Pre-retcon Amalgam Brothers discussion

Originally posted by Galan007
.

Can TOAA, (absolutely omnipotent/omniscient within Marvel),

create a boulder so heavy that he could not lift it?

Either way you answer proves that omnipotence in the literal sense is an impossibility, (even within comic-dom).

Originally posted by Thanos_THOTU
One of those omnipotent paradoxes would be the answer for that.
Can a Omnipotent being create a stone so heavy he cannot lift it?
Can he make himself more powerful?
Ect.

If the being could not make a stone that heavy, then he didn't carry out the given task due to lack of ability..... Which also means this being wasn't truly omnipotent.

It's a paradox for sure, but it also makes you question the concept of "true" omnipotence. 😬

Originally posted by Galan007
Well if a "truly omnipotent" being could make a stone so heavy he could not lift it, this means the being was not truly omnipotent.

If the being could not make a stone that heavy, then he didn't carry out the given task due to lack of ability..... Which also means this being wasn't truly omnipotent.

It's a paradox for sure, but it also makes you question the concept of "true" omnipotence. 😬

All we know is that other beings have been refered to as omnipotent.
And those have been refered to as supreme of all Marvel and DC, so if they arent omnipotent then no one in Marvel or DC is.

Originally posted by Thanos_THOTU
With fantasy you can make, and even surpass omnipotence.

Omnipotence:

(literally, "all power"😉, is power with no limits or inexhaustible, in other words, unlimited power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence

So if a being already has limitless power, then there would be no way to gain more power.

If this being was able to gain more power, then it was not truly omnipotent to begin with.

Imagination ...

Originally posted by Thanos_THOTU
Imagination ...

Originally posted by Galan007
I can't imagine a being with greater than omnipotent power, (if that's even possible). lsd

Originally posted by Thanos_THOTU
Logicaly no, imaginationly (or whatever you call it) yes.

Now that's pushing it...... Even by comic standards.

Originally posted by Galan007
Infinity + 1?

Now that's pushing it...... Even by comic standards.

Originally posted by Thanos_THOTU
Pretty much, and no I don't think it's punching it, not too far at least.

But using real logic, nothing can be greater than infinity, and nothing can have greater than omnipotent power.

But there can be more then one of each IMO.

Groups of infinity, like this:

1,2,4 1,2,4 1,2,4 1,2,4 ...

and larger sets, like say: 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 ...

but what infinite groupings of numbers have to do with 'power', and where marvel got the idea of doing this in the first place is beyond me...😕

Originally posted by Ethereal
Groups of infinity, like this:

1,2,4 1,2,4 1,2,4 1,2,4 ...

and larger sets, like say: 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 9,8,1,5,0 ...

but what infinite groupings of numbers have to do with 'power', and where marvel got the idea of doing this in the first place is beyond me...😕

Because, no infinite set of numbers could be greater than another infinite set of numbers.

If one set were greater then the other.... Then the smaller of the two was never truly infinite to begin with.

Infinity = Infinity...

There is no infinity + 1. 😂

IMO it was published to insult the intelligence of the readers.

Originally posted by Endless Mike
The Brothers weren't omnipotent, because they had trouble fighting each other, they weren't omniscient (or else they would already know the outcome of every fight before they set it up), etc.

Are you omnipotent? Omniscient? No?

Then how do you know?

You take Fighter A from Earth, strongest most unbeatable fighter to ever live, has beaten hundreds of people at the same time, just plain impossible to defeat.

He's essentially unbeatable because no one anyone knows about can defeat him. Unbeatable, just like Omnipotent, is a relative term that is based on context.

Now bring Fighter B from Mars, strongest and most unbeatable fighter to ever live, has beaten hundreds of people at the same time, just plain impossible to defeat.

He's essentially unbeatable because no one anyone knows about can defeat him. Unbeatable, just like omnipotent, is a relative term that is based on context.

Put Fighter A and Fighter B in a cage together, and either one is going to be better or they'll fight each other to a stalemate.

Originally posted by Nataku8188
Are you omnipotent? Omniscient? No?

Then how do you know?

You take Fighter A from Earth, strongest most unbeatable fighter to ever live, has beaten hundreds of people at the same time, just plain impossible to defeat.

He's essentially unbeatable because no one anyone knows about can defeat him. Unbeatable, just like Omnipotent, is a relative term that is based on context.

Now bring Fighter B from Mars, strongest and most unbeatable fighter to ever live, has beaten hundreds of people at the same time, just plain impossible to defeat.

He's essentially unbeatable because no one anyone knows about can defeat him. Unbeatable, just like omnipotent, is a relative term that is based on context.

Put Fighter A and Fighter B in a cage together, and either one is going to be better or they'll fight each other to a stalemate.

Originally posted by Galan007
I agree.

Of course you agree. I'm right. Omnipotent means limitless power. If something has yet to have shown a limit, than as far as perception is concerned, it's limitless. If I've lifted every set of weights you've ever asked me to lift without showing any strain, then as far as you know there is no limit to my strength. Is it actually limitless? No, but as far as you're perception is concerned it is. Just like the 'omnipotent' beings in comics, we have no way to truly know if they are omnipotent, we have just been told and lead to believe they are.

Undefeated isn't the same as omnipotent.

Omnipotent means you have no limits period, not just that you have shown none.

Originally posted by Galan007
I know, it was flawed from the beginning lol.

Because, no infinite set of numbers could be greater than another infinite set of numbers.

If one set were greater then the other.... Then the smaller of the two was never truly infinite to begin with.

Infinity = Infinity...

There is no infinity + 1. 😂

IMO it was published to insult the intelligence of the readers.

not sure if this has already been mentioned, but infinity doesn't necessarily equal infinity. there are strata of infinity. say you start out with one hundred dollars; your friend start's out with ninety. you are each given one dollar a day for infinite days. you will always have ten more dollars, even though you both have infinity monies. ja know?

Originally posted by Galan007
Well if a "truly omnipotent" being could make a stone so heavy he could not lift it, this means the being was not truly omnipotent.

If the being could not make a stone that heavy, then he didn't carry out the given task due to lack of ability..... Which also means this being wasn't truly omnipotent.

It's a paradox for sure, but it also makes you question the concept of "true" omnipotence. 😬

Originally posted by Juntai
Power should not be confused with strength in this regard. Without that misconception, this paradox doesn't exist.

If an omnipotent being wanted the strength to lift something, he should be able to will himself to have such strength.

So that paradox still holds true, even where strength is concerned.