Big bangs create, dood. They do not destroy-- this is should be a very simple concept to grasp. Once more: Monarch's detonation created absolutely nothing(it only destroyed), therefore it was obviously not a big bang in the typical sense.
Aside from that, unless I missed something said detonation was never referred to as a big bang, so I'm not sure where your opinion that it was such even stems from..? Please don't argue just to argue. It's irritating and accomplishes absolutely nothing.
I presume that I have your permission to PM quanchi112 this cloaked concession that Lucifer standing at ground zero during Michael's death isn't a proof of a durability feat, since it was after all, a "creation event".
The energy released from Michael detonating would have destroyed the prime universe-- this was outright stated. When Lucifer took Mike to un-space and skewered him to release said energies, he even referred to it as "a controlled detonation."
Furthermore, the raw energy released from Michael was not sufficient to create ANYTHING by itself. It took Lucifer's WILL to mold it into a tangible creation. Aside from that, the demiurgic power was explicitly referred to as "the power that builds and breaks." It goes both ways.
Having said that, comparing Monarch's quantum energies to the demiurgic power(God's power) is one of the more faulty argumentations I've seen in some time.
Which is pretty much what the uncontrolled release of Monarch's power did: destroy an already existing universe.
Wholly irrelevant. If there was someone like Lucifer to guide/manipulate/weave those energies into a new creation, then no doubt Monarch's death would have rebooted the universe. As it so happens, there wasn't, so this is a useless non-sequiter.
I feel like posting the scans in which Captain Atom utilizes the link of his energies with the Quantum Field to spawn a universe and then subsequently destroy said universe.
Having read your points, claiming that the energies contained within Monarch's armor are completely unlike the Demiurgic power(especially in light of the highest-end stuff that Captain Atom has done with similar/identical energies) is one of the stupidest argumentations I've read in quite some time.
In comics, big bangs create, they do not destroy. Monarch's blast destroyed. Had Lucifer not taken Michael out of the prime creation, his subsequent release of energy would have destroyed said creation as well. Had Lucifer not been present in the void to shape Michael's raw energy into a physical creation, then it have equated to little more than a massive release of raw energy. Nothing more.
By your line of logic, any huge explosion with universe-busting potential equates to a big bang. I find that horrendously faulty, given that creating a universe is much more difficult, and requires much more energy input, than destroying a universe.
...And btw, the CA feat you likely copied/pasted from his respect thread was only possible because he was in the Quantum Field at the time. Had he not been in the QF, that creation feat wouldn't have been possible. So yeah, epic fail, etc.
So, to summarize, in one paragraph alone you contradict yourself by claiming that Michael's energies both were and weren't a Big Bang. I intend to catalogue this post before I PM quan, telling him your cloaked concession that Lucifer didn't tank a destructive blast since at the time it was a Creation Event.
Hardly. I've provided proof with Captain Atom's energies spawning a universe, which is indicative of what Monarch's energies are capable of achieving since they have virtually identical powersets. I mean you would have a point if we were discussing something like the Null Bomb, or Mistress Death's explosion of the Cancerverse, but we're not, unfortunately for you.
I am not sure what relevance about where I got those scans from has on this discussion. And learn to read: I clearly mention Captain Atom's link to the Quantum Field in my post. Conversely speaking, Captain Atom's energies on their own aren't capable of destroying a universe as well. So that's that.