see
You have contradicted yourself again, which renders everything stated in between those two points in your argument moot. Due to how the writers are allowing people to take either approach in terms of timelines, it causes there to be a Schrödinger's cat-like paradox, where both states are able to be accepted as true from the outside observer's perspective. You cannot declaratively state one is true over the other without going against the writers’ intent at the moment. I am not inherently dismissive of converging timeline interpretations, the problem is that without clear clarification of the paradoxes that have to exist for a converging timeline to be true, it is extremely difficult to accept this interpretation in its current state. Divergence allows for the events to all play out as they have in the way they have been depicted without the need to deal with these paradoxes as they would not exist. That being said, I do not want to give myself carpal tunnel discussing something where the writers have clearly indicated it is up to your own interpretation, thus I will agree to disagree with your overall position.
This statement does nothing to enhance your previous argument and arguably makes it worse. The quote used is based on Venat's opinion and, on top of that, uses language that is not entirely dismissive of the possibility of Hermes creating more entelechies as the term 'unlikely' is not 'never'. In addition, you have failed to refute any of the points in my former post in regards to negating your argument, thus I find the continuance of your argument with the points you are currently making otherwise to be strictly headcanon/personal opinion, as none of these things are directly stated inside of the story or any other source material. Do understand, this is not me arguing Hermes will ever end up doing what is deemed unlikely above, it is refuting the complete dismissal of that possibility as something that can still be viable.
From the perspective of the WoL, this is an accurate interpretation. Any viewpoint related to how the WoL interprets events will seem to them as being convergent, as there is no way for them to have an omniscient view where they can see how time streams twist and turn and potentially branch and parallel each other. In the case of G'Raha (Crystal Exarch) in particular, he did not cease to exist upon averting the 8th Umbral Calamity, which suggests his actions did not remove/overwrite the conditions required for him to exist, which is proof his original time stream is still intact and running parallel to our own, where our own time stream is diverged from his original time stream.
This reads like Yoshi-P's interpretation, which he has described as his own opinion/interpretation. This above statement can exist in all time stream types, and much like I argued above, due to how the writers intended to leave this open to interpretation, it creates a Schrödinger's cat-like paradox where both interpretations of how time travel works and how time streams work both exist at the same time, which causes a whole assortment of issues when discussing anything related to the time travel portions of EW. As I have indicated to Lyth above, I don't feel like developing carpal tunnel over this so I will agree to disagree with any approach that is dismissive of either of the two time stream types.



Reply With Quote


