Incorrect. The Giga Slave doesn't destroy the universe at all. The Giga Slave is a spell that draws power from the source of creation, the Lord of Nightmares. That's why it can damage and even slay demon lords. However, if the spell is miscast it summons the Lord of Nightmares who's desire is to return all the worlds she created to the sea of Chaos. When summoned she will proceed by destroy the world, the exception to that was the occurrence in in Slayers NEXT.
I'm not saying that, I'm saying "nothing has shown to be greater, and this character can perform any task that he decides to do with no effort, therefore, in the context of the story, he is functionally omnipotent."
Didn't I just say that? That's why these omnipotence debates are pointless.
Frieza didn't create the universe and everything in it, and he can't warp reality.
You really want to play this way?
Fine.
The One Above All in Marvel was represented by Jack Kirby when the Fantastic Four visited him in Fantastic Four #511. But that's not his only appearance.
You're ignoring the paradoxical nature of being able to preform any task. The character in question hasn't shattered the framework of logic nor is it indicated that he could if he so desired.
Once again you missed the point, it's not only omnipotent versus omnipotent battles that are inconclusive, even omnipotent versus non-omnipotent battles are. The structure of reasoning relies on that there are no illogical factors in play. You could define it so that omnipotents would always win against non-omnipotents but that's a result of postulation and not logical reason.
Which doesn't bring him further from omnipotence than if he could. Once again, feats within the framework of logical coherence aren't within reach of illogicalities.
I never argued that The-One-Above-All could defy logic. He has never done so and there are no implications of that he is able to.
That's your interpretation and a very generous one at that. I on the other hand--due to his brief appearance--would analyze the scenery more critically.
Actually there is, you can't appoint Frieza as an omnipotent and then disregard any attempts of refuting the claim because the concept in question isn't logically bounded. If you provided credible evidence of that the author intended for said character to be capable of operating outside of logic then you've efficiently proved it.
Last edited by Astner on Jun 22nd, 2010 at 08:11 PM
The Chousein were able to perform infinite computations in a finite amount of time. Does that not defy logic?
You're assuming that it's possible to prove that any given character is omnipotent in the first place.
If we were to do a serious TOAA vs. Kami Tenchi thread, TOAA would win due to better feats/more expansive creation. It would not be simply proven, but it would be the most likely result given the available evidence.
If an omnipotent being is infinitely beyond any non-omnipotent being, then nothing could "bring any character closer or farther to omnipotence" other than becoming omnipotent or losing it. My point is that there are some indications that we can use to determine candidates for omnipotence, but it can never actually be proven. This is why discussing the subject of omnipotence is pretty pointless.
Red Herring. That has nothing to do with the point of my post, which was to claim that you can't use scenes obviously made for comedy to downplay characters, or I could say Goku is weak because he's afraid of needles and getting beat up by Chichi.
They're joke scenes. What about the What If? comics where they present a bunch of joke scenarios like Thor speaking in a Swedish accent, Black Bolt getting hiccups, Hulk being yellow and Thing being blue, Ghost Rider being the proprietor of a fast food restaurant, Cylcops' beam firing out of his ears instead of his eyes, Uatu growing hair, Conan turning into Bing Crosby, Hulk's pants ripping when he transforms, and then "What if you (the reader) went to the movies and had to sit behind The Leader?"
The information you've provided is errorous. Even worse, you're fully aware of this considering that this specific instance have been brought up and discussed.
The elasped time was stated to be infinite.
(please log in to view the image)
Even so, there's nothing illogical with the concept of infinity. Just like finite values--infinite values are an aspect of nature. So even if the data was correct, the reasoning for its intent wasn't.
Depending on the criterias for proof, it is.
Which would be just as reasonable a result as if you pitted any other characters against eachother and applied the same reasoning.
Though the main sentiment of One Above All's power comes through scaling, and not on-panel feats.
Thus directly falsifying any attempt of proving it through feats and character position without any exception.
Why would omnipotence be a necessity in the first place? If your intent is to prove that a character's powers aren't restricted by logic then it's on you to bring forth sufficient evidence. However, to be able to operate outside of logic doesn't mean that one is unsurpassable.
You could. But that argument wouldn't be based off the source material. In the 23rd Budokai it was shown that Goku was beyond the harm of Chi-chi and nowhere in the manga does Chi-chi "beat up" Goku. The closes thing to a argument would be when Chi-chi hit Roshi with a fan when he makes a humorous comment on why Porunga denies the wish of retrieving Goku. Then again Chi-chi was a trained matrial artist and perhaps not that far from Roshi in terms of power.
Even if you were to resort to this, there's sill a difference. The scene in question was for all intent serious. Tenchi's life was threaten, a child had just lost her parents and the universe was in peril. Furthermore, this is the only appearance of "Kami Tenchi", unlike the examples you've provided each and every characer brought up has a established persona and condition making it easy to point these "joke scenes". Then there's the issue of the canonicity of said events.
However if your insisting that it was a "joke scene" because of the character's supposed unsurpassable state you'd be begging the question.
It's not as if this scene is unambiguous in terms of interpretation.
Yet they obviously stopped at one point and tried to actually perform experiments. Therefore that still implies the ability to nest infinite time within finite time.
Not to any reasonable degree of certitude.
Not if the power of those characters is ill-defined/unknown.
Nothing wrong with that.
Way to contradict yourself. You just said that it was possible to prove omnipotence after I told you it wasn't.
Of course not, I was saying that discussing "which omnipotent is more omnipotent" is stupid and will get nowhere. This is actually probably one of my least favorite subjects to debate because it's so ****ing pointless.
Several times he expressed fear at doing something (usually having Gohan train instead of study) that would make Chichi angry at him.
Not really. Everything had just been fixed.
What If?s are officially canon as alternate universes.
Furthermore, using that piece of dialogue to try to prove anything is retarded, he was just speaking casually to someone who didn't understand his true form. Obviously he was trying to present himself as friendly and "normal", not "I AM GOD, WORSHIP ME YOU PATHETIC CREATURES".
They directly state that the experiment took place over a infinite amount of time. You're once again ignoring plot exposition. Furthermore you're a hypocrite for accepting that the calculations were infinite, but dismissing the time elapsed, even though they're in the same sentence.
Wrong. If the criteria for proof is author exposition and that's provided it's proved beyond any reason of a doubt.
There are a lot of characters with unknown capabilities. Uchiha Madara for one and I've yet to see you take this into account.
That would be contradiciting you. Not myself.
Though you might be getting at that I said that you could prove it depending on criteria, which is true. However if the criteria solely take feats and power scaling into account then it's impossible to prove.
So if omnipotence isn't a necessity--and through your criteria impossible to prove--why would you use it as a argument
Fear of being beat up? Or something that might well be the fear of not getting any dinner? The only things that might be consider a beat-up in the manga is when kid Goku first picks up Chi-chi and taps his foot in-between her legs and she pushes him Jindujun.
A typical gag beat-up scene in Dragon Ball would be when Bulma picks up a submachine gun and shoot Goku in the back.
(please log in to view the image)
The keyword being other universes. Even the Fantastic Four movie is canon and takes place on Earth-121698 according to the comic adaptation.
Oddly enough out of that breif and casual appearance you constructed a omnipotent and undisputable god.
If it were infinite, they would still be doing them. (This was mentioned in the English dub but not in the original).
Except tons of authors say their characters are omnipotent when they are clearly not. For example, narration often said Marvel Odin was omnipotent.
The fact that he needs to gather the Bijuu for his plans and try to cast a sharingan on the moon instead of just hypnotizing everyone on earth instantly with a thought puts a pretty clear limit on his capabilities.
So make up your mind. Do you think it can be proven or not?
A necessity for what?
Hence you admit the existence of gag scenes. Good, we're starting to make progress.
And your point is? They're still part of overall continuity. Which means that gag scenes that cannot be subject to objective analysis exist.
I already said that if an even higher being is revealed he would lose his status (and considering the nested complexity nature of the hyperdimension, this is actually a plausible scenario). However, within the context of the story (this is the part you keep failing to understand), Kami Tenchi is, for all effective purposes, omnipotent.
Don't apply non-canon material. The calculations are as infinite as the amount of time it took to do them.
That's a equivocation fallacy. You're insinuating that the author had your absurd definition in mind. "The queen bee's omnipotence." Is a literally correct statement. However, if the author elaborates on the mechanics of the character's power--that's another principle entirely.
You're a hypocrite. Your intent and arguments precedes the reveal of Madara's powers and grand scheme.
For a functional forum dedicated for cross fiction battles.
Many gag scenes can well be objectivly analyzed. Goku survived submachine gun fire as a child, for one. Then again, you've further yet to prove that what you're referring to was a gag scene to begin with.
There is no evidence or implications whatsoever that Kami Tenchi could preform any feat he desired nor that he could defy logic.
I wasn't, using the non-canon material of the English dub would actually invalidate the point I am trying to make. Please work on your reading comprehension.
In the original Japanese, after saying that they did infinite trials and experiments, Washu then said that they did them in their minds.
In the same scene in the English dub, Washu's line was changed to saying that they weren't really infinite, because if they were they would still be doing them now.
The original implies that they can perform infinite calculations within a finite amount of time (as evidenced by the fact that they finished).
What god-like beings in fiction ever have the mechanics of their powers discussed in-depth? It's always, "they're god/cosmic/reality warpers, so they can break the laws of physics and do stuff just by willing it".
What? Are you saying that I'm somehow cheating by using evidence from the manga currently instead of when Madara was first introduced? That's retarded.
If you're trying to say that any random character who we don't know much of anything about could be omnipotent, that's still a pretty stupid argument.
Say there's a character that appears in a comic or manga in just one panel. Let's call him Bob. Now we never saw Bob fail to do anything (or even do anything in the first place), so can we say he is omnipotent? While it is possible, it's an utterly ridiculous thing to simply assume. Even if the author wrote a sidenote saying "Bob is omnipotent" we still usually don't buy that if there is nothing in-story to back it up.
Now if it was revealed that Bob had created the universe/multiverse/whatever, and seemingly knew everything, and could warp reality, then the claim would become more plausible.
Are you saying that the concept of omnipotence should be disregarded completely when comparing different series in vs. threads?
Because that's exactly the same thing I've been saying. I've been saying that Kami Tenchi is omnipotent from a literary perspective, aka Within the context of the story. Why do you keep ignoring that simple phrase?
Objectively analyze the "What if you were in a movie theater and had to sit behind The Leader" scene, please. Go ahead, I need a laugh.
It was obviously informal speech, as seen by his attitude. In fact one of the things he did was kiss Misaki, do you think a supreme being would really feel a need or desire to do that? It was just for show.
He could perform any feat Within the context of the story. I already explained how the weaker Chousein defied logic. If you're going to ask "can he beat TOAA/The Presence/*insert random cosmic being from another series here*, then the question you are asking is no longer within the context of the Tenchi Muyo! series.
Are you implying that the scan provided--even though containing subtitles--isn't of the original Japanese episode? Because it is and I advice you to rewatch the episode.
The time elapsed was still explained to be infinite.
The key sequence being "English dub", you might as well argue that Raditz's speed is beyond that of light. The English dubbing has no influence on the source material.
No, the original outright explains that the time elapsed was infinite. Considering how they existed outside of the regular universe there might have been a way for them to create the necessary conditions for a transfinite passage of time in their minds.
To my knowledge, none. Regardless you argument is a false attribution fallacy: Just because it isn't explained doesn't mean that you can fabricate your own concepts and treat them as if they were of the source material. Furthermore, breaking the established laws of physics or even the laws of nature isn't the same as breaking laws of logic.
No. I'm saying that you didn't account for Madara's capabilities before they were revealed.
Not necessarily omnipotent, but a factor that could tip the scales in the Naruto universe's favor.
The problem is semantical, omnipotence has more than one meaning. If the author explains what he means with omnipotence then that could in fact be used as a valid argument for it.
No it wouldn't, logical feats doesn't work as arguments for illogical omnipontence.
In cross battle forums with focus on feats, yes.
Because what you're trying to concoct is a general acceptance of that said character is illogically omnipotent, even though there are no form of evidence supporting the premise.
You even used his supposed illogical omnipotence as an argument for why he would defeat the original Beyonder.
All we know is that he's beyond the chousin, we don't know if he's supreme, and even if he was it still wouldn't be an argument for his illogical omnipotence.
This is wrong, even though you openly ignore the source material what you're arguing for doesn't defy logic I explained this once already:
So you do admit that if the criteria of proof is based off feats then the Living Tribunal trumps "Kami Tenchi" beyond any reason of a doubt?
Last edited by Astner on Jul 6th, 2010 at 05:55 PM
Any finite amount of time can be split into an infinite number of pieces, if cut into an infinite number of pieces.
You can also have an infinite number of time-continuums in each time slice, so that it can be an infinite number of dimensions, if you really really really wanted to get pedantic about it.
A supreme being saying that they ran an infinite # of tests means that, for some arbitrary time relative to our perception, and eternity took place to run those tests.
Also, learn the difference between a scan and a screencap.
Explain how you can complete something that took an infinite amount of time without defying logic.
Please pay attention, I explained this in the last post. I was not using the English dub at all, I only mentioned it because I figured you or someone else might bring it up to contradict what I was saying. The English dub CONTRADICTS the claim I am trying to make. The original SUPPORTS it.
Furthermore, not really relevant, but you should know that the scene with Raditz has been redubbed and corrected on TV and current DVDs.
Explain how that is not a violation of logic.
You're not even addressing the relevant points anymore.
Let's go back over this point in our discussion:
- You say that word of the author is enough to prove omnipotence
- I counteract that with examples of Odin and Darkseid being called omnipotent, when they are clearly not
- You say that's completely different, and author's word of a character's omnipotence is still acceptable if they explain their powers
- I point out that the various "omnipotent" fictional characters almost never have the mechanics of their powers explained.
- You go off into some irrelevant tangent about me making up powers for them and get confused about the whole point.
So anytime a new character is introduced, if we don't know anything about them or their powers, then it's logical to consider that they might be omnipotent?
Now you're backpeddling and changing the entire focus of your argument. You were attempting to question my attribution of Kami Tenchi as being omnipotent by claiming Madara as a character of unknown capabilities could also be omnipotent. If you've dropped that claim, then it doesn't matter how powerful he is or might be otherwise.
Even if the author says "Bob is omnipotent, he has absolutely no limits whatsoever and can do anything at all", that can't just be accepted without precedent to back it up. For example, if the comic Bob appears in has a city buster as its greatest shown power, then the claim should be treated very skeptically.
And logical author statements do? If we are talking about logic-transcending omnipotence, then it's impossible to prove or disprove, as logic is the only tool we have to evaluate such a claim. Therefore, attempting to objectively establish such a thing is pointless. In the case of Bob, and every other case in which I have stated someone or something to be omnipotent in this thread, I mean omnipotent within the context of the story.
You don't have to accept it, but it is implied within the context of the story. As I said, it's impossible to ever prove omnipotence, so trying to convince someone else of it would be pointless.
First of all, that was 4 years ago. Believe it or not, people can change their stances on issues. I also used to think that Naruto could beat Luffy if he had a kunai. I gave up the concept of objectively provable omnipotence a long time ago.
However, I would still argue that it would be possible for Tenchi to beat Beyonder, for the same reason I believe Lucifer Morningstar could beat him: He's much smarter. Beyonder was tricked and exploited by "lesser beings" all the time. However, that is neither here or now.
Irrelevant, the existence of even one gag scene that can't be objectively analyzed is enough to prove my point.
Like I said, if another, higher being appears, then he loses his title. But for now he's supreme in Tenchiverse as he created the creators of the multiverse.
Explain how it's possible to run infinite simulations in your mind and finish them.
As the Living Tribunal is not an anime character, and the topic of this thread is "who is the most powerful anime character", such a discussion would be irrelevant and off-topic.
In Einstein's theory of general relativity, place the observer in the singularity of a black hole and then let a unit of time of choice (Planck time, second, minute, hour, etc.) pass for the observer then remove the observer from the singularity and voila. Of course, this requires that the universe and the black hole to remain intact during the observer's visit. For the reverse effect you'd have to use a more theoretical model such as white hole.
There are of course easier alternatives, moving at c for one.
For the third time:
Given what the author explained what he meant with omnipotence since it's an ambiguous (has more than one meaning) term.
Given the lack of clarification it isn't incorrect as you're implying. It doesn't accord with your interpretation but that's it.
And I stand to that.
Which means that we "almost never" can truly know its power considering the fact that omnipotence can range from a politician's influence to the illogical omnipotence pondered by philosophers.
You forgot the step where you said that unless we know the extent of a character's power we should wait until those extents are known before involving said character in threads. In which I pointed out your hypocrisy and double standards.
No, unless we know anything about them any given argument would be a slipperly slope fallacy. Unless to a reasonable extent known, they shouldn't be debated at all.
No, I said that Madara might have been powerful enough to tip the scales against--for the sake of argument--say Bleach. It might be a bad example since "that ship has sailed" and we know Madara's capabilities better now than then. But it's still a valid point.
Why? There's no reason to doubt the author unless it to some degree contradicts the source material, and when it does it has to be dealt with on a case-to-case basis. Just as contradictory feats.
The author transcends the story, the author may well establish that a character can draw a square triangle but he wouldn't be able to draw it on paper and credit it to the character. Furthermore whether or not a character is "omnipotent within the context of the story." is irrelevant. Because the vast majority of the battles aren't within the "context of the story" to begin with.
I know that some people are open to changes, sadly you're not one of them. You'll have to excuse me for pointing out that you were wrong.
Now, that was hardly the point of the addressment, now was it?
No, it only serves to prove that one (or some) can't be objectively analyzed. By the same means, the panel previously posted proves that some can be used for objective analysis. Justifying my stance of that "some"--in fact--can be analyzed objectively.
And with "multiverse" you refer to the 11 dimensional (universal in context of the story) cluster as opposed to Marvel's infinite dimensional multiverse.
Of course you avoid to point this out in hopes of that people would associate its scale to Marvel's.
I suspected you'd wriggle yourself out of that one, but fair enough. Take Mokona from Magic Knights of Rayearth, Cardcaptor Sakura, List of Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle, etc. instead.
Don't just throw out the names of fallacies when you get proven wrong about something. I already explained what I meant to you twice. How am I misinterpreting your argument?
Also, I see you finally realized your error about why I mentioned the English dub, but instead of conceding on that point and admitting your mistake, you just didn't respond to it, hoping I wouldn't notice.
There's the rub, dude. Black holes decay eventually due to Hawking Radiation. Therefore, the black hole would have evaporated before infinite time could pass.
No evidence they exist.
That would make you frozen in time, so no time would pass for you at all.
That's not an answer. Of course it does not defy logic for things to be infinite, but to perform infinite calculations and finish, it is illogical. It's like the joke "Chuck Norris counted to infinity twice".
Does it make you feel smart to include the definitions of simple words with your posts?
So you arbitrarily define standards to which examples must adhere to. That's called "moving the goalposts".
Somehow I don't think that when Odin is blowing up galaxies and shaking the universe, the narrator is using the word to refer to his political power.
Now this is a strawman. I never said such a thing. Obviously, we can't use a character if there is too much about them that is unknown, but if we have a general idea of what they can do, we can use it.
Yet you were claiming that Madara could be considered omnipotent when we didn't know anything about him.
It's an irrelevant point. If we were in a discussion about British history, you could say that the distance between the earth and the sun is ~ 150 million km. That would be a "valid point", but it would have absolutely no bearing on the current topic of discussion.
You're assuming that authors don't regularly engage in hyperbole, aka "Haku is lightspeed, Itachi's water bullets are lightspeed, Jiraiya is a mountain buster, etc." all found in the Naruto databook. If you want to believe that crap, fine, but it's not sufficient evidence as it is not properly reflected in the source material.
Author says "character can ignore logic".
Author then says "character can do X"
Statement A makes statement B unreliable, as it is a formulation of logic.
It's like asking whether "This sentence is false" is a true or false sentence.
It's relevant in the original context I mentioned it.
Not wrong, I merely changed my point of view. As it would be pretty much impossible to prove those claims to be right or wrong on any convincing level, as the notion of illogical omnipotence is too abstract.
Simply clarifying my current stance on the issue, as you were incorrect about it.
Which is pointless, as if you admit the existence of gag scenes that are not subject to objective analysis, then you cannot prove the one your argument is based on is without further evidence, which you do not have.
No, I mean the at least 11 core universes, each one far more expansive and complex than the previous to the point where a being from one wouldn't even be able to conceive of the next, as well as a great many other universes and dimensions, such as Washu's jar, the "small universes" referred to by the scientists in GXP, the 2 universes in Dual, the universe in Isekai no Seikishi Monogatari, etc.
*snip*
No I don't. Marvel has an Omniverse, that's the biggest "verse" I've ever seen in fiction.
I also love how the scan you posted disproved one of your most common arguments, that the dimensions in Tenchiverse's hyperdimension are not real universes. The scan even says that universes are commonly referred to as dimensions. That makes you a hypocrite.
Neither do I, in fact I tend to explain the fallacy rather than pointing it out. But when repeated time after time, eventually rather than repeating it once more I'll point it out.
Because the location: "in their minds" has nothing to do with the time elapsed.
Lets backtrack:
Your argument is that the Chousin was able to preform a infinite amount of calculations in a finite amount of time.
Here you're implying that the time wasn't infinite and claim that it was mentioned in the English dubbing and not the original.
I dropped the argument because it seemed as if you had entangled yourself in lies and kept on trying to twist from that argument into something that could be considered a rational thought. I didn't drop it in pity or mercy but rather because I thought it seemed transparent enough for even the simplest of minds to see through. But if you insist, please explain what you meant in the quotation above, because judging by your attitude what you mean can't have been what you wrote.
I'm aware, I pointed it out:
There's theoretical evidence, for what it's worth.
Wrong. Motion is relative. If a character moves at c, it will for the character seem as the universe is moving by at c hence his surrounding will seem to have stopped in time, vice-versa. It's called twin paradox and it depends on which system, the environment's or the character's that adjusts to the other's initial frame of reference. If the character stops moving, then he'd be the one who've stopped in time. If the environment speeds-up then to the character's speed, then it will be what have stopped in time.
Of course we're dealing with fiction and there might be natural ways of dealing with these problems even if there wasn't an explanation (which there clearly is).
It's not illogical. If the universe is infinite, and expanding, which is two out of three current models it became infinite at the instance of the Big bang.
If you count with a hyperreal number rate you'd reach infinity as soon as you've started counting. If you're given a infinite amount of time you'll never reach a maximum number at any point in time but at the same time you'll never reach a end in time, hence infinity.
(please log in to view the image)
Of course, that's only if you decide to take "infinity" as defined in a mathematical sense rather than one of the literal definitions. Such as:
"2 : an indefinitely great number or amount <an infinity of stars>"
I rather define what I mean when seeming vague then repeat myself.
Incorrect. I'm not making an argument, but rather explain the possibilities you must adhere to. In fact there is no need for me to make an argument because by saying (paraphrasing) "The author is wrong because he said that Odin was omnipotent when he's clearly not." you're committing the equivocation fallacy.
And neither was the rhetorical example posted for that purpose, but rather to prove that there's more than one meaning to the word omnipotence. If you have good reasons to believe that the author's intention was that Odin could accomplish any feat he desired without hindrance I'd like you to share those reasons.
You did:
Even when "general ideas" are insufficient, e.g. in close calls?
No, I claimed that he could possibly be powerful enough to tip the scales against other Shonen titles.
And I assume that you're the one to decide whether or not you find it to properly reflect the source material? Regardless I've come across attempt of explaining these "hyperbole" statements, some of which I find plausible explanations.
Are you suggesting that just because a character can ignore logic he can't abide by it if he so pleases?
I'd like you to rephrase the context?
Incorrect in what, that in fact you were wrong? Since I have no memory of that writing that it was your current belief.
Incorrect.
(please log in to view the image)
The gag scene above can be analyzed objectively. Goku is damaged by bullets from a submachine gun, but he can withstand them. It's supported by the fact that Goku withstood bullets from Bulma in the first chapter and when he took bullets from Colonel Silver's revolver.
11 core universes is pretty much established as the hyper-dimension. You could add the universes in Washu's jar, but it would still be insufficient.
KMC Community Forums
Jun 22nd, 2010 07:53 AM
