Use of the terms 'multiverse' and 'omniverse'

The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe defines [their] multiverse as all universes in Marvel Comics and 'omniverse' as ALL universes of any fictional material, real life, and other actual universes. Whether or not 'omniverse' is entirely intended as a fictional construct, I do not know. I've read in battle threads both terms being thrown around. But, people need to realize that more people are familiar with 'multiverse' than 'omniverse', most likely including Marvel's writers. Even if they are familiar with both of the terms, I still think that confusion between them happens often and carries over into the comics. So when the writer uses 'omniverse' he could be using it in place of 'multiverse'. Comments?

Anyone? This is an interesting topic.

I do think there's some confusion sometimes but it's pretty clear if you look at it. Multi = several; the many universes that compose Marvel. Omni = all; all the universes in everything. Of course people could see all as all universe in Marvel and use omniverse instead of Multiverse but if people get informed and the term is used correctly, everyone eventually gets it right IMO

@Melab:

Here's a list of Marvel characters that reside in the omniverse.

Zom

Slorrioth

Shuma-Gorath

Cyttorak

Nebulos

Nemesis

Dormammu (moved to Splinter Realm)

Eternity (the multiverse)

Vishanti

Trion

There are alot others

Here is a list of characters that reside in the Multiverse (Eternity)

Cosmic Compass (Infinity, Death, Eternity, Oblivion)

Cosmic Balance (Master Order, Lord Chaos)

Cosmic Safeguard (Living Tribunal)

Celestials

Elder Gods

Proemial Gods

Pantheon Gods

Aliens

Mutants

Humans

InHumans

Spacial Dimensions: The multiverse is mainly shown as 3D (in the eyes of the characters), but can extend up to the 10-D consciousness of Eternity.

Spacial Dimensions: The Omniverse Universes can extend up to infinite spacial dimension and consciousness. (Extra-Dimension)

Its simple a universe is one universe, the multi-verse is a collection of similar universes like say the marvel or DC universes, The Omni-verse is the sum total of all existence including all fictional and actual universes that have, do or ever will exist.

@Jorgevysaid:

I do think there's some confusion sometimes but it's pretty clear if you look at it. Multi = several; the many universes that compose Marvel. Omni = all; all the universes in everything. Of course people could see all as all universe in Marvel and use omniverse instead of Multiverse but if people get informed and the term is used correctly, everyone eventually gets it right IMO

I made this thread to point out for battle debates that when the word "omniverse" is used in comics like when Mad Jim Jaspers is said to be a threat to the omniverse, the writer probably should have used "multiverse" instead because MJJ and the rest of Marvel's—and DC's and IDW's and Dark Horse's—properties are nothing but abstract constructs encoded, I'll say, as ink dots on a piece of paper or even electrical charges representing the bits that comprise a PDF file or a CBR file. Insomuch as the characters depicted in comic books are concerned, real life does not exist. It sounds like I am pointing out the obvious but this actually [somewhat] relevant.

Turning back to why I made this thread, I have read discussions on this website and Killer Movies where sides will assert that some character is more powerful than another because the first is said to be an omniversal threat on-panel while the second is only called a multiversal threat. The deeper problem here is that while canon is established through published material, common sense can be used to modify the premises on which the argument is based. So if, ehh, let's say a versus debate is posted for Dormammu (once referred to as a multiversal threat) and Mad Jim Jaspers (once referred to as an omniversal threat), it can be said that considering MJJ to be an omniversal threat may be wrong because the writer misused a term. I think frequenters of this website would call that "plot-induced stupidity" or "writer-induced stupidity". I'd opt for "language-induced stupidity" or "semantically-induced stupidity. This is all stuff I am trying to incorporate into my theory of fiction (see this post). It's kind of a silly thing to think about, but I feel that if someone can make better arguments through it, then it will have succeeded.

@joshmightbe said:

Its simple a universe is one universe, the multi-verse is a collection of similar universes like say the marvel or DC universes, The Omni-verse is the sum total of all existence including all fictional and actual universes that have, do or ever will exist.

There is that definition, yes, though if I were to use the term "omniverse", I would use it to mean the collection of all connected fictive elements of a particular <I do not know what word to use here>. I am not confused. I just wanted to state that the evidence used in battle debates is not always reasonably interpreted.

@melab: Omniverse could also mean all Marvel Universes that are, were and ever will be. The word Omni is relevant to whatever you're talking about. For instance, in Marvel the One-Above-All is considered Omnipotent, but he clearly does not have any power in the real world even though Omni means 'all'.

That being said, I think that is also true for Omniverse it simply means 'all' in respect to that universe or fictional universe.