Marvel Hierarchy revised as of December 2005

Originally posted by leonidas
<<
And don't give me that "Can God create a rock so big he can't lift it?" business, Mister! The answer is no, but that's not because of a limitation of what God can do....it's a paradox of human language. Ditto with TOAA choosing to allow himself to not know something....no!>>

😆 😆

so in saying that, you're admitting that an all-powerful, omniscient entity CAN'T do something?

🙄 I JUST said that it's a paradox of human language, not a genuine limitation of a being who can do everything. Of course someone who is able to do anything can't not be able do something - it proves nothing. It's just that crap Socratic crap that's meant to be deeper than it is, lol.

<<And like Illa said, you can't derive from something that is made of your essence.>>

but WE'RE not deriving it. it simply derived. and besides that . . . 😑 things in comics have been derived form essences many times . . .

But not when the essence derives from them!

Besides, the line about being born in the formless void actually further supports my interpretation that it's not the Phoenix Force itself that derives from life....it's the consciousness of the Phoenix Manifestation that derives from life. It's just an energy source that permeates the universe until the first life comes into being...this life gave sentience to the Phoenix. The Phoenix Force itself came from the void....the White Hot Room, which is separate from the multiverse. As far as I'm concerned, my interpretation supports both statements. You have to choose to accept one and ignore the other.

Join us, Leon!

and i've never heard of this atlez, either. sounds interesting.

All my research still points to him being responsible specifically for 616 reality. He lives outside of the reality, the way Atlas has to be outside of the world to lift it, but he's still responsible for only 616.

<<All things that live have Phoenix in them, and all things that potentially will live have Phoenix in them. Everything that lives or will live is dirived from the same energy source, which also happens to be called the Phoenix Force.>>

you keep reiterating that but like demi's multi-pf it is no where to be seen in the bio.

You're overrelying on the bio. The bio gives a concise history of the Phoenix Force, but it doesn't go into detail about the Phoenix's place in the multiverse, or its relationship with the abstracts or with TOAA. You'd have to refer to the souce issues to gain more insight. The Multi-PF is NOT something I made up (well, the name is, but not what it represents). The Multi-PF are the beings who give orders to the Phoenix Avatars and reside in the White Hot Room. They exist, they've been talked about in comics....I'm not making it up! 😛

nor can i still see exactly why you insist on saying pf is the fuel of life when that has never been stated anywhere to be true

"The stars are my children"
"Everything that is, I am"
"The Big Bang, or the Phoenix Force, whatever you want to call it"
"Your power derives from the lives of those not yet born. By employing it, you deny them existence"
"I am the spark of creation"
"A power second only to the creator himself...the power of life!"

😆

nor do i understand why you insist there even MUST be a fuel.

Nobody is creating the concept...it's been stated. If future life is denied because Phoenix is drawing on the energy necessary for their eventual existence, that's as close as you can get to definite proof that the Phoenix Force energies are fuel for life.

Originally posted by Cosmic Flame
Shouldn't the idea of alternate universes and free will include that in many universes (and I would hazard to say most) an individual and their counterpart do indeed make the same choices?

No, because there are an infinite combination of choices and alternatives that you will make in your life. Each choice you make kickstarts realities where you made alternate choices, and each of those have realities that deal with the fallout and future choices related to those choices. It's infinite. What does that mean? That means that there's no such thing as "many" or "most".

I understand what you and Leon are trying to say - "Why would a universe exist where I've become a world conquering mass murderer who sacrifices baby ostriches to fuel my godly power, when that's totally out of character for me to EVER do something like that?"

Remember - the choices one makes is not limited to one's character, and one's character is not as consistent as you would think, so such a reality IS possible however unlikely. This will lead to a debate on nature vs. nuture, among the half dozen or so other existential concepts we're all already juggling on this thread! 🙂

Could these alternate universe counterparts really only embody different aspects of an individual? That is demi's choice in one universe to be a pious Muslim, and demi's choice in another universe to not be a pious Muslim not only reflect simple choices, but different aspects of demi's personality as well? This allows for free will to reflect the complexity of the psyche as well as simple choices and actions.

Yes - but then I suffer the consequence for being the alternate choice of a decision another me made on my behalf. My punishment is being Demigawd of Universe #48593 - the Demigawd who chose not to become a pious muslim, even though I never really "chose" anything - I'm just the alternate reality of the Demigawd who did become a Pious Muslim.

I wonder if individuals and their multiversal counterparts are merely "shards" of themselves, and that they form a whole in the White Hot Room, considereing that it's in a sense the crux of the concept of life.

Which I think would be a fair fate, but then judgment should not be allowed because all we've done is act out the infinite possibilities we've encountered in our lives.

Are people making a distinction between being and living? What is this distinction? Is TOAA alive? I ask because the first sentence of the history of the PF says:

Born of the void between states of being

This either implies that the PF can/does/did exist before, outside of, and independent of life, or that it draws on the psyche of TOAA as well as the beings that it creates, doesn't it? Can one of our resident physics experts explain?

Hear hear!

Originally posted by leonidas
i've been puzzling over that line, unsure how it fits in anywhere. personally, i think it is some writer talking out of his arse trying to make things sound cool.

tsk tsk tsk!

Originally posted by demigawd
No, because there are an infinite combination of choices and alternatives that you will make in your life. Each choice you make kickstarts realities where you made alternate choices, and each of those have realities that deal with the fallout and future choices related to those choices. It's infinite. What does that mean? That means that there's no such thing as "many" or "most".

I understand what you and Leon are trying to say - "Why would a universe exist where I've become a world conquering mass murderer who sacrifices baby ostriches to fuel my godly power, when that's totally out of character for me to EVER do something like that?"

Remember - the choices one makes is not limited to one's character, and one's character is not as consistent as you would think, so such a reality IS possible however unlikely. This will lead to a debate on nature vs. nuture, among the half dozen or so other existential concepts we're all already juggling on this thread! 🙂

Why do people develop a taste for things? because they tried it and decided they liked it? What if you hadn't chosen to try it? Or what if you decided you didn't like it?

I order to better illustrate the concept of infinity, each and every little action plays out another posability. There will be an infinite number of alternate reailites that are nearly identicle. in one you typoed and hit an extra letter. even what you decide to write in these posts. or the movements you take while typing, where you look, how your body moves, if you twitch a certain way or not. even with the keyboard being a micron to the left, or right, or foreward or backward. Each little difference is another reality.
So while we may only note more major changes into seperate designated realities like Demi was using earlier about donuts or being a pious muslim. there are actually more differences between the two realities than he said before.

But then, why would we need to have all the realities designated be whole intergers?

This brings us to the concept of infintesimals.

What is one third in decimals? .33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333~ the tilde indicates that there are an infinite number of threes afterwards. No I only typed out 120 3s which is nowhere near an infinite number of threes.
What is the very VERY first number above zero?
.0~1
A number you'd never reach. as it is a decimal, an infinite number of zeros and a 1.
The next number after that?
.0~2
Ten numbers after the first?
A decimal, a number of zeros one less than infinity, and then a one.
So there are an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1.

🙂 How's your head?

my problem with the 'void' existing outside the multiverse is that there WAS no 'between' states. there was NOTHINGNESS. toaa and void. there was just non-being. that's why i think the void must have existed WITHIN the multi where 'states' finally existed.

Originally posted by leonidas
my problem with the 'void' existing outside the multiverse is that there WAS no 'between' states. there was NOTHINGNESS. toaa and void. there was just non-being. that's why i think the void must have existed WITHIN the multi where 'states' finally existed.

"Born of the void between states of being, the Phoenix Force is a child of the universe."

Originally posted by leonidas
my problem with the 'void' existing outside the multiverse is that there WAS no 'between' states. there was NOTHINGNESS. toaa and void. there was just non-being. that's why i think the void must have existed WITHIN the multi where 'states' finally existed.

You're confusing multiverse with being. You could exist outside the multiverse, even in the void, and still "be". TOAA declared "is" first, then made the multiverse in accordance with the flow I developed in my old post.

It only further serves to prove what I've been saying all along. And the Handbook doesn't talk about the origin of the Phoenix Force aside from it being born in the void between states of being. It goes from there directly to its interaction with the modern 616 Universe. There's a lot of room for what takes place before that, which is where my theories fit in nicely.

This has gotten REALLY good.

Here's another brain teaser:

Is TOAA also subject to this same formula?

After all, TOAA is simply a possibility realized, if you really think about it.

Is TOAA a possible end result of pre-determined set of variables combined within the equation of existence, or the prime possibilty that predates all the other variables?

Or both? (Alpha and Omega)

And if he is both, isn't it also a possibility for other variables within the equation to be both a creation and the creator?

<<"The stars are my children"
"Everything that is, I am"
"The Big Bang, or the Phoenix Force, whatever you want to call it"
"Your power derives from the lives of those not yet born. By employing it, you deny them existence"
"I am the spark of creation"
"A power second only to the creator himself...the power of life!">>

the first line is meaningless -- stars are children of the big bang, that's a given.

the second line is puzzling. that line is equating the pf with an omnipresent god, as gs has said along. that doesn't help your theory -- the multi entity you have said is not part of the universes, so it can't be 'everywhere'. and your 'universal enities' have always been associated with life. or gs WAS right and it IS the power of god in creation. i don't like the implications of it for either of us.

third line is a given -- i just don't like to think it was needed to start the multiversal big bang.

fourth line is fine, and fifth line is redundant.

the last line is again not great for either of us, but it doens't really impact either theory in any way.

some of that sounds like hyperbole, however. perhaps in the face of the changing pf most will be retconned? anyway, the quotes still fit with my theory (except for the line that gives both theories trouble).

<<You're confusing multiverse with being. You could exist outside the multiverse, even in the void, and still "be".>>

and you're thinking retroactively when you shouldn't be. COULD i exist (or rather, could i BE) in this 'void'? of course. problem is i WASN'T until the multiverse existed. there wasn't 'being' (the concept) until after the birth of the multiverse.

if the pf existed in this void as you suppose, with only the toaa, what 'states' existed for it to be birthed 'between'? besides, i like the notion of the same void WITHIN the multiverse giving rise to the abstracts and concepts. where do you suppose they came from?

for all your objections, you're own theory says that toaa will have directly created pf the before the multiverse, (a large leap, and why when he was more than capable of starting it himself?) created for the pf a 'room' for it to exist in, (why, isn't the void outside where you say it was born, good enough?) that the pf itself will have 2 manifestations (universal and multiversal, and again the multi entity has never been proven to exist).

in all, your theory is no more or less wild than my own. hmm, i think we need some sort of list of things that NEED explaining. if we had a list, we might be able to find a compromise and compare how effective our ideas are at clearing them up, and any problems each theory may have.

anyone feel like starting a list of all the things in existence that need explaining? we're here to clear 'em all up!! 😄

(just half kidding. a list WOULD be helpful, but it wouldn't be easy to come up with.)

Originally posted by illadelph12
This has gotten [B]REALLY good.

Here's another brain teaser:

Is TOAA also subject to this same formula?

After all, TOAA is simply a possibility realized, if you really think about it.

Is TOAA a possible end result of pre-determined set of variables combined within the equation of existence, or the prime possibilty that predates all the other variables?

Or both? (Alpha and Omega)

And if he is both, isn't it also a possibility for other variables within the equation to be both a creation and the creator? [/B]

It's very interesting, all this void stuff, considering that it's never appeared in a handbook entry about Phoenix before. All of the history before the bit about Feron and Necrom is new and unique to the entry in the most recent handbook.

It seems that the PF is the ultimate paradox-beginning and end, everything and nothing, create destroy. I wonder if the void is just the gap between nothingness and creation. It would make sense that the PF came from this "space" considering that such concepts mean little to beings like TOAA, PF and LT. This also means that if the PF does "derive" from the psyches of all living creatures, then that would include TOAA, and that it has to pre-date existence and creation and not appear after the fact. If it came after creation then there would be no void--the void becomes moot. [QUOTE]

The biggest issue with trying to discern WHY TOAA created the PF or allowed creation to come into existence is one that really can't be answered. It's basically because it wanted to. That's the only thing that I can think of. It's the same question that scholars of religion and philosphers and everyday have been asking since humans have been able to ask it: WHY?

I don't know that there really is an answer except the one I gave above--it just wanted to create something.

Originally posted by leonidas
"The stars are my children"
"Everything that is, I am"
"The Big Bang, or the Phoenix Force, whatever you want to call it"
"Your power derives from the lives of those not yet born. By employing it, you deny them existence"
"I am the spark of creation"
"A power second only to the creator himself...the power of life!">>

the first line is meaningless -- stars are children of the big bang, that's a given.

the second line is puzzling. that line is equating the pf with an omnipresent god, as gs has said along. that doesn't help your theory --

It supports my theory. The Big Bang = Phoenix Force = everything in the Universe, which is what I've been saying all along. The Multi-PF adds the instances of the PF manifestation to its allocated space in the multiverse. That part of Multi-Eternity (to become that universe's Eternity) asks "why", which activates that instance of the PF manifestation in the form of the Big Bang. The line fits in fine with MY theory...but it disproves your statement that there's no proof that the PF is the fuel of life.

the multi entity you have said is not part of the universes, so it can't be 'everywhere'. and your 'universal enities' have always been associated with life. or gs WAS right and it IS the power of god in creation. i don't like the implications of it for either of us.

There are no implications for me. I've always said that the Phoenix Manifestation is the sum total of the universe. Everthing that is...is it.

third line is a given -- i just don't like to think it was needed to start the multiversal big bang.

what multiversal big bang?

fourth line is fine, and fifth line is redundant.

Fuel and fuel. Those quotes are all there because you challenged Illa's claim that the PF is the fuel and composition of life, and therefore must pre-date it. If we are part of the universe, and the Phoenix is the spark of creation (big bang) that created everything that we are...then it was here before us.

the last line is again not great for either of us, but it doens't really impact either theory in any way.

It's fine for me...Multi-PF lobs the power of creation into the multiverse perpetually in the form of uninitialized universes. Either way, "power of creation" = proof of fuel. And fuel = proof of pre-dating.

some of that sounds like hyperbole, however. perhaps in the face of the changing pf most will be retconned? anyway, the quotes still fit with my theory (except for the line that gives both theories trouble).

It cant' fit in with your theory that life pre-dated the Phoenix if the Phoenix is the power of creation. If the Phoenix powers creation, as the quotes have clearly proven, and life created Phoenix...how could Phoenix power creation? Your theory can't work.

My theory states that TOAA created multi-PF, which in turn added locked universes with its essence (manifestation) to the multiverse. When unlocked by Eternity asking "why", it initializes the universe in the form of a Big Bang (manifestation) that in turn forms everything that is in the universe. That's my theory, and nothing in those quotes do anything but support it.

<<You're confusing multiverse with being. You could exist outside the multiverse, even in the void, and still "be".>>

and you're thinking retroactively when you shouldn't be. COULD i exist (or rather, could i BE) in this 'void'? of course. problem is i WASN'T until the multiverse existed. there wasn't 'being' (the concept) until after the birth of the multiverse.

Fair enough. SOMETHING could exist outside the multiverse, even in the void, and still "be". The Phoenix Force "is", and that was before the multiverse existed. Everything can be dead, or unborn, and there would still be an IS. It IS nothing. But it still IS.

if the pf existed in this void as you suppose, with only the toaa, what 'states' existed for it to be birthed 'between'?

The void within the multiverse, which "is", even though it's filled with nothingness until its populated with universes. Again, in support of my theory, the creation of each universe births a Phoenix Manifestation within the void of the multiverse. It took Eternity asking "why" to bring existence to the universe. Phoenix was there, in that void until the "why", which created a state of being for it....the universe.

besides, i like the notion of the same void WITHIN the multiverse giving rise to the abstracts and concepts. where do you suppose they came from?

Referring back to my theory - the abstracts were always within the universe. So it addresses that notion. But no abstract is multiversal..theyre all universal, which means that they require the birth of their universe to exist...the Phoenix Force (Big Bang).

for all your objections, you're own theory says that toaa will have directly created pf the before the multiverse, (a large leap, and why when he was more than capable of starting it himself?)

For the same reason any abstracts exist when he can do it himself...because he said so.

created for the pf a 'room' for it to exist in, (why, isn't the void outside where you say it was born, good enough?)

The White Hot Room may indeed be a void. There's no description of what it is, other than being outside creation.

that the pf itself will have 2 manifestations (universal and multiversal, and again the multi entity has never been proven to exist).

It has - Eternity has referred to a "greater self" in the past. Mult-Eternity isn't actually my invention. It's been mentioned before.

in all, your theory is no more or less wild than my own.

I've supported it with pretty extensive quotes. What supports your theory that TOAA said, "Oh my...self. Look, a Phoenix out of life! I never saw that coming!"?

hmm, i think we need some sort of list of things that NEED explaining. if we had a list, we might be able to find a compromise and compare how effective our ideas are at clearing them up, and any problems each theory may have.

anyone feel like starting a list of all the things in existence that need explaining? we're here to clear 'em all up!! 😄

(just half kidding. a list WOULD be helpful, but it wouldn't be easy to come up with.)

hahaha...my hands are full just in dealing with this...no way I'm writing a list of everything that needs to be explained!!!

<<There are no implications for me. I've always said that the Phoenix Manifestation is the sum total of the universe. Everthing that is...is it.>>

so then you say that part of your multi entity can die since it is part of the universe entity? then if they are the same, and part of the multi can die, why bother with your egg theory?

<<what multiversal big bang?>>

the universes start with a big bang that pf is responsible for, why shouldn't there be a big bang that started the multiverse?

<<It supports my theory. The Big Bang = Phoenix Force = everything in the Universe, which is what I've been saying all along. The Multi-PF adds the instances of the PF manifestation to its allocated space in the multiverse. That part of Multi-Eternity (to become that universe's Eternity) asks "why", which activates that instance of the PF manifestation in the form of the Big Bang. The line fits in fine with MY theory...but it disproves your statement that there's no proof that the PF is the fuel of life. >>

so where did multieternity come from? the newly created 'creation' is capable of developing a multiversal eternity, but not a pf? and actually the 'proof' you claim is circumstantial at best. it seems it is being allowed to draw from a source of allotted energy, allocated for 'potential' life in the future. just because it can 'tap' this well spring, does not mean the present life would simply . . . fade away/die were there no pf. and what about those univserses that never give rise to life? no pf? or just no universal pf?

as for the void -- a void can be many things. it need not be this primordial void of which we are discussing existing pre-multiverse. pre-multiverse there were no concepts, no abstracts, no states. there was just toaa. so again, what 2 states was the pf born between in a place where there was only one state, where toaa was all and everything? doesn't make sense that it was born pre-multi.

damn, i gotta get outta this thread . . . 🤪

I think this "void" is the point between possibility and realization, being as thought and existence are one. It's referred to as the "Pre-creation hesitation", i.e., the point before the realization of a possibility. The "void" between an action and it's reaction. The sum and substabnce of all possibilities before their realization in creation.

The place before "What if?" becomes "What is."

Basically: "Potential".

Originally posted by leonidas
damn, i gotta get outta this thread . . . 🤪

😆

This is the only worthwhile thread going right now. Believe me, I've looked.

Originally posted by leonidas
<<There are no implications for me. I've always said that the Phoenix Manifestation is the sum total of the universe. Everthing that is...is it.>>

so then you say that part of your multi entity can die since it is part of the universe entity?

If you're asking of Multi-Eternity can be destroyed, then the answer is yes. Multi-Eternity embodies the collection of universes that makes up the multiverse.

then if they are the same, and part of the multi can die, why bother with your egg theory?

I don't understand what you're trying to say. My egg theory is that the Phoenix of the White Hot Room (WHR) distributes universes into the infinite space allocated to the multiverse. Multi-Eternity, who can be destroyed, is the sentience of that multiverse, which in turn is the collection of universes placed there by the Phoenix of the WHR. If the multiverse is destroyed for whatever reason, Multi-Eternity dies with it.

<<what multiversal big bang?>>

the universes start with a big bang that pf is responsible for, why shouldn't there be a big bang that started the multiverse?

Because there's no such thing as the "multiverse" as a created entity. TOAA allocated infinite space for all universes to reside. These universes collectively are referred to as the multiverse. Multi-Eternity is the embodiment of every universe that exists, and manifests in each universe as Eternity, who can be destroyed in a single universe with no impact on other universes. But the "multiverse" itself is meaningless.

Think of multiverse as being analogous to "family" and universe being analogous to "person". A person is born via sex, pregnancy and delivery from the womb (big bang). A family is not...a family is a collection of related people, who were each born. But there's no formal "genesis" of a family.

so where did multieternity come from? the newly created 'creation' is capable of developing a multiversal eternity, but not a pf?

I've been lost this whole post by what you're trying to get at. I've been following you pretty well the entire thread until now. Multi-eternity is the embodiment of the (and I'm going to stop calling it a multiverse for the sake of clarity) collection of universes that make up creation. TOAA created Multi-Eternity to be that representation. Multi-Eternity has a separate manifestation for each universes and a macro-manifestation for the collection of universes, which usually deals with things that affect more than one universe.

and actually the 'proof' you claim is circumstantial at best. it seems it is being allowed to draw from a source of allotted energy, allocated for 'potential' life in the future. just because it can 'tap' this well spring, does not mean the present life would simply . . . fade away/die were there no pf. and what about those univserses that never give rise to life? no pf? or just no universal pf?

The PF IS the universe. It's the energy that permeates it. The consciousness of the phoenix manifestation can go away, but the Phoenix Force can't destroyed. It would be like wishing away all carbon on Earth - life would cease because carbon is a fundamental building block of life. So is the Phoenix Force.

I've given TONS of quotes and examples with Watchers, Galactus, Reed, even Phoenix herself all saying the same thing - Phoenix IS the universe, it's the energy of creation, and by using that energy of creation for other purposes, future life is DENIED. How can you possibly claim with a straight face that it's circumstantial?

as for the void -- a void can be many things. it need not be this primordial void of which we are discussing existing pre-multiverse. pre-multiverse there were no concepts, no abstracts, no states. there was just toaa. so again, what 2 states was the pf born between in a place where there was only one state, where toaa was all and everything? doesn't make sense that it was born pre-multi.

You're seeing the multiverse as this "entity" that it's not. The multiverse was born the moment there were two universes. And each universe...requires a big bang. And the big bang, as we should all know by now, is the name for the manifestation of Phoenix.

So did TOAA HAVE to create the Phoenix Force before deciding that he's going to create a collection of universes? No. He could have decided that he's going to create universes first, and THEN made the Phoenix Force. But there could be no multiverse without the universe, the universe could not have come to pass without a Big Bang, and there could be no Big Bang without the Phoenix Force.

<<If you're asking of Multi-Eternity can be destroyed, then the answer is yes. Multi-Eternity embodies the collection of universes that makes up the multiverse.>>

i was referring to your multi-pf entity. my bad for not being clear.

<<I don't understand what you're trying to say. My egg theory is that the Phoenix of the White Hot Room (WHR) distributes universes into the infinite space allocated to the multiverse. Multi-Eternity, who can be destroyed, is the sentience of that multiverse, which in turn is the collection of universes placed there by the Phoenix of the WHR. If the multiverse is destroyed for whatever reason, Multi-Eternity dies with it.>>

and so does the pf because there is no more potential for life.

<<Because there's no such thing as the "multiverse" as a created entity. TOAA allocated infinite space for all universes to reside.>>

??

why assume this? it's as logical to say the multiverse simply expands into the void. why does there need to be a allocated a set amount of space?

<<family is a collection of related people, who were each born. But there's no formal "genesis" of a family.>>

but each family will have derived from one source -- think of that first mating (adam and eve for sake of discussion) as the multiverse's start. without it, there would be no family. that also doesn't imply that the multiverse was fashioned linearly. just that it had a starting point.

<<You're seeing the multiverse as this "entity" that it's not. The multiverse was born the moment there were two universes.>>

it was born the instant there was a chance that the quantum foam tucked deep within plank time could have behaved differently -- ie -- it came into being when there was choice. but at one point, there would have BEEN no choice. it simply WAS. from that first spark, causality arose. by saying it came into existence at the moment there were 2 universes implies the same thing i'm saying in a different way.

you see, i knew we'd agree on something! 😄

<<I've given TONS of quotes and examples with Watchers, Galactus, Reed, even Phoenix herself all saying the same thing - Phoenix IS the universe, it's the energy of creation, and by using that energy of creation for other purposes, future life is DENIED. How can you possibly claim with a straight face that it's circumstantial?>>

you've given one. i've agreed that it is the force of creation in the big bangs. in fact i've really no issue with anything in your theory other than the eggs (which i see no need for and which don't seem entirely consistent in your theory) and the fact that the pf was born outside of the multiverse because there were no states outside the multiverse.

as for whether the pf is everything? it does say that in one line, but i already addressed that point. but by accepting the fact that the pf is everything . . . i don't know. can't prove it doesn't, but can't buy that it does. how could you argue that pf could ever lose if you believe all it needs to do is withdraw itself from an entity to 'kill it'? when phoenix battles, or the force is threatened, why not withdraw its power from the offending force and end its existence?

to believe it IS everything implies too much. i admit to having no evidence to support my denial, but deny it i do! 😄

Originally posted by leonidas
<<If you're asking of Multi-Eternity can be destroyed, then the answer is yes. Multi-Eternity embodies the collection of universes that makes up the multiverse.>>

i was referring to your multi-pf entity. my bad for not being clear.

<<I don't understand what you're trying to say. My egg theory is that the Phoenix of the White Hot Room (WHR) distributes universes into the infinite space allocated to the multiverse. Multi-Eternity, who can be destroyed, is the sentience of that multiverse, which in turn is the collection of universes placed there by the Phoenix of the WHR. If the multiverse is destroyed for whatever reason, Multi-Eternity dies with it.>>

and so does the pf because there is no more potential for life.

<<Because there's no such thing as the "multiverse" as a created entity. TOAA allocated infinite space for all universes to reside.>>

??

why assume this? it's as logical to say the multiverse simply expands into the void. why does there need to be a allocated a set amount of space?

<<family is a collection of related people, who were each born. But there's no formal "genesis" of a family.>>

but each family will have derived from one source -- think of that first mating (adam and eve for sake of discussion) as the multiverse's start. without it, there would be no family. that also doesn't imply that the multiverse was fashioned linearly. just that it had a starting point.

<<You're seeing the multiverse as this "entity" that it's not. The multiverse was born the moment there were two universes.>>

it was born the instant there was a chance that the quantum foam tucked deep within plank time could have behaved differently -- ie -- it came into being when there was choice. but at one point, there would have BEEN no choice. it simply WAS. from that first spark, causality arose. by saying it came into existence at the moment there were 2 universes implies the same thing i'm saying in a different way.

you see, i knew we'd agree on something! 😄

<<I've given TONS of quotes and examples with Watchers, Galactus, Reed, even Phoenix herself all saying the same thing - Phoenix IS the universe, it's the energy of creation, and by using that energy of creation for other purposes, future life is DENIED. How can you possibly claim with a straight face that it's circumstantial?>>

you've given one. i've agreed that it is the force of creation in the big bangs. in fact i've really no issue with anything in your theory other than the eggs (which i see no need for and which don't seem entirely consistent in your theory) and the fact that the pf was born outside of the multiverse because there were no states outside the multiverse.

as for whether the pf is everything? it does say that in one line, but i already addressed that point. but by accepting the fact that the pf is everything . . . i don't know. can't prove it doesn't, but can't buy that it does. how could you argue that pf could ever lose if you believe all it needs to do is withdraw itself from an entity to 'kill it'? when phoenix battles, or the force is threatened, why not withdraw its power from the offending force and end its existence? besides, if it is everywhere isn't it infinite? and something i forgot to ask -- what about this goblin force that devoured part of it? was that retconned?

to believe it IS everything implies too much. i admit to having no evidence to support my denial, but deny it i do! 😄

The only worthwhile thread created by a genius 🙂

Originally posted by Enigma W
The only worthwhile thread - created by a genius 🙂

Indeed 🙂