User blog comment:DYBAD/Character Sheet/@comment-26322734-20161130044819/@comment-4867780-20161130214252

"If that is true, then Lawrence most definitely isn't singular. Infinity is, by definition, all-encompassing and it is mathematically impossible to create an infinite amount of "different" things because the amount of different things are limited. So logically it would progress to a combination of the "different" things, but even then you would come up with a limited amount of those things. If the multiverse is truly somehow objectively infinite, then how could you justifiably say, with confidence, that Lawence is the only Lawrence that exists, and that there isn't some being out there more powerful than him, or at his level of power?"

Because his origin is singular, and predates the infinity of multiverses (hence the absence of alternate Lawrence). So while there are most likely many similar entities with similar powers (sometimes to the point of passing as him) that appeared later on, he remains one of a kind.

"It matters because if the multiverse is limited, that means there are limited things out there for him to absorb and replicate. This wouldn't be a problem if he and the citizens of Selforge City weren't immortal, but the fact that they are means that, in a finite multiverse, Selforge City would eventually halt its development completely and it would end up being the same thing every day."

As mentionned previously, there is an infinity of "multiverses", not just an infinite one. So while I do believe that each multiverse would ultimately be finite one way or another (even the biggest box is just that : a limited portion, which implies some macroscopic finiteness), their sum isn't. It's like frontiers : they are the end of something and the beginning of something else. And since Lawrence is a very nomadic type, he would most likely move to another one eons before any kind of warning signs may have a chance of appearing.

"The Many World Interpretation assumes that all infinite universes exist already, and that beings or events within their respective universes are just playing out the way they're supposed to play out at the same time. The theory isn't very kind to the notion of free will."

Oh yeah, I remember now ! The Bioshock madness mantra, right ? Well, since Lawrence is so attached to free will, he would most likely avoid this kind of realities altogether.

"See, that's the issue though. If he has inherent limits to his power, he cannot justifiably be called "greater than omnipotence" or "outside power levels". Power levels are defined entirely by their limits. That's why when you see power levels like TvTrope's Supernatural Weight Class, the next level up is defined as "being able to do more than the level below, but less than the level above". If Lawrence has comprehensive limits like the law of conservation, he can't justifiably be said to be outside of any power level. He could only be said to have a power level of his own."

Lawrence's primary power is "perfect absorbing replication", this doesn't imply infinite resources or complete knowlege of everything, so the power is coherent with itself. And it doesn't fit in TV Tropes' or any other power weight hierarchy, precisely because it exists outside of them.

"Omnipotence, on the other hand, kind of cheats with the concept of power levels, as its defined as "having no limit". Therefore, omnipotence is the only thing that can justifiably be said to be outside of power levels, as it is "able to do more than the levels below" and that's it. There is no real need to logically justify omnipotence to work, because the power defines and justifies itself. It makes more sense when you stop thinking of omnipotence as a power and more as a state of being."

Sorry, I've never been a believer of Omnipotence (since believing is ultimately all you can do). This "there is no real need to logically justify omnipotence to work, because the power defines and justifies itself" always sounded like a glorified asspull to me. It's like God's famous "I am what I am" : it's not an answer at all, it's a complete dodge. And somehow, you're supposed to just swallow it, hook, line and sinker ^ ^; Admitedly, Christians were always much better at forcing their beliefs on others (Omnipotence notably) than reliably backing them up (probably because it's downright impossible in the first place), so I guess that was to be expected.

Now, let's read this sections-related comment :D