Most powerful physical feat

Originally posted by Astner
You're missing the point. The problem is that it can't be literally infinite because it had an end.

The reason I'm not accepting Galan's interpretation of "Ultraman didn't know what he was talking about," and "the book was retconned," is because it's not based on the comics. If you don't have to fall back on canon to motivate your excuses then you can excuse anything, which makes the excuses worthless.

It's odd because people are chastising Carver for doing this, and then doing it themselves.

Because it provides the context for the nature of the book. For the book to be infinite, the monkey would have to have written it sempiternaly. Which is contradicted by the fact that he died.

The fact that the word "infinity" is being repeated doesn't make it any more literal.

If I refer to the number of droplets in the ocean as "infinte," it doesn't matter whether I do it once or a hundred times, it's still going to be figurative.

Even Galan argued that we shouldn't scrutinize the feat, which to me is as good as a concession that the feat doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

But it IS based on comics.

Ultraman was literally, wrong:

Now, as you chastise us for not basing arguments on the comics - so where is your proof the monkeys are the same? You are adding your own interpretive excuses.

As for holding up to scrutiny, there is zero way mutations in DNA lead to reality warpers, magic users, weather controllers, and masters of the EM spectrum. Under scrutiny, there is zero way a mere human can master all forms of earth martial arts, some extraterrestrial forms, collect a dozen PhDs from top universities, be an Olympic level marathon runner, gymnast, weightlifter and sprinter etc etc, all by his mid-30s - but we handwave it.

And in THIS instance, the whole point is that we suspend belief, and the story of Superman does the impossible.

I mean, if it helps you understand it...again, Ultraman read to the end (not the end; important distinction) of the book, and saw the final chapter. He didn't ACTUALLY read to the end of the final chapter.

So, again:

A: Final chapter does not mean finite pages. I can have ten chapters, with the last chapter being infinite in length.

Originally posted by Astner
It also said that the book had an end.

That's a claim made by Mandrakk and Ultraman which was later proven false.

No. I'm falling back in the fact that the monkey who wrote it died, and Ultraman saying that he read the end of it. Both of these things are canon.

Ultraman claimed evil won in the end and was proven false.

Because figurative statements don't become literal by being repeated.

This is nonsense.

I'm referring to logical scrutiny, not nomological scrutiny. The latter can be disregarded, the former can't.

Anything can be disregarded lol. Especially in fiction.

Bench-pressing 5.972 sextillion tons is only more impressive than lifting 100 tons if we assume that logic holds. Because "5.972 sextillion tons > 100 tons" is a proposition that has to be evaluated logically.

Superman holding up 100 tons is as nonsensical as holding whatever sextillion tons because both are unrealistic. Same as fictional infinity.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
But it IS based on comics.

Ultraman was literally, wrong:

Now, as you chastise us for not basing arguments on the comics - so where is your proof the monkeys are the same? You are adding your own interpretive excuses.

As for holding up to scrutiny, there is zero way mutations in DNA lead to reality warpers, magic users, weather controllers, and masters of the EM spectrum. Under scrutiny, there is zero way a mere human can master all forms of earth martial arts, some extraterrestrial forms, collect a dozen PhDs from top universities, be an Olympic level marathon runner, gymnast, weightlifter and sprinter etc etc, all by his mid-30s - but we handwave it.

And in THIS instance, the whole point is that we suspend belief, and the story of Superman does the impossible.

I mean, if it helps you understand it...again, Ultraman read [b]to the end (not the end; important distinction) of the book, and saw the final chapter. He didn't ACTUALLY read to the end of the final chapter.

So, again:

I mean, your only 'rebuttal' is based on an assertion that is not proven anywhere, to the best of my knowledge (certainly not provided by yourself). If you cannot prove your assertion that the monkey is the same, then your entire argument falls down. [/B]

Neither saw the end because the story of comics will continue.

So it's false that Ultraman couldn't turn the pages to the book anymore? The story was written to the point of Superman being capable of doing anything per Darksaint, so, why couldn't the Supermen merging rewrite or create a new ending to the story on the last page Ultraman read?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85

Edit: the entire premise of the story, is that Superman can do the impossible@

Want to chalk it up as an outlier? Sure. But that is not what this thread is about. [/B]

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Ultraman was literally, wrong:

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Now, as you chastise us for not basing arguments on the comics - so where is your proof the monkeys are the same?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
You are adding your own interpretive excuses.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
As for holding up to scrutiny, there is zero way mutations in DNA lead to reality warpers, magic users, weather controllers, and masters of the EM spectrum. Under scrutiny, there is zero way a mere human can master all forms of earth martial arts, some extraterrestrial forms, collect a dozen PhDs from top universities, be an Olympic level marathon runner, gymnast, weightlifter and sprinter etc etc, all by his mid-30s - but we handwave it.

And in THIS instance, the whole point is that we suspend belief, and the story of Superman does the impossible.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I mean, if it helps you understand it...again, Ultraman read [b]to the end (not the end; important distinction) of the book, and saw the final chapter. He didn't ACTUALLY read to the end of the final chapter.[/b]

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I mean, your only 'rebuttal' is based on an assertion that is not proven anywhere, to the best of my knowledge (certainly not provided by yourself). If you cannot prove your assertion that the monkey is the same, then your entire argument falls down.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman holding up 100 tons is as nonsensical as holding whatever sextillion tons because both are unrealistic. Same as fictional infinity.

100 tons ain't that much irl --- two heavy tanks can easily weight more than that.

Originally posted by Astner
So what? It was the book they lifted. We're not talking about two different books. The book Ultraman lifted was the same book that Superman and Captain Marvel failed to lift.

I don't think it's necessary to prove that the monkey in Limbo who wrote the Infinite Book in Animal Man is the same as the monkey in Limbo who wrote the Infinite Book who was referenced in Superman Beyond, because they were never implied to be different. You're grasping at straws here.

No I'm not, the arguments I'm making are based off the fact that the monkey who wrote the book died and that the book had an end.

You're conflating logical scrutiny with nomological scrutiny and probability, they're not the same.

No, I understand the story perfectly well. I'm not the one having to differentiate between "the end" and "the end" for my interpretation to work. If "infinity" is interpreted figuratively (which is not an infringement on how the story is written) then the story is free of contradictions and makes perfect sense.

My arguments are based off logic and the scenes from Animal Man #25 and Final Crisis: Superman Beyond #2 that I've posted.

I think it IS necessary, tbh. A second monkey could have come after the one that died. So as your entire argument hinges on these monkeys being the same, prove it.

After all, the Anti Monitor ended the infinite DC multiverse.

And the book that was lifted.... contains multiple books. Just like a DVD I hold in my hands can contain multiple albums. You listening to the end of one album, and asserting you have listened to the end of the DVD, isn't correct if there was more that you hadn't listened to.

Especially if you're subsequently proved to be wrong as to the final song on that DVD.

Originally posted by Astner
You're missing the point. The problem is that it can't be literally infinite because it had an end.

Of course it can.

Prior to Crisis on Infinite Earths, there were an infinity of Universes, each with its own characters and stories -- thus an infinity of stories.

If you skip to the Anti-Monitor end chapter, you can see the end, where they are wiped out and then a new post-Crisis Universe is rebooted.

Thus, there are an infinity of stories, with an end, which is Anti Monitor.

How could you possibly not understand this?

I'm going to be honest here, I'm very satisfied with how this thread turned out.

The coutner-positions are so absurd that I'm fully content with letting them speak for themselves.

Still awaiting your monkey proof. But it seems we can just make any claim we want these days, and ignore the burden of proof.

Then turn around and claim victory when challenged.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So I have re-read the comic (thus far, all of my arguments that have defeated you have been based on random memories).

You have misunderstood the scan. You read that panel, and you interpret it as Quantum Superman saying the matter in Limbo is not there, or something.

But that is wrong.

Quantum Superman is telling Superman not to worry about combining with Ultraman. Earlier in the book, we are clearly told:

Not once, but twice:

Pretty important plot point, no?

But Quantum Superman is explaining to Superman that he wouldn't be annihilated, and to trust him - aftewards, he can still go save Lois:

Ultimately, even if they combine, Quantum Superman is telling him that in Limbo, they wouldn't be destroyed - because the memory will continue to live on. I mean, we clearly see outsiders (Superman, Ultraman, Shazam , Overman etc) interacting with *things*, so there is clearly *stuff* in Limbo.

So I don't understand what your argument is. Are you arguing that Limbo is just made of memories, no physical matter? Then what are the ships anchoring themselves to? What *trash* are the ships taking? What is the infinite computer of the Ultima Thule reading, interacting with, if it is just metaphysical memory? We even see Shazam pointing out a shard from the Rock of Eternity (and bonus, Overman handling some random tech):

[b]TL;DR: Limbo has physical matter, but Quantum Superman's statement was merely to reassure Superman that his sacrifice would not mean he would be destroyed, so he can still go on to save Lois afterward. So you are misunderstanding that scan and running with 'there is no physical matter in Limbo' - which is wrong, because Limbo DOES have matter.

Then we go onto the next part of your posts, that because Ultraman read to the end, it isn't infinite. Which is silly, because:

A: you can have a beginning and an end to infinity - there are infinite numbers between 1 &2; and

B: Ultraman was clearly wrong:

The Infinite Book contains every possible book (which was my question to you for six long years, lol):

So all Ultraman did, was read to the end of *A* book, where Mandrakk won. Obviously, Mandrakk...did not win -there is more than one story, after all. Evil did not win. [/B]

Carver, you asked. I delivered. Your rebuttal?

That's not a rebuttal, that's you in denial. He clearly states limbo is a living memory but you want to twist these words to mean something else. The cake I'm eating doesnt have icing - what darksaint does... "even though the cake doesn't have icing on it, that doesn't mean that the person who made the cake didn't put icing on it in the beginning and changed their mind and scraped it off". 🤷🏾‍♂️

Limbo doesn't have material things and it is a living memory - said on panel.

https://imgbb.com/G55cvDp

Ultraman read the last page, this was also said on panel. He didn't say he read the last story, he said he read the book until the end, the final chapter. Concrete evidence. Again, you wouldn't deny any of this if it was any other (Marvel) character.

I'll pose the same question/analogy to Astner that I posed to carver, then...

Anti-Monitor nearly destroyed an infinite amount of universes in a finite amount of time, and he did so by [primarily] wiping them out one by one. Does that mean the pre-crisis multiverse wasn't actually infinite, despite the numerous sources citing it as such?

I am now genuinely curious what your stance is here.

Originally posted by Astner
The reason I'm not accepting Galan's interpretation of "the book was retconned," is because it's not based on the comics.

Morrison's take on what the monkey was writing down clearly changed/evolved into something far greater in the decades between Animal Man and Final Crisis... As did his take on the Overvoid, as another example.

Originally posted by Galan007
I'll pose the same question/analogy to Astner that I posed to carver, then...

Anti-Monitor nearly destroyed an infinite amount of universes in a finite amount of time, and he did so by [primarily] wiping them out one by one. Does that mean the pre-crisis multiverse wasn't actually infinite, despite the numerous sources citing it as such?

I am now genuinely curious what your stance is here.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Honestly, I never really bought the idea of the DC Multiverse(or any company's multiverse for that matter) as being truly "infinite". If it were, all but 5 universes couldn't have been destroyed. To me personally, it seemed more like an "infinite potential/possibility" type thing. By the same token, I don't think the Beyonders really destroyed an infinite number of Celestials because that wouldn't have taken a really long time as the narration said, it would have taken an infinite amount of time. Don't get me wrong because I understand how and why many prefer to try to simply take such story elements with a grain of salt and even tried to adjust my thinking to go along with the rest of the forum in cosmic debates way back when, but for me it really does seem so nonsensical that it should be considered hyperbole.

😂

Originally posted by carver9
That's not a rebuttal, that's you in denial. He clearly states limbo is a living memory but you want to twist these words to mean something else. The cake I'm eating doesnt have icing - what darksaint does... "even though the cake doesn't have icing on it, that doesn't mean that the person who made the cake didn't put icing on it in the beginning and changed their mind and scraped it off". 🤷🏾‍♂️

Limbo doesn't have material things and it is a living memory - said on panel.

https://imgbb.com/G55cvDp

Ultraman read the last page, this was also said on panel. He didn't say he read the last story, he said he read the book until the end, the final chapter. Concrete evidence. Again, you wouldn't deny any of this if it was any other (Marvel) character.

So if it's not material....

What's Billy taking home?

Mathematically, there are no issues with mapping a countably infinite set (of pages) to a finite real interval (e.g. to within the finite thickness of the book). And this book can easily feature a well-defined first and last page, as well.

As a constructive example we can define our x,y,z-coordinate system such that the book's front page lies in the x=0 plane and the final page in the x=1 plane, giving the book a unit thickness. Now we can map our countably infinite set of pages to this interval by using the following function:

f: {1,2,3,....} --> (0,1),
f(k) = ( 2/π ) * arctan(k)

where k is the page number and f(k) its (x-)location within the book. For example, the positions of the first three pages would be:

f(1) = 0.5
f(2) = 0.704...
f(3) = 0.795...

We can now *extend* this map to include the front page (defined to have the page number 0) and the final page (+∞ ) as well:

g: {1,2,3,....} ∪ {0 , +∞ } --> [0,1],
g(k) = ( 2/π ) * arctan(k) for all finite positive k,
g(0) = 0,
g(+∞ ) = 1.

Thus, the front page would be found at x=0, and the final page at x=1, *and* the book would still have countably infinite number of pages.