Infinity conceptually since they are both concept of time and space . Within the marvel multiverse (which Infinity ad eternity embodies) exist infinite aspects of time and space.(Literally from the same comic as well) Eternity and Infinity are confirmed to be the same and one multiples times
Whenever it's stated he transcend just time and space. It's still irrelevant since he still transcend both Eternity and Infinity who are stated to be one and embodies infinite levels of time and space. Basically he still transcend all levels of time and space conceptually since he trancend both eternity and infinity who are both the concept of time and space.
Whenever it's stated he transcend just time and space. It's still irrelevant since he still transcend both Eternity and Infinity who are stated to be one and embodies infinite levels of time and space. Basically he still transcend all levels of time and space conceptually since he trancend both eternity and infinity who are both the concept of time and space.
- 540
- 303
@Demiurgic Archangel
You aren't helping the thread, like, at all. If anything, all you're doing is being unreasonable.
For one, calling the revision out for being "trash" is hardly a contribution, and being beyond infinite dimensional realities is, as others have mentioned several times already, still High 1-B.
Having said that, I apologize for randomly commenting in a staff-only thread and will refrain from commenting any further.
You aren't helping the thread, like, at all. If anything, all you're doing is being unreasonable.
For one, calling the revision out for being "trash" is hardly a contribution, and being beyond infinite dimensional realities is, as others have mentioned several times already, still High 1-B.
Having said that, I apologize for randomly commenting in a staff-only thread and will refrain from commenting any further.
- 818
- 140
as for the beyonder, I'm pretty sure the dimensions are refered to be spatial. As Beyonder claimed himself that the Multiverse is indeed many layered.
- 818
- 140
Anyway i dont see how this isnt 1-A.The Tetromino King said:
- 30,046
- 31,269
Keep in mind, the gap between 1-A and High 1-B is even greater than the gap between High 1-B and 11-C.
- 818
- 140
I wonder what that has to do with TLT transcending the concepts of dimensions, time and space???
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #70
> Based on what? Your preconceived notions?
If by that, you mean the actual evidence in the comics, by all means yes.
> Which still doesn't explain why TLT's perspective and motives are unfathomable to Eternity.
Eternity is a mere fragment of the Tribunal, who is the complete embodiment of the multiverse, thus Tribunal's thoughts and motives are beyond Eternity's domain and knowledge. How any of this is relevant to Attack Potency, I can't for the life of me fathom.
Just for outsiders, this is the statement the dude is trying to use to say the Tribunal is conceptually transcendent to Multi-Eternity:
No punchline so far.
> Just because one character is a fragment of another doesn't mean that the other character isn't incomparably beyond the first one.
Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to argue that the other character transcends the very concept of said character just from a random quote that states they are omniscient and their motives can't be understood by a weaker character. This is legitimately what you're arguing. This is the pinnacle of ridicule.
> What I meant was that when Adam Warlock absorbed his universe's Tribunal, he did it while that Tribunal was still alive.
...So what?
> Some throwaway line about predecessors means absolutely nothing. Dream of the Endless "died" and was replaced, and yet everyone who is informed on the specifics of the nature of the Endless would know that only an aspect of Dream "died".
I don't care about DC Comics' cosmology. We are talking about Marvel Comics. The unarguable facts and lines explicitly state that the Tribunal was killed, and TOAA himself replaced him, with the Multiversal Abstracts explicitly stating that the new Tribunal is a successor to the old one. The textbook explicitly states that the Beyonders battled the Multiversal Tribunal and that upon his death every single reality and world of the multiverse had a M-Body of the Tribunal fall on it to represent the multiversal scale of the battle.
> That "random stuff" about Death is a display of the fundamental relationship between the abstracts and the multiverse, and what happens if an abstract is destroyed in full. Guess what, their concept goes with them. Some mumbling about "inconsistencies" (as if that scene was ever contradicted) will not change that at all.
I don't care about what happened to Death. Every single statement shows that the complete Tribunal was killed.
> And this is supposed to prove...what exactly? It's not like M-Bodies cannot be made to administer to multiple levels of reality at once.
From the exact same textbox that states the one fighting the Beyonders was the complete Multiversal Tribunal right off the bat.
> Assuming that the Living Tribunal is just the embodiment of the Marvel multiverse in full, and he was destroyed as completely as Death was, then his concept should have been removed from the multiverse that instant.
Yes. I remember Universal Eternity's various deaths leading to the destruction of whatever universe he was manifesting in. I also remember the Beyonders planning to destroy the multiverse by killing Eternity and Infinity, instead of killing Molecule Man like stated. That was sarcasm, if it wasn't obvious.
Apparently explicit statements that the complete Tribunal was killed aren't enough. Using an old story that was later retconned to be just an avatar of Death obviously overrides the actual statements made in the storyline.
> Every time the Living Tribunal speaks of opposing realities, he speaks of dual systems, as in dualities:
The dual systems he speaks of are always referencing the Multiversal Abstracts that compose him, and their opposites in the cosmological compass.
Death directly opposes Eternity.
Chaos directly opposes order.
Nothing that is stated ever suggests Type 3 Transduality.
> I want to ask how many of the other 1-A characters catalogue in this site have "flowery language" descriptions as the basis of their ranking.
How many 1-A characters in this site have "X taught me infinite dualities" as justification? Absolutely none.
How many 1-A characters have anything less than a direct statement of being dimensionless as justification, as transcending the very concepts? None.
> And why is it somehow necessary for the Living Tribunal to use the exact same wording?
The word "duality" is used by Silver Surfer in the exact same scan. The Tribunal himself has used that word before. If by opposing realities, he meant all sets of dual systems, he would have said so.
> And those entities embody concepts, which are put in the context of dual systems, even those as far-reaching as life/existence (Eternity) and death/nonexistence (Death). The Living Tribunal completely transcends them, to the point that his perspective is unfathomable from theirs.
The Tribunal is never stated to conceptually transcend either Infinity or Eternity. That's yet another made-up statement.
Lierally nothing shown so far, taken at face value, warrants more than 1-A. The Tribunal represents the sum totality of the Marvel Multiverse. Even taking all of your statements and scans at face value, the Tribunal would be no more than a Type 2 Transdual (ie, transcendent of dual systems to a certain scope of reality), which is High 1-B.
And no, a random statement saying the Tribunal's motives can't be understood by Eternity because he is omniscient is nowhere near a statement of him transcending Eternity conceptually
> "I knew it! I knew that everything in the multiverse is connected to something else! Death and Eternity in this dimension--Chaos and Order in the Sphere of Magick--
Really? A statement about the Multiversal Abstracts being linked to each other is what you're going to choose as proof? As if that wasn't patently obvious already in the series.
> Except the Living Tribunal is above space and time too, so even if the In-Betweener doesn't embody *that* duality (and he does, as per his literal description, which wouldn't suddenly limit itself from encompassing space and time), it wouldn't have been relevant anyway.
It is irrelevant if he transcends space and time. Still doesn't warrant anything more than Type 2 Transduality. Read up on our standards: Transduality.
Type 2 fits the Tribunal perfectly.
Collection of statements altogether providing clear evidence, if not proof, of 1-A Transduality =/= High 2-A statement
Except it is a High 2-A statement.
Even taking your evidence at straight value and assuming that, by realms, the Tribunal does mean the duality of space and time...that would still fit under Type 2 Transduality. Type 2 fits literally any non-1-A being who transcends concepts within a certain scope.
Considering the Tribunal is the embodiment of the entirety of the High 1-B multiverse and all its forces, he fits as a high-end Type 2. Still not 1-A. He has zero 1-A statements.
> 'And yes, it probably was an M-Body, especially considering how the Chaos King himself is a glorified M-Body for Oblivion, and yet he "walks hand in hand" with Eternity himself, and seems to be connected to Eternity is some way, a dualistic way, while, at the same time, in higher levels of reality, Infinity (who is Eternity's sister and equal) herself can be seen talking to Oblivion rather forthrightly, discussing their contract and the fact that he, by her estimate, broke it:
It's funny you talk about M-Bodies yet fail to realize that this entire scene between Infinity and Oblivion, too, took place between weak M-Bodies of the entities, as noted in our pages. It doesn't scale to their full selves, nor can be used to argue that Infinity is comparable to Oblivion.
At this point I'm getting the impression you want to push for 1-A Abstracts.
> You come in talking about vagueness and yet you suddenly fail to understand how in Marvel Comics, the term "multiverse" can mean several different things depending on the context, from the infinite layers of the complete multiverse to the layer of reality "just beyond" the Earth-616 universe.
Occam's Razor. Prove that they didn't mean the entire multiverse or concede.
> And who says the Marvel Multiverse is just High 1-B?
Our accepted profiles and the actual characters.
> Multiple times has the Beyonder said that, without him, the Beyonder Realm isn't even really a place, rather just some featureless blank canvas.
...So what? This is a High 1-B statement. The Beyond Realm is an infinite-dimensional realm.
> It may seem so, but in the greater context, these are merely figures if speech taking on a limited aspect of the Beyonder's power.
So, in your narrative, when the statements limit the level of power of the characters, they are figures of speech. When they upgrade them to levels suggested absolutely nowhere in the whole work, they are to be taken at face value.
> It's not like I can't argue that it was an M-Body regardless.
This is Pre-Retcon.
> When the Beyonder took on a lower-dimensional form, he was actually surprised at the "lacking" nature of such a form, suggesting that he actually lowered his base dimensionality from infinity to three. And back again. This suggests that, at his core, the Beyonder is a dimensionless entity.
This is suggested nowhere and is just you adding your spin into the text. The narrator outright states that the Beyonder's original form is infinite-dimensional. Him being surprised at it is because he had never taken on a merely three-dimensional avatar before, as plainly stated in the scan. You can't keep rewriting what is stated to suit your argument.
> Except "dimensions" refer to different things in both cases. They aren't that intertwined at all. The first quote certainly doesn't prove that the second can have different interpretations
Both quotes use similar wording.
> They are crossing the "4th-dimensional space-time barrier" not to go to the void beyond the Beyonder Realm, but to go downwards, to shrink down into the "submicroscopic quantum level" where they can see individual quarks pop in and out of existence.
Said level is said to transcend the Beyond Realm entirely, being separated from it by a 4-D barrier. Therefore, the storyline was absolutely treating the Beyond Realm as a 4-D realm when making those statements. Maximum-wanking, 5-D.
> And while the Beyonders probably do have those, it like still wouldn't allow them to pose such a threat that the Living Tribunal himself had to step in, something he didn't even do for the Chaos King.
So what, once again? Why is this relevant? It was outright stated they were destroying one universe at a time. It is a non-debatable topic.
> I interpreted the "background void" as nothingness, as contrasted with the "somethingness" of matter. You seem to have interpreted it as the vacuum of space, even though, in context, the Living Tribunal was comparing and contrasting the spectrum of the types of "nebulous netherworld" that he reigned over, which is why he mentioned netherworld that somehow existed either solely in time or in space.
I. Actually, my interpretation was similar to yours.
II. The Living Tribunal is comparing the worlds that exist withi dimensions of either time and space. Oblivion is a dimensionless void.
Once again you grab vague statements and pretend they're saying something far more complex than what they actually are. Anyone can see it isn't talking about Oblivion. Oblivion was introduced 20 years after that statement.
> The G.L.A. #1-4 + Special segment of this respect thread makes it very clear how Death is linked to Oblivion.
Oblivion himself has stated he is linked to none of them.
If by that, you mean the actual evidence in the comics, by all means yes.
> Which still doesn't explain why TLT's perspective and motives are unfathomable to Eternity.
Eternity is a mere fragment of the Tribunal, who is the complete embodiment of the multiverse, thus Tribunal's thoughts and motives are beyond Eternity's domain and knowledge. How any of this is relevant to Attack Potency, I can't for the life of me fathom.
Just for outsiders, this is the statement the dude is trying to use to say the Tribunal is conceptually transcendent to Multi-Eternity:
No punchline so far.
> Just because one character is a fragment of another doesn't mean that the other character isn't incomparably beyond the first one.
Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to argue that the other character transcends the very concept of said character just from a random quote that states they are omniscient and their motives can't be understood by a weaker character. This is legitimately what you're arguing. This is the pinnacle of ridicule.
> What I meant was that when Adam Warlock absorbed his universe's Tribunal, he did it while that Tribunal was still alive.
...So what?
> Some throwaway line about predecessors means absolutely nothing. Dream of the Endless "died" and was replaced, and yet everyone who is informed on the specifics of the nature of the Endless would know that only an aspect of Dream "died".
I don't care about DC Comics' cosmology. We are talking about Marvel Comics. The unarguable facts and lines explicitly state that the Tribunal was killed, and TOAA himself replaced him, with the Multiversal Abstracts explicitly stating that the new Tribunal is a successor to the old one. The textbook explicitly states that the Beyonders battled the Multiversal Tribunal and that upon his death every single reality and world of the multiverse had a M-Body of the Tribunal fall on it to represent the multiversal scale of the battle.
> That "random stuff" about Death is a display of the fundamental relationship between the abstracts and the multiverse, and what happens if an abstract is destroyed in full. Guess what, their concept goes with them. Some mumbling about "inconsistencies" (as if that scene was ever contradicted) will not change that at all.
I don't care about what happened to Death. Every single statement shows that the complete Tribunal was killed.
> And this is supposed to prove...what exactly? It's not like M-Bodies cannot be made to administer to multiple levels of reality at once.
From the exact same textbox that states the one fighting the Beyonders was the complete Multiversal Tribunal right off the bat.
> Assuming that the Living Tribunal is just the embodiment of the Marvel multiverse in full, and he was destroyed as completely as Death was, then his concept should have been removed from the multiverse that instant.
Yes. I remember Universal Eternity's various deaths leading to the destruction of whatever universe he was manifesting in. I also remember the Beyonders planning to destroy the multiverse by killing Eternity and Infinity, instead of killing Molecule Man like stated. That was sarcasm, if it wasn't obvious.
Apparently explicit statements that the complete Tribunal was killed aren't enough. Using an old story that was later retconned to be just an avatar of Death obviously overrides the actual statements made in the storyline.
> Every time the Living Tribunal speaks of opposing realities, he speaks of dual systems, as in dualities:
The dual systems he speaks of are always referencing the Multiversal Abstracts that compose him, and their opposites in the cosmological compass.
Death directly opposes Eternity.
Chaos directly opposes order.
Nothing that is stated ever suggests Type 3 Transduality.
> I want to ask how many of the other 1-A characters catalogue in this site have "flowery language" descriptions as the basis of their ranking.
How many 1-A characters in this site have "X taught me infinite dualities" as justification? Absolutely none.
How many 1-A characters have anything less than a direct statement of being dimensionless as justification, as transcending the very concepts? None.
> And why is it somehow necessary for the Living Tribunal to use the exact same wording?
The word "duality" is used by Silver Surfer in the exact same scan. The Tribunal himself has used that word before. If by opposing realities, he meant all sets of dual systems, he would have said so.
> And those entities embody concepts, which are put in the context of dual systems, even those as far-reaching as life/existence (Eternity) and death/nonexistence (Death). The Living Tribunal completely transcends them, to the point that his perspective is unfathomable from theirs.
The Tribunal is never stated to conceptually transcend either Infinity or Eternity. That's yet another made-up statement.
Lierally nothing shown so far, taken at face value, warrants more than 1-A. The Tribunal represents the sum totality of the Marvel Multiverse. Even taking all of your statements and scans at face value, the Tribunal would be no more than a Type 2 Transdual (ie, transcendent of dual systems to a certain scope of reality), which is High 1-B.
And no, a random statement saying the Tribunal's motives can't be understood by Eternity because he is omniscient is nowhere near a statement of him transcending Eternity conceptually
> "I knew it! I knew that everything in the multiverse is connected to something else! Death and Eternity in this dimension--Chaos and Order in the Sphere of Magick--
Really? A statement about the Multiversal Abstracts being linked to each other is what you're going to choose as proof? As if that wasn't patently obvious already in the series.
> Except the Living Tribunal is above space and time too, so even if the In-Betweener doesn't embody *that* duality (and he does, as per his literal description, which wouldn't suddenly limit itself from encompassing space and time), it wouldn't have been relevant anyway.
It is irrelevant if he transcends space and time. Still doesn't warrant anything more than Type 2 Transduality. Read up on our standards: Transduality.
Type 2 fits the Tribunal perfectly.
Collection of statements altogether providing clear evidence, if not proof, of 1-A Transduality =/= High 2-A statement
Except it is a High 2-A statement.
Even taking your evidence at straight value and assuming that, by realms, the Tribunal does mean the duality of space and time...that would still fit under Type 2 Transduality. Type 2 fits literally any non-1-A being who transcends concepts within a certain scope.
Considering the Tribunal is the embodiment of the entirety of the High 1-B multiverse and all its forces, he fits as a high-end Type 2. Still not 1-A. He has zero 1-A statements.
> 'And yes, it probably was an M-Body, especially considering how the Chaos King himself is a glorified M-Body for Oblivion, and yet he "walks hand in hand" with Eternity himself, and seems to be connected to Eternity is some way, a dualistic way, while, at the same time, in higher levels of reality, Infinity (who is Eternity's sister and equal) herself can be seen talking to Oblivion rather forthrightly, discussing their contract and the fact that he, by her estimate, broke it:
It's funny you talk about M-Bodies yet fail to realize that this entire scene between Infinity and Oblivion, too, took place between weak M-Bodies of the entities, as noted in our pages. It doesn't scale to their full selves, nor can be used to argue that Infinity is comparable to Oblivion.
At this point I'm getting the impression you want to push for 1-A Abstracts.
> You come in talking about vagueness and yet you suddenly fail to understand how in Marvel Comics, the term "multiverse" can mean several different things depending on the context, from the infinite layers of the complete multiverse to the layer of reality "just beyond" the Earth-616 universe.
Occam's Razor. Prove that they didn't mean the entire multiverse or concede.
> And who says the Marvel Multiverse is just High 1-B?
Our accepted profiles and the actual characters.
> Multiple times has the Beyonder said that, without him, the Beyonder Realm isn't even really a place, rather just some featureless blank canvas.
...So what? This is a High 1-B statement. The Beyond Realm is an infinite-dimensional realm.
> It may seem so, but in the greater context, these are merely figures if speech taking on a limited aspect of the Beyonder's power.
So, in your narrative, when the statements limit the level of power of the characters, they are figures of speech. When they upgrade them to levels suggested absolutely nowhere in the whole work, they are to be taken at face value.
> It's not like I can't argue that it was an M-Body regardless.
This is Pre-Retcon.
> When the Beyonder took on a lower-dimensional form, he was actually surprised at the "lacking" nature of such a form, suggesting that he actually lowered his base dimensionality from infinity to three. And back again. This suggests that, at his core, the Beyonder is a dimensionless entity.
This is suggested nowhere and is just you adding your spin into the text. The narrator outright states that the Beyonder's original form is infinite-dimensional. Him being surprised at it is because he had never taken on a merely three-dimensional avatar before, as plainly stated in the scan. You can't keep rewriting what is stated to suit your argument.
> Except "dimensions" refer to different things in both cases. They aren't that intertwined at all. The first quote certainly doesn't prove that the second can have different interpretations
Both quotes use similar wording.
> They are crossing the "4th-dimensional space-time barrier" not to go to the void beyond the Beyonder Realm, but to go downwards, to shrink down into the "submicroscopic quantum level" where they can see individual quarks pop in and out of existence.
Said level is said to transcend the Beyond Realm entirely, being separated from it by a 4-D barrier. Therefore, the storyline was absolutely treating the Beyond Realm as a 4-D realm when making those statements. Maximum-wanking, 5-D.
> And while the Beyonders probably do have those, it like still wouldn't allow them to pose such a threat that the Living Tribunal himself had to step in, something he didn't even do for the Chaos King.
So what, once again? Why is this relevant? It was outright stated they were destroying one universe at a time. It is a non-debatable topic.
> I interpreted the "background void" as nothingness, as contrasted with the "somethingness" of matter. You seem to have interpreted it as the vacuum of space, even though, in context, the Living Tribunal was comparing and contrasting the spectrum of the types of "nebulous netherworld" that he reigned over, which is why he mentioned netherworld that somehow existed either solely in time or in space.
I. Actually, my interpretation was similar to yours.
II. The Living Tribunal is comparing the worlds that exist withi dimensions of either time and space. Oblivion is a dimensionless void.
Once again you grab vague statements and pretend they're saying something far more complex than what they actually are. Anyone can see it isn't talking about Oblivion. Oblivion was introduced 20 years after that statement.
> The G.L.A. #1-4 + Special segment of this respect thread makes it very clear how Death is linked to Oblivion.
Oblivion himself has stated he is linked to none of them.
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #72
Derailing and being condescending to the opposition has been your modus operandi in this thread so far.
- 1,050
- 491
@Ant
Do the revision if you want to for now, even though I disagree, because this debate does seem to be running in circles at this point.
Although you can probably note that it's rather contested.
@Kep
>If by that, you mean the actual evidence in the comics, by all means yes.
I heavily disagree with that, but whatever.
>Eternity is a mere fragment of the Tribunal, who is the complete embodiment of the multiverse, thus Tribunal's thoughts and motives are beyond Eternity's domain and knowledge. How any of this is relevant to Attack Potency, I can't for the life of me fathom.
Just for outsiders, this is the statement the dude is trying to use to say the Tribunal is conceptually transcendent to Multi-Eternity:
"His motives are unfathomable to all others - even Eternity itself, for none possess his omniscient perspective. No punchline so far.
How does any of that contradict the Tribunal being 1-A?
Just to remind you, Eternity, as the embodiment of the concept of temporal existence and life (among other things) is so on the scale of the entire multiverse, a multiverse that follows Cantorian set theory, which alone makes Eternity, by himself, immeasurably above baseline high 1-B.
I bring this up to ask you how, when the Living Tribunal himself says he transcends space and time, concepts which in Marvel encompass all dimensional scale (if not more), it isn't enough to prove that the Living Tribunal is 1-A?
>Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to argue that the other character transcends the very concept of said character just from a random quote that states they are omniscient and their motives can't be understood by a weaker character. This is legitimately what you're arguing. This is the pinnacle of ridicule.
It's not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, it's that it is impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
Tell me, what does it mean when a character is completely beyond the understanding of a character who is already well beyond the baseline of high 1-B?
>...So what?
So the Beyonders hadn't killed that M-Body yet, proving you wrong about how they completely destroyed the Tribunal in all realities.
>I don't care about DC Comics' cosmology. We are talking about Marvel Comics. The unarguable facts and lines explicitly state that the Tribunal was killed, and TOAA himself replaced him, with the Multiversal Abstracts explicitly stating that the new Tribunal is a successor to the old one. The textbook explicitly states that the Beyonders battled the Multiversal Tribunal and that upon his death every single reality and world of the multiverse had a M-Body of the Tribunal fall on it to represent the multiversal scale of the battle.
So now you're going to create a double standard? Because this is a double standard, Kep.
And "Multiversal Tribunal" doesn't mean "True Living Tribunal", as the Living Tribunal both embodies and transcends the multiverse. There's a reason why Eternity and Infinity, both also defined collectively embodying the multiverse, are unceasingly portrayed as subservient to the Living Tribunal.
>I don't care about what happened to Death. Every single statement shows that the complete Tribunal was killed.
So you're going to interpret that scene in a way that flies in the face if established Marvel canon?
Okay.
>From the exact same textbox that states the one fighting the Beyonders was the complete Multiversal Tribunal right off the bat.
And who said that the "Multiversal Tribunal" was the "Complete Tribunal"?
>Yes. I remember Universal Eternity's various deaths leading to the destruction of whatever universe he was manifesting in. I also remember the Beyonders planning to destroy the multiverse by killing Eternity and Infinity, instead of killing Molecule Man like stated. That was sarcasm, if it wasn't obvious.
Are you implying that universes weren't destroyed everytime Eternity was killed (and not immediately replaced by somebody) in canon? And that the Beyonders didn't kill universes by killing their respective Eternities and Infinities?
They were going to finish off the multiverse with Molecule Man. Don't pretend that they didn't do much damage to hand beforehand.
>Apparently explicit statements that the complete Tribunal was killed aren't enough. Using an old story that was later retconned to be just an avatar of Death obviously overrides the actual statements made in the storyline.
Again, who said that "multiversal Tribunal" equaled "complete Tribunal"?
And if that was just an avatar of Death, then it gets even worse. If the destruction of Death's mere avatar caused such sweeping effects across at least multiple layers of the multiverse, then imagine what would have happened if the complete Living Tribunal was killed.
The fact that the multiverse didn't collapse on the fact alone proves that it wasn't the complete Living Tribunal who died, but rather an immensely powerful multiversal M-Body.
>The dual systems he speaks of are always referencing the Multiversal Abstracts that compose him, and their opposites in the cosmological compass.
Death directly opposes Eternity.
Chaos directly opposes order.
Nothing that is stated ever suggests Type 3 Transduality.
And yet the scale of those multiversal abstracts at their zenith is well beyond ordinary high 1-B, to the point that they pretty much at minimum encompass all dimensional scales.
The fact that the Living Tribunal transcends all of these dual systems should tell you something
And keep in mind that the Silver Surfer spoke of "infinite dualities", not just the ones the Tribunal himself mentioned, something that the Living Tribunal never contradicted him on.
>How many 1-A characters in this site have "X taught me infinite dualities" as justification? Absolutely none.
How many 1-A characters have anything less than a direct statement of being dimensionless as justification, as transcending the very concepts? None.
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Father_Time_(Vertigo)
But this is considered okay because Father Time embodies a Platonic, absolute Time. A "time beyond time", one might say. Also he's comparable to his wife, Mother Night.
Even temporal and spatial constructs can be considered 1-A here if they're metaphysical enough, possessing a beyond-dimensional nature, are considered the "canvas" for all "conventional"/physical space or time, etc.
I've also noted that Platonic forms are considered 1-A, even though Platonic forms are, by definition, formal (in the sense of possessing a defined form or shape, and not being formless)
>The word "duality" is used by Silver Surfer in the exact same scan. The Tribunal himself has used that word before. If by opposing realities, he meant all sets of dual systems, he would have said so.
Do you not know what a synonymous term is? Do you know what context clues are?
What do you think the Living Tribunal uses "opposing realities" for, if not in relation to dualities? Every time he uses that term, it's in relation in dualities.
Just because it doesn't sate your sheer pedantry doesn't mean it isn't there.
>The Tribunal is never stated to conceptually transcend either Infinity or Eternity. That's yet another made-up statement.
Lierally nothing shown so far, taken at face value, warrants more than 1-A. The Tribunal represents the sum totality of the Marvel Multiverse. Even taking all of your statements and scans at face value, the Tribunal would be no more than a Type 2 Transdual (ie, transcendent of dual systems to a certain scope of reality), which is High 1-B.
And no, a random statement saying the Tribunal's motives can't be understood by Eternity because he is omniscient is nowhere near a statement of him transcending Eternity conceptually.
Are we now just going to ignore when the Living Tribunal states that he was beyond space and time, the two concepts Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively?
Or that the statement if the Living Tribunal's motives being "unfathomable" to Eternity is not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, but that it's impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
These things are right there, yet you refuse to connect the dots.
>Really? A statement about the Multiversal Abstracts being linked to each other is what you're going to choose as proof? As if that wasn't patently obvious already in the series.
I used it as proof of the Living Tribunal transcending dualities, as each abstract and abstract concept in the multiverse is linked to their opposite, in dualistic fashion, yet the Living Tribunal transcends all of them, and the entire dualistic system.
>It is irrelevant if he transcends space and time. Still doesn't warrant anything more than Type 2 Transduality. Read up on our standards: Transduality.
Type 2 fits the Tribunal perfectly.
It is irrelevant even if he transcends time and space on all dimensional scales?
I still don't understand what contradicts the Living Tribunal having type 3 transduality.
>Except it is a High 2-A statement.
Even taking your evidence at straight value and assuming that, by realms, the Tribunal does mean the duality of space and time...that would still fit under Type 2 Transduality. Type 2 fits literally any non-1-A being who transcends concepts within a certain scope.
Considering the Tribunal is the embodiment of the entirety of the High 1-B multiverse and all its forces, he fits as a high-end Type 2. Still not 1-A. He has zero 1-A statements.
It isn't only a high 2-A statement. In fact, it cannot be only high 2-A because of the wider context of that statement.
When the Living Tribunal talks about transcending space and time, by extension he is saying that he transcends Infinity and Eternity, the embodiments of space and time, who exist on all dimensional levels in Marvel.
It just doesn't make sense for the Living Tribunal to not be 1-A. Everything perfectly lines up for him to be so.
>It's funny you talk about M-Bodies yet fail to realize that this entire scene between Infinity and Oblivion, too, took place between weak M-Bodies of the entities, as noted in our pages. It doesn't scale to their full selves, nor can be used to argue that Infinity is comparable to Oblivion.
But those M-Bodies were still operating on a greater level than the Chaos King and that M-Body of Eternity.
And I wasn't arguing that Infinity was comparable to Oblivion (although I do think she is "up there", so to speak), I was arguing that the Chaos King isn't comparable to the complete Eternity.
>At this point I'm getting the impression you want to push for 1-A Abstracts.
Not right now, no.
Although I do think that the abstracts in general are "just below" 1-A, so to speak.
>Occam's Razor. Prove that they didn't mean the entire multiverse or concede.
I love how "we shouldn't take certain statements at face value" suddenly moves over for "Occam's Razor" in your mind.
And why do I have to prove a negative? Prove that that guy wasn't talking about the entire multiverse? Why don't you prove that he was? Why don't you prove that he even knows about the entire multiverse?
>Our accepted profiles and the actual characters.
The "accepted profiles", some of which you're trying to revise right now (ignoring the appeal to authority/popularity inherent in that)?
The "actual characters"? I remember some "infinite layers" statements, but no character saying that "the multiverse is infinite-dimensional, and nothing but".
>...So what? This is a High 1-B statement. The Beyond Realm is an infinite-dimensional realm.
I meant the Beyonder Realm being a blank canvas for spaces of all dimensional types.
You know...an outerverse.
>So, in your narrative, when the statements limit the level of power of the characters, they are figures of speech. When they upgrade them to levels suggested absolutely nowhere in the whole work, they are to be taken at face value.
Different contexts.
And I'm not asking anyone to take any statement at face value, just to connect the dots to get a better, fuller picture of the character's nature.
>This is Pre-Retcon.
And?
>This is suggested nowhere and is just you adding your spin into the text. The narrator outright states that the Beyonder's original form is infinite-dimensional. Him being surprised at it is because he had never taken on a merely three-dimensional avatar before, as plainly stated in the scan. You can't keep rewriting what is stated to suit your argument.
When was that suggested to be his mere "avatar", especially considering that when he came back to the Beyonder Realm, it would be a blank void?
That being his mere avatar wouldn't surprise the Beyonder, because he'd know where his true form was, that true form acquiring the experience of a successive descent from infinite dimensions to three.
"Both quotes use similar wording."
And? Similar wording can mean different things in certain contexts.
>Said level is said to transcend the Beyond Realm entirely, being separated from it by a 4-D barrier. Therefore, the storyline was absolutely treating the Beyond Realm as a 4-D realm when making those statements. Maximum-wanking, 5-D.
Where?
And in what way do you read such a scan when "submicroscopic quantum level" is interpreted by you as being "utterly transcendent" of a realm already portrayed as utterly transcendent of at least universal Eternity?
It just doesn't make sense.
>So what, once again? Why is this relevant? It was outright stated they were destroying one universe at a time. It is a non-debatable topic.
Because it shows that the Beyonders' threat level was much superior to the Chaos King's threat level, because the Tribunal intervened for the Beyonders but not the Chaos King.
And just because it was stated that the Beyonders were destroying "one universe at a time", it does not mean they weren't doing much more.
>I. Actually, my interpretation was similar to yours.
Oh okay.
>II. The Living Tribunal is comparing the worlds that exist within dimensions of either time and space. Oblivion is a dimensionless void.
And the "fathomless voids" that the Living Tribunal explicitly contrasted to matter weren't dimensionless?
>Once again you grab vague statements and pretend they're saying something far more complex than what they actually are. Anyone can see it isn't talking about Oblivion. Oblivion was introduced 20 years after that statement.
Maybe not Oblivion per se, but the Living Tribunal does stated that he controls the void.
Oblivion being the embodiment of the void.
I'm sure that you see where I'm going with this.
>Oblivion himself has stated he is linked to none of them.
Where?
Do the revision if you want to for now, even though I disagree, because this debate does seem to be running in circles at this point.
Although you can probably note that it's rather contested.
@Kep
>If by that, you mean the actual evidence in the comics, by all means yes.
I heavily disagree with that, but whatever.
>Eternity is a mere fragment of the Tribunal, who is the complete embodiment of the multiverse, thus Tribunal's thoughts and motives are beyond Eternity's domain and knowledge. How any of this is relevant to Attack Potency, I can't for the life of me fathom.
Just for outsiders, this is the statement the dude is trying to use to say the Tribunal is conceptually transcendent to Multi-Eternity:
"His motives are unfathomable to all others - even Eternity itself, for none possess his omniscient perspective. No punchline so far.
How does any of that contradict the Tribunal being 1-A?
Just to remind you, Eternity, as the embodiment of the concept of temporal existence and life (among other things) is so on the scale of the entire multiverse, a multiverse that follows Cantorian set theory, which alone makes Eternity, by himself, immeasurably above baseline high 1-B.
I bring this up to ask you how, when the Living Tribunal himself says he transcends space and time, concepts which in Marvel encompass all dimensional scale (if not more), it isn't enough to prove that the Living Tribunal is 1-A?
>Neither does it mean that it's acceptable to argue that the other character transcends the very concept of said character just from a random quote that states they are omniscient and their motives can't be understood by a weaker character. This is legitimately what you're arguing. This is the pinnacle of ridicule.
It's not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, it's that it is impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
Tell me, what does it mean when a character is completely beyond the understanding of a character who is already well beyond the baseline of high 1-B?
>...So what?
So the Beyonders hadn't killed that M-Body yet, proving you wrong about how they completely destroyed the Tribunal in all realities.
>I don't care about DC Comics' cosmology. We are talking about Marvel Comics. The unarguable facts and lines explicitly state that the Tribunal was killed, and TOAA himself replaced him, with the Multiversal Abstracts explicitly stating that the new Tribunal is a successor to the old one. The textbook explicitly states that the Beyonders battled the Multiversal Tribunal and that upon his death every single reality and world of the multiverse had a M-Body of the Tribunal fall on it to represent the multiversal scale of the battle.
So now you're going to create a double standard? Because this is a double standard, Kep.
And "Multiversal Tribunal" doesn't mean "True Living Tribunal", as the Living Tribunal both embodies and transcends the multiverse. There's a reason why Eternity and Infinity, both also defined collectively embodying the multiverse, are unceasingly portrayed as subservient to the Living Tribunal.
>I don't care about what happened to Death. Every single statement shows that the complete Tribunal was killed.
So you're going to interpret that scene in a way that flies in the face if established Marvel canon?
Okay.
>From the exact same textbox that states the one fighting the Beyonders was the complete Multiversal Tribunal right off the bat.
And who said that the "Multiversal Tribunal" was the "Complete Tribunal"?
>Yes. I remember Universal Eternity's various deaths leading to the destruction of whatever universe he was manifesting in. I also remember the Beyonders planning to destroy the multiverse by killing Eternity and Infinity, instead of killing Molecule Man like stated. That was sarcasm, if it wasn't obvious.
Are you implying that universes weren't destroyed everytime Eternity was killed (and not immediately replaced by somebody) in canon? And that the Beyonders didn't kill universes by killing their respective Eternities and Infinities?
They were going to finish off the multiverse with Molecule Man. Don't pretend that they didn't do much damage to hand beforehand.
>Apparently explicit statements that the complete Tribunal was killed aren't enough. Using an old story that was later retconned to be just an avatar of Death obviously overrides the actual statements made in the storyline.
Again, who said that "multiversal Tribunal" equaled "complete Tribunal"?
And if that was just an avatar of Death, then it gets even worse. If the destruction of Death's mere avatar caused such sweeping effects across at least multiple layers of the multiverse, then imagine what would have happened if the complete Living Tribunal was killed.
The fact that the multiverse didn't collapse on the fact alone proves that it wasn't the complete Living Tribunal who died, but rather an immensely powerful multiversal M-Body.
>The dual systems he speaks of are always referencing the Multiversal Abstracts that compose him, and their opposites in the cosmological compass.
Death directly opposes Eternity.
Chaos directly opposes order.
Nothing that is stated ever suggests Type 3 Transduality.
And yet the scale of those multiversal abstracts at their zenith is well beyond ordinary high 1-B, to the point that they pretty much at minimum encompass all dimensional scales.
The fact that the Living Tribunal transcends all of these dual systems should tell you something
And keep in mind that the Silver Surfer spoke of "infinite dualities", not just the ones the Tribunal himself mentioned, something that the Living Tribunal never contradicted him on.
>How many 1-A characters in this site have "X taught me infinite dualities" as justification? Absolutely none.
How many 1-A characters have anything less than a direct statement of being dimensionless as justification, as transcending the very concepts? None.
https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Father_Time_(Vertigo)
But this is considered okay because Father Time embodies a Platonic, absolute Time. A "time beyond time", one might say. Also he's comparable to his wife, Mother Night.
Even temporal and spatial constructs can be considered 1-A here if they're metaphysical enough, possessing a beyond-dimensional nature, are considered the "canvas" for all "conventional"/physical space or time, etc.
I've also noted that Platonic forms are considered 1-A, even though Platonic forms are, by definition, formal (in the sense of possessing a defined form or shape, and not being formless)
>The word "duality" is used by Silver Surfer in the exact same scan. The Tribunal himself has used that word before. If by opposing realities, he meant all sets of dual systems, he would have said so.
Do you not know what a synonymous term is? Do you know what context clues are?
What do you think the Living Tribunal uses "opposing realities" for, if not in relation to dualities? Every time he uses that term, it's in relation in dualities.
Just because it doesn't sate your sheer pedantry doesn't mean it isn't there.
>The Tribunal is never stated to conceptually transcend either Infinity or Eternity. That's yet another made-up statement.
Lierally nothing shown so far, taken at face value, warrants more than 1-A. The Tribunal represents the sum totality of the Marvel Multiverse. Even taking all of your statements and scans at face value, the Tribunal would be no more than a Type 2 Transdual (ie, transcendent of dual systems to a certain scope of reality), which is High 1-B.
And no, a random statement saying the Tribunal's motives can't be understood by Eternity because he is omniscient is nowhere near a statement of him transcending Eternity conceptually.
Are we now just going to ignore when the Living Tribunal states that he was beyond space and time, the two concepts Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively?
Or that the statement if the Living Tribunal's motives being "unfathomable" to Eternity is not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, but that it's impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
These things are right there, yet you refuse to connect the dots.
>Really? A statement about the Multiversal Abstracts being linked to each other is what you're going to choose as proof? As if that wasn't patently obvious already in the series.
I used it as proof of the Living Tribunal transcending dualities, as each abstract and abstract concept in the multiverse is linked to their opposite, in dualistic fashion, yet the Living Tribunal transcends all of them, and the entire dualistic system.
>It is irrelevant if he transcends space and time. Still doesn't warrant anything more than Type 2 Transduality. Read up on our standards: Transduality.
Type 2 fits the Tribunal perfectly.
It is irrelevant even if he transcends time and space on all dimensional scales?
I still don't understand what contradicts the Living Tribunal having type 3 transduality.
>Except it is a High 2-A statement.
Even taking your evidence at straight value and assuming that, by realms, the Tribunal does mean the duality of space and time...that would still fit under Type 2 Transduality. Type 2 fits literally any non-1-A being who transcends concepts within a certain scope.
Considering the Tribunal is the embodiment of the entirety of the High 1-B multiverse and all its forces, he fits as a high-end Type 2. Still not 1-A. He has zero 1-A statements.
It isn't only a high 2-A statement. In fact, it cannot be only high 2-A because of the wider context of that statement.
When the Living Tribunal talks about transcending space and time, by extension he is saying that he transcends Infinity and Eternity, the embodiments of space and time, who exist on all dimensional levels in Marvel.
It just doesn't make sense for the Living Tribunal to not be 1-A. Everything perfectly lines up for him to be so.
>It's funny you talk about M-Bodies yet fail to realize that this entire scene between Infinity and Oblivion, too, took place between weak M-Bodies of the entities, as noted in our pages. It doesn't scale to their full selves, nor can be used to argue that Infinity is comparable to Oblivion.
But those M-Bodies were still operating on a greater level than the Chaos King and that M-Body of Eternity.
And I wasn't arguing that Infinity was comparable to Oblivion (although I do think she is "up there", so to speak), I was arguing that the Chaos King isn't comparable to the complete Eternity.
>At this point I'm getting the impression you want to push for 1-A Abstracts.
Not right now, no.
Although I do think that the abstracts in general are "just below" 1-A, so to speak.
>Occam's Razor. Prove that they didn't mean the entire multiverse or concede.
I love how "we shouldn't take certain statements at face value" suddenly moves over for "Occam's Razor" in your mind.
And why do I have to prove a negative? Prove that that guy wasn't talking about the entire multiverse? Why don't you prove that he was? Why don't you prove that he even knows about the entire multiverse?
>Our accepted profiles and the actual characters.
The "accepted profiles", some of which you're trying to revise right now (ignoring the appeal to authority/popularity inherent in that)?
The "actual characters"? I remember some "infinite layers" statements, but no character saying that "the multiverse is infinite-dimensional, and nothing but".
>...So what? This is a High 1-B statement. The Beyond Realm is an infinite-dimensional realm.
I meant the Beyonder Realm being a blank canvas for spaces of all dimensional types.
You know...an outerverse.
>So, in your narrative, when the statements limit the level of power of the characters, they are figures of speech. When they upgrade them to levels suggested absolutely nowhere in the whole work, they are to be taken at face value.
Different contexts.
And I'm not asking anyone to take any statement at face value, just to connect the dots to get a better, fuller picture of the character's nature.
>This is Pre-Retcon.
And?
>This is suggested nowhere and is just you adding your spin into the text. The narrator outright states that the Beyonder's original form is infinite-dimensional. Him being surprised at it is because he had never taken on a merely three-dimensional avatar before, as plainly stated in the scan. You can't keep rewriting what is stated to suit your argument.
When was that suggested to be his mere "avatar", especially considering that when he came back to the Beyonder Realm, it would be a blank void?
That being his mere avatar wouldn't surprise the Beyonder, because he'd know where his true form was, that true form acquiring the experience of a successive descent from infinite dimensions to three.
"Both quotes use similar wording."
And? Similar wording can mean different things in certain contexts.
>Said level is said to transcend the Beyond Realm entirely, being separated from it by a 4-D barrier. Therefore, the storyline was absolutely treating the Beyond Realm as a 4-D realm when making those statements. Maximum-wanking, 5-D.
Where?
And in what way do you read such a scan when "submicroscopic quantum level" is interpreted by you as being "utterly transcendent" of a realm already portrayed as utterly transcendent of at least universal Eternity?
It just doesn't make sense.
>So what, once again? Why is this relevant? It was outright stated they were destroying one universe at a time. It is a non-debatable topic.
Because it shows that the Beyonders' threat level was much superior to the Chaos King's threat level, because the Tribunal intervened for the Beyonders but not the Chaos King.
And just because it was stated that the Beyonders were destroying "one universe at a time", it does not mean they weren't doing much more.
>I. Actually, my interpretation was similar to yours.
Oh okay.
>II. The Living Tribunal is comparing the worlds that exist within dimensions of either time and space. Oblivion is a dimensionless void.
And the "fathomless voids" that the Living Tribunal explicitly contrasted to matter weren't dimensionless?
>Once again you grab vague statements and pretend they're saying something far more complex than what they actually are. Anyone can see it isn't talking about Oblivion. Oblivion was introduced 20 years after that statement.
Maybe not Oblivion per se, but the Living Tribunal does stated that he controls the void.
Oblivion being the embodiment of the void.
I'm sure that you see where I'm going with this.
>Oblivion himself has stated he is linked to none of them.
Where?
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #74
> How does any of that contradict the Tribunal being 1-A?
Don't pull a loaded question on me. You have yet to prove he is 1-A to begin with. It doesn't contradict it because this quote, and other quotes, never indicated him to be 1-A in the first place.
> I bring this up to ask you how, when the Living Tribunal himself says he transcends space and time, concepts which in Marvel encompass all dimensional scale (if not more), it isn't enough to prove that the Living Tribunal is 1-A?
Transduality
Absolutely none of the quotes provided so far breach Type 2 Transduality. The following statement:
> It's not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, it's that it is impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
This is completely exaggerating and embellishing the quote.
"Fathom" is synonymous to "understand". Therefore, "unfathomable" is something that can't be understood. All the quote says is that Eternity is unable to understand the Tribunal's motives, not that he can't even begin to possibly understand the very nature of the Tribunal.
> So the Beyonders hadn't killed that M-Body yet
Evidence?
> And "Multiversal Tribunal" doesn't mean "True Living Tribunal", as the Living Tribunal both embodies and transcends the multiverse. There's a reason why Eternity and Infinity, both also defined collectively embodying the multiverse, are unceasingly portrayed as subservient to the Living Tribunal.
Eternity and Infinity are embodiments of time and space throughout the multiverse. Other aspects are beyond them.
Meanwhile, The Tribunal is the embodiment of absolutely everything in the multiverse. He is the fusion of all abstracts.
> So you're going to interpret that scene in a way that flies in the face if established Marvel canon?
You're one to say that, since you're throwing away the actual canon to sate your needs of absolute consistency by inventing headcanon that an entity that was explicitly stated to be the Tribunal in its whole was just an M-Body.
> And who said that the "Multiversal Tribunal" was the "Complete Tribunal"?
The Tribunal is the sum total of all Multiversal Entities, each of which embody aspects of the multiverse. Therefore, the Tribunal in a form that represents "all of reality; the multiverse itself taken form" is the Complete Tribunal.
> Are you implying that universes weren't destroyed everytime Eternity was killed (and not immediately replaced by somebody) in canon? And that the Beyonders didn't kill universes by killing their respective Eternities and Infinities?
Yes to both.
> They were going to finish off the multiverse with Molecule Man. Don't pretend that they didn't do much damage to hand beforehand.
This is false. Their plan was to kill Molecule Man in every reality, since each universe's Molecule Man had a bomb sealed within that would destroy the universe they were in. All of their destruction revolved around Molecule Man. The various deaths ofUniversal Eternity and Infinity's manifestations? They didn't do shit to the respective universe.
> And if that was just an avatar of Death, then it gets even worse. If the destruction of Death's mere avatar caused such sweeping effects across at least multiple layers of the multiverse, then imagine what would have happened if the complete Living Tribunal was killed.
I'm not sure if you realize that you're demolishing your own argument by pointing out that the destruction of an infinitesimal M-Body of Death resulted in multiversal chaos, while the destruction of, according to you, an "extremely powerful multiversal M-Body" of the Tribunal didn't do shit, even to one single universe (since the textbox points out that all of the Tribunal's fragments fell on celestial bodies in every universe and world of the multiverse, suggesting the fight and the Tribunal's subsequent death didn't destroy any of them).
Unless you're going to backtrack and argue it was a less-than-infinitesimal hyper-insignificant M-Body they killed and that the Narrator is a dirty-liar when he said the Tribunal assumed his complete form. Wouldn't be surprised if you did, though.
> And yet the scale of those multiversal abstracts at their zenith is well beyond ordinary high 1-B, to the point that they pretty much at minimum encompass all dimensional scales.
Marvel Abstracts are about as baseline High 1-B as it can possibly get. They aren't even full-on multiversal embodiments; they embody singular aspects of the High 1-B multiverse. There is a lot of stuff I could point out if I wanted to irrationally downplay them; such as the fact that a 16-Dimensional Subspace was stated to be "beyond space and time" at one point (which both pokes holes on your 1-A interpretation of the High 2-A/at the very most High 1-B quote and shows that "space and time" doesn't necessarily refer to Multi-Eternity and Multi-Infinity)
> https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Father_Time_(Vertigo)
He is 1-A via powerscaling, not via his own showings, so...no.
> Even temporal and spatial constructs can be considered 1-A here if they're metaphysical enough, possessing a beyond-dimensional nature, are considered the "canvas" for all "conventional"/physical space or time, etc.
This is false. We only consider constructs of space and time 1-A if they receive powerscaling from 1-A characters, and we never give them Beyond-Dimensional Existence or Nature, just Attack Potency, Durability and etc. on that level. Similar to how there exist many franchises with characters that are 3-D but have 4-D, 5-D, or even High 1-B levels of energy and power.
> I've also noted that Platonic forms are considered 1-A, even though Platonic forms are, by definition, formal (in the sense of possessing a defined form or shape, and not being formless)
This is false. They're called Platonic Forms because objects that possess form and shape are defined by them, hence they're the original metaphorical "form" of said object. They're still utterly non-physical and transcendental.
> Are we now just going to ignore when the Living Tribunal states that he was beyond space and time, the two concepts Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively?
Guess a 16-dimensional void is now beyond Eternity and Infinity as well. That's not how it works, for the millionth time. Transcending the space and time of a High 1-B multiverse doesn't grant you a 1-A rating (this is explicitly noted in the definition), neither does it warrant Type 3 Transduality.
As I have already explained several times, the Living Tribunal is beyond Eternity and Infinity, but he himself is still an entity whose scale only goes as far as representing the entire multiverse and all its concepts, as opposed to the aforementioned two abstracts, who only represent one singular aspect of the multiverse. Hence why he is only a Type 2 Transdual and a high-end High 1-B character, but still nowhere near 1-A.
> But those M-Bodies were still operating on a greater level than the Chaos King and that M-Body of Eternity.
This is headcanon.
> And I wasn't arguing that Infinity was comparable to Oblivion (although I do think she is "up there", so to speak), I was arguing that the Chaos King isn't comparable to the complete Eternity.
It is stated that, were the Chaos King to succeed, Eternity in its entirety would disappear. Later, it is revealed that 99% of the multiverse had been erased by the entity.
As you like to repeat so much: "connect the dots."
> And why do I have to prove a negative? Prove that that guy wasn't talking about the entire multiverse? Why don't you prove that he was?
The burden of proof is on you to prove that he wasn't talking about the entire multiverse. He explicitly states 99% of the multiverse had been erased. There is absolutely no basis to interpret it as anything but the entire construct. Either prove it wasn't or concede, once more.
Replace "multiverse" with "universe" and see how ridiculous your argument gets:
I also don't remember any Naruto character saying that Kaguya didn't transcend the concepts of space and time throughout all the multiverse and couldn't effortlessly erase an Infinite-Dimensional universe. I guess she can because nothing says otherwise
That isn't how basic debating and burden of proof works. You can't just make up stuff about the Marvel Multiverse and expect people to believe it because "nobody says it's the limit!"
> I meant the Beyonder Realm being a blank canvas for spaces of all dimensional types.
Something you made up that can't be at all discerned from what was stated.
Beyonder: "I embody a universe - said universe isn't even anything without me!"
You: "That means said universe is the background canvas of the whole multiverse, and transcends its concepts entirely to the point of it being nonexistent in comparison"
Not getting the joke. Serious, man.
> Different contexts.
But similar lack of interpretation.
> When was that suggested to be his mere "avatar", especially considering that when he came back to the Beyonder Realm, it would be a blank void?
If you don't consider the Beyonder lowering his base dimensionality from infinite to 3-D, but still being able to fully manifest if he so desired as him taking on an "avatar", fine. Semantics don't change absolutely anything, nonetheless the fact that the narrator explicitly states his true form is Infinite-Dimensional.
> And? Similar wording can mean different things in certain contexts.
Similar wording means other scans with similar context and wording can possibly have similar interpretations instead of set ones.
> Where?
"Four-dimensional spacetime barrier between this plane...and what lies beyond [it]"
Literally the first panel in the bottom row.
> And in what way do you read such a scan when "submicroscopic quantum level" is interpreted by you as being "utterly transcendent" of a realm already portrayed as utterly transcendent of at least universal Eternity?
You're strawmanning me. I simply said it was beyond the Beyond Realm (which is explicitly stated in the scan without any room for doubt), not that it was utterly transcendent of it or anything.
> Because it shows that the Beyonders' threat level was much superior to the Chaos King's threat level, because the Tribunal intervened for the Beyonders but not the Chaos King.
1. Nothing implies the Tribunal personally stepped in. It could have been that the Beyonders themselves sought him out.
2. The exact same Tribunal who stepped in personally to deal with Korvac, an entity whose power rivaled that of one singular Cosmic Cube? I guess you think Korvac is superior to the Chaos King now. That would hardly be surprising at this stage, anyway.
> And just because it was stated that the Beyonders were destroying "one universe at a time", it does not mean they weren't doing much more.
"Just because Mr. Mxyzptlk is stated to be a 5-Dimensional Imp doesn't mean he isn't a Beyond-Infinite-Dimensional entity who completely dwarves time and space"
> And the "fathomless voids" that the Living Tribunal explicitly contrasted to matter weren't dimensionless?
"All the dimensions - each nebulous netherworld which exists either in time or in space - either as matter or as fathomless void"
Unarguably not.
> Maybe not Oblivion per se, but the Living Tribunal does stated that he controls the void.
When has he stated he controls the void Oblivion represents?
> Where?
"Death has his joys... As do Love, Eternity and the countless other cosmic deities who play their parts in the Divine Drama... But Oblivion... Has nothing."
Don't pull a loaded question on me. You have yet to prove he is 1-A to begin with. It doesn't contradict it because this quote, and other quotes, never indicated him to be 1-A in the first place.
> I bring this up to ask you how, when the Living Tribunal himself says he transcends space and time, concepts which in Marvel encompass all dimensional scale (if not more), it isn't enough to prove that the Living Tribunal is 1-A?
Transduality
- Type 2 (False General Transduality): Being qualitatively beyond and superior to the nature of all dual systems and concepts within the scope of an entire level of reality. Any non 1-A (Outerverse level) characters who transcend duality at a basic level would also qualify for this level, as space and time can be thought of as dual concepts, as well as existing within/outside spatio-temporal dimensionality
Absolutely none of the quotes provided so far breach Type 2 Transduality. The following statement:
- "The Living Tribunal transcends the duality of space and time on a High 1-B multiverse"
> It's not just that Eternity can't understand the Living Tribunal, it's that it is impossible for Eternity to even make the attempt of understanding the Living Tribunal, which is why the Living Tribunal's motives are "unfathomable" to Eternity.
This is completely exaggerating and embellishing the quote.
"Fathom" is synonymous to "understand". Therefore, "unfathomable" is something that can't be understood. All the quote says is that Eternity is unable to understand the Tribunal's motives, not that he can't even begin to possibly understand the very nature of the Tribunal.
> So the Beyonders hadn't killed that M-Body yet
Evidence?
> And "Multiversal Tribunal" doesn't mean "True Living Tribunal", as the Living Tribunal both embodies and transcends the multiverse. There's a reason why Eternity and Infinity, both also defined collectively embodying the multiverse, are unceasingly portrayed as subservient to the Living Tribunal.
Eternity and Infinity are embodiments of time and space throughout the multiverse. Other aspects are beyond them.
Meanwhile, The Tribunal is the embodiment of absolutely everything in the multiverse. He is the fusion of all abstracts.
> So you're going to interpret that scene in a way that flies in the face if established Marvel canon?
You're one to say that, since you're throwing away the actual canon to sate your needs of absolute consistency by inventing headcanon that an entity that was explicitly stated to be the Tribunal in its whole was just an M-Body.
> And who said that the "Multiversal Tribunal" was the "Complete Tribunal"?
The Tribunal is the sum total of all Multiversal Entities, each of which embody aspects of the multiverse. Therefore, the Tribunal in a form that represents "all of reality; the multiverse itself taken form" is the Complete Tribunal.
> Are you implying that universes weren't destroyed everytime Eternity was killed (and not immediately replaced by somebody) in canon? And that the Beyonders didn't kill universes by killing their respective Eternities and Infinities?
Yes to both.
> They were going to finish off the multiverse with Molecule Man. Don't pretend that they didn't do much damage to hand beforehand.
This is false. Their plan was to kill Molecule Man in every reality, since each universe's Molecule Man had a bomb sealed within that would destroy the universe they were in. All of their destruction revolved around Molecule Man. The various deaths ofUniversal Eternity and Infinity's manifestations? They didn't do shit to the respective universe.
> And if that was just an avatar of Death, then it gets even worse. If the destruction of Death's mere avatar caused such sweeping effects across at least multiple layers of the multiverse, then imagine what would have happened if the complete Living Tribunal was killed.
I'm not sure if you realize that you're demolishing your own argument by pointing out that the destruction of an infinitesimal M-Body of Death resulted in multiversal chaos, while the destruction of, according to you, an "extremely powerful multiversal M-Body" of the Tribunal didn't do shit, even to one single universe (since the textbox points out that all of the Tribunal's fragments fell on celestial bodies in every universe and world of the multiverse, suggesting the fight and the Tribunal's subsequent death didn't destroy any of them).
Unless you're going to backtrack and argue it was a less-than-infinitesimal hyper-insignificant M-Body they killed and that the Narrator is a dirty-liar when he said the Tribunal assumed his complete form. Wouldn't be surprised if you did, though.
> And yet the scale of those multiversal abstracts at their zenith is well beyond ordinary high 1-B, to the point that they pretty much at minimum encompass all dimensional scales.
Marvel Abstracts are about as baseline High 1-B as it can possibly get. They aren't even full-on multiversal embodiments; they embody singular aspects of the High 1-B multiverse. There is a lot of stuff I could point out if I wanted to irrationally downplay them; such as the fact that a 16-Dimensional Subspace was stated to be "beyond space and time" at one point (which both pokes holes on your 1-A interpretation of the High 2-A/at the very most High 1-B quote and shows that "space and time" doesn't necessarily refer to Multi-Eternity and Multi-Infinity)
> https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Father_Time_(Vertigo)
He is 1-A via powerscaling, not via his own showings, so...no.
> Even temporal and spatial constructs can be considered 1-A here if they're metaphysical enough, possessing a beyond-dimensional nature, are considered the "canvas" for all "conventional"/physical space or time, etc.
This is false. We only consider constructs of space and time 1-A if they receive powerscaling from 1-A characters, and we never give them Beyond-Dimensional Existence or Nature, just Attack Potency, Durability and etc. on that level. Similar to how there exist many franchises with characters that are 3-D but have 4-D, 5-D, or even High 1-B levels of energy and power.
> I've also noted that Platonic forms are considered 1-A, even though Platonic forms are, by definition, formal (in the sense of possessing a defined form or shape, and not being formless)
This is false. They're called Platonic Forms because objects that possess form and shape are defined by them, hence they're the original metaphorical "form" of said object. They're still utterly non-physical and transcendental.
> Are we now just going to ignore when the Living Tribunal states that he was beyond space and time, the two concepts Infinity and Eternity embody, respectively?
Guess a 16-dimensional void is now beyond Eternity and Infinity as well. That's not how it works, for the millionth time. Transcending the space and time of a High 1-B multiverse doesn't grant you a 1-A rating (this is explicitly noted in the definition), neither does it warrant Type 3 Transduality.
As I have already explained several times, the Living Tribunal is beyond Eternity and Infinity, but he himself is still an entity whose scale only goes as far as representing the entire multiverse and all its concepts, as opposed to the aforementioned two abstracts, who only represent one singular aspect of the multiverse. Hence why he is only a Type 2 Transdual and a high-end High 1-B character, but still nowhere near 1-A.
> But those M-Bodies were still operating on a greater level than the Chaos King and that M-Body of Eternity.
This is headcanon.
> And I wasn't arguing that Infinity was comparable to Oblivion (although I do think she is "up there", so to speak), I was arguing that the Chaos King isn't comparable to the complete Eternity.
It is stated that, were the Chaos King to succeed, Eternity in its entirety would disappear. Later, it is revealed that 99% of the multiverse had been erased by the entity.
As you like to repeat so much: "connect the dots."
> And why do I have to prove a negative? Prove that that guy wasn't talking about the entire multiverse? Why don't you prove that he was?
The burden of proof is on you to prove that he wasn't talking about the entire multiverse. He explicitly states 99% of the multiverse had been erased. There is absolutely no basis to interpret it as anything but the entire construct. Either prove it wasn't or concede, once more.
Replace "multiverse" with "universe" and see how ridiculous your argument gets:
- "He erased 99% of the universe"
- "Prove that that guy was talking about the entire universe!"
I also don't remember any Naruto character saying that Kaguya didn't transcend the concepts of space and time throughout all the multiverse and couldn't effortlessly erase an Infinite-Dimensional universe. I guess she can because nothing says otherwise
That isn't how basic debating and burden of proof works. You can't just make up stuff about the Marvel Multiverse and expect people to believe it because "nobody says it's the limit!"
> I meant the Beyonder Realm being a blank canvas for spaces of all dimensional types.
Something you made up that can't be at all discerned from what was stated.
Beyonder: "I embody a universe - said universe isn't even anything without me!"
You: "That means said universe is the background canvas of the whole multiverse, and transcends its concepts entirely to the point of it being nonexistent in comparison"
Not getting the joke. Serious, man.
> Different contexts.
But similar lack of interpretation.
> When was that suggested to be his mere "avatar", especially considering that when he came back to the Beyonder Realm, it would be a blank void?
If you don't consider the Beyonder lowering his base dimensionality from infinite to 3-D, but still being able to fully manifest if he so desired as him taking on an "avatar", fine. Semantics don't change absolutely anything, nonetheless the fact that the narrator explicitly states his true form is Infinite-Dimensional.
> And? Similar wording can mean different things in certain contexts.
Similar wording means other scans with similar context and wording can possibly have similar interpretations instead of set ones.
> Where?
"Four-dimensional spacetime barrier between this plane...and what lies beyond [it]"
Literally the first panel in the bottom row.
> And in what way do you read such a scan when "submicroscopic quantum level" is interpreted by you as being "utterly transcendent" of a realm already portrayed as utterly transcendent of at least universal Eternity?
You're strawmanning me. I simply said it was beyond the Beyond Realm (which is explicitly stated in the scan without any room for doubt), not that it was utterly transcendent of it or anything.
> Because it shows that the Beyonders' threat level was much superior to the Chaos King's threat level, because the Tribunal intervened for the Beyonders but not the Chaos King.
1. Nothing implies the Tribunal personally stepped in. It could have been that the Beyonders themselves sought him out.
2. The exact same Tribunal who stepped in personally to deal with Korvac, an entity whose power rivaled that of one singular Cosmic Cube? I guess you think Korvac is superior to the Chaos King now. That would hardly be surprising at this stage, anyway.
> And just because it was stated that the Beyonders were destroying "one universe at a time", it does not mean they weren't doing much more.
"Just because Mr. Mxyzptlk is stated to be a 5-Dimensional Imp doesn't mean he isn't a Beyond-Infinite-Dimensional entity who completely dwarves time and space"
> And the "fathomless voids" that the Living Tribunal explicitly contrasted to matter weren't dimensionless?
"All the dimensions - each nebulous netherworld which exists either in time or in space - either as matter or as fathomless void"
Unarguably not.
> Maybe not Oblivion per se, but the Living Tribunal does stated that he controls the void.
When has he stated he controls the void Oblivion represents?
> Where?
"Death has his joys... As do Love, Eternity and the countless other cosmic deities who play their parts in the Divine Drama... But Oblivion... Has nothing."
- 15,332
- 7,559
- Thread starter
- #76
Ultima Reality agrees with the revisions, by the way.
- 818
- 140
LOL nothing i have said has been debunked yet but idc lets downgrade marvel!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked