superboyprimeonejillion

The Beyonder is outside of the Marvel Universe. The whole metaphysical argument doesn't apply to the Beyonder because that's how it was intended. TOAA is the omnipotent figure of the Marvel Universe, whereas the Beyonder was designed to be the omnipotent figure of all the multiverse -- DC, Image, Marvel, anything. The Beyonder is literally the embodiment of everything. He's the most powerful fictional character ever.

@shawnbaby: We all understand that the authors intent was for Flash to move a hair slower than the speed of light.. The issue is that he didn't, he traveled much faster than the speed of light to save these people. This is the underlying issue that we're all understanding: Flash traveled faster than the speed of light to save these people and contradicted the authors intent. The authors intent to make Flash slower than the speed of light is clear, but it is also clear through the narration itself that he did save 500,000 people in .0000001 seconds. From that we (as proven by my statements earlier) simply must deduce that Flash traveled faster than the speed of light, because if he did not, the story loses the logic (yes there is logic in moving faster than the speed of light). If we base everything on the authors intent, half of the feats we know can thereby be nullified because we have no clear understanding of the authors intent. Battles aren't determined by the authors intent, they're determined by feats, and what happened in these panels is a clear feat that contradicts the authors intent: Flash traveled faster than the speed of light (much faster) to save those people. Nothing more... and nothing less.

The authors intention plays a big role in everything, but the issue is the feat itself is contradictory towards the basic rules of logic, which every story must follow. Through intent, we'd never be able to compare strength among heroes (through intent Bart would probably even be the fastest Flash), but decoding the authors intent doesn't win battles, feats do. And even the authors intent is a little murky, since it was also HIS doing of putting in the jumbo numbers and the impossible task.. we can't even correctly deduce the authors intent.

@shawnbaby: There's a difference between the examples you brought up and the panel we're talking about. A human punching a bullet out of the air is logical (and actually it's possible, Chinese warriors did it in the early 1900's), and so is getting bitten by a radioactive spider. It makes sense, there's a logic and syllogistic argument in the process. For example, the spider is radioactive. Because the spider is radioactive, if it bites someone, that person gains superpowers. Peter Parker was bitten and gained super powers. That is a logical process, you can process it in your mind because it's within the bounds of reason, it's just extremely unrealistic. However, these panels and the rules given are not logical and CANNOT make sense together. Rule 1: Flash does not travel faster than the speed of light and Rule 2: Flash cannot save those people without travelling faster than the speed of light. Conclusion: Flash saves those people. ??? These rules are in direct conflict with each other because they completely contradict each other. To make sense out of the conclusion we nullify the slower than light lines and assume he saved those people because it's the only scenario that's logical. Flash saving those people while moving slower than the speed of light is a completely illogical feat, it's like buying 10 apples from a store that absolutely has none. At least the other feats (human punching a bullet, spider) you can make sense out of in that you can comprehend it, but if you do not assume that Flash does travels faster than the speed of light the feat is not logical and is not comprehensible.

@shawnbaby: More clearer than the authors intent to make Flash slower than the speed of light is Flash moving faster than the speed of light to save half a million of those people. There's a difference between a human breaking mountains with his bare hands and the panels shown above. At least the concept of breaking a mountain is something we can process, there is simply no explanation of being able to save that many people without traveling fast enough. That's just not within the bounds of logic, you can't process that logic.

Both the writer and the artist are involved in making the comic. You didn't seem to answer anything besides "well the author says so so whatever it's whatever the author says." The issue is that what Flash did was impossible according to the "slower than light" line. Which again leads to my issue of are we going to believe explicit or implied information. Both the story and the art prove that Flash rescued those people going beyond the speed of light, the only thing stopping this from remaining "true" is that line about moving a hairs less. The issue is that it happened, so that line has to go null and void. Choose what happened, Flash didn't move beyond the speed of light and did not save those people, or he did move faster and save those people? According to the artwork and story, he did save those people. I think two pages of artwork and narration invalidate that one, faulty line.

Absolutely everything that these panels prove that he travelled faster than the speed of light. The issue isn't the authors lack of mathematics or his stupid logic, it's the silly typo that he left saying that Flash moved slower than the speed of light. The error was that single line.

You're absolutely wrong, it does matter. His job isn't simply to write an entertaining comic book, it's to draw an entertaining comic book as well. It's also his job to piece together a coherent, logical, story, which he obviously failed to do when he managed to contradict himself and make a paradox in the span of two pages.

If we're supposed to simply believe what we read, are we supposed to completely ignore what we see on the page? We draw just as much from implied information as explicitly told information. The numbers given by the comic book don't make sense even at a rough glance, the issue is that Flash saved those people and could not have done so without traveling faster than the speed of light. Oh, he didn't go faster? Then he didn't save those people. Oh wait, he did. What do we believe, the narration or what we see? It's the same as having a rock explode and having the narration say "The rock did not explode." It's simply absolutely contradictory, but I'm going to believe that the rock did explode, if I see it explode on page. But, according to you, you will believe that the rock is still there even after seeing it explode.

We have no way of knowing, but I'm going to believe what I see, and what I saw was Flash traveling faster than the Speed of Light to save those people.

@starbrander: The Beyonder is millions of times more powerful than the Living Tribunal. Millions of times more powerful than the Marvel multiverse, actually.

@yung_ancient_one: this is very interesting. I like it. The One Above All is also the Fulchrum as well, yes?

@yung_ancient_one:

TOAA is the supreme ruler of the Marvel multiverse as The Presence is for the DC universe, right? Isn't the Beyonder beyond both of these multiverse, the embodiment and supreme ruler of the omniverse itself?