if you want to remove an article from website contact us from top.

    an ethereal being, as much abstract concept as actual entity, who exists as the sum total of all living things in the universe

    James

    Guys, does anyone know the answer?

    get an ethereal being, as much abstract concept as actual entity, who exists as the sum total of all living things in the universe from EN Bilgi.

    Doctor Strange Masterworks Vol. 9

    Collects Doctor Strange (1974) #47-57, Marvel Fanfare (1982) #6; material from Crazy (1973) #88, OHOTMU (1983). This Halloween, the Marvel Masterworks cast an enticing spell with the newest volume of Doctor Strange! All-time great writer Roger Stern joins a host of the best artists ever to draw the Master of the Mystic Arts. The result? Pure magic. The tales in store feature the return of classic enemies such as Nightmare, Baron Mordo and Dormammu; introduce Morgana Blessing; team Stephen Strange with Brother Voodoo; draw Clea into a war for the Dark Dimension; and send Strange back in time - both to ancient Egypt alongside the Fantastic Four and to World War II with Nick Fury! Painstakingly restored and packed with extras galore, this amazing tome honors one of greatest eras in Doctor Strange's history.

    Oturum açın

    Kitaplar

    Örnek görüntüle

    Kütüphaneme ekleEleştiri yazın

    E-KITAP SATIN AL - ₺294,83

    Bu kitabı basılı olarak edinin▼

    Kitaplığım Geçmişim

    Google Play'de Kitaplar

    Doctor Strange Masterworks Vol. 9

    Roger Stern, J.M. Dematteis

    Marvel Entertainment, 16 Eki 2019 - 336 sayfa

    0 Eleştiriler

    Collects Doctor Strange (1974) #47-57, Marvel Fanfare (1982) #6; material from Crazy (1973) #88, OHOTMU (1983). This Halloween, the Marvel Masterworks cast an enticing spell with the newest volume of Doctor Strange! All-time great writer Roger Stern joins a host of the best artists ever to draw the Master of the Mystic Arts. The result? Pure magic. The tales in store feature the return of classic enemies such as Nightmare, Baron Mordo and Dormammu; introduce Morgana Blessing; team Stephen Strange with Brother Voodoo; draw Clea into a war for the Dark Dimension; and send Strange back in time - both to ancient Egypt alongside the Fantastic Four and to World War II with Nick Fury! Painstakingly restored and packed with extras galore, this amazing tome honors one of greatest eras in Doctor Strange's history.

    Diğer »

    Bu kitaba önizleme yap »

    Kullanıcılar ne diyor? - Eleştiri yazın

    Her zamanki yerlerde hiçbir eleştiri bulamadık.

    Seçilmiş sayfalar

    Başlık Sayfası

    İçindekiler

    Doctor Strange 1974 47

    Doctor Strange 1974 48

    Doctor Strange 1974 49

    Doctor Strange 1974 50

    Doctor Strange 1974 51

    Doctor Strange 1974 52

    Doctor Strange 1974 53

    Doctor Strange 1974 54

    Doctor Strange 1974 55

    Doctor Strange 1974 56

    Doctor Strange 1974 57

    Marvel Fanfare 1982 6

    Material from Crazy 1973 88

    Telif Hakkı

    Sık kullanılan terimler ve kelime öbekleri

    ability able Ancient appearance artist astral ATTACK BACK became become BELIEVE Book CALL CARDS CLEA comics dimension Doctor Strange Dormammu drawing Earth energy FACE FEEL FIND FOLLOW FORCE FOUND GOING Golden HELP HOLD HOPE HUMAN issue John KEEP KNOW known LEARN LEAVE LEFT LIGHT LITTLE LIVING LONG LOOK LOVE magical Marshall Marvel Marvel Comics MASTER MEAN mind Mordo MORGANA MU3T mystical NAME NEED NEVER º º º ONCE original Paul person physical PLACE PLANE POWER reach RETURN RIGHT Rogers sº º sorcerer spells Spider-Man story TAKE Terry Austin THI& THING THINK THOUGHT TRUE TURN Umar universe VOLS WANT Ward WOMAN WONG Wºº WORLD writing X-MEN YOUNG Zºº

    Kaynakça bilgileri

    Başlık Doctor Strange Masterworks Vol. 9

    Yazarlar Roger Stern, J.M. Dematteis

    Çizen: Paul Smith, Kevin Nowlan, Charles Vess, Marshall Rogers, Gene Colan, Michael Golden, Brent Anderson

    Yayıncı Marvel Entertainment, 2019

    ISBN 1302516337, 9781302516338

    Uzunluk 336 sayfa

    Alıntıyı Dışa Aktar BiBTeX EndNote RefMan

    Google Kitaplar Hakkında - Gizlilik Politikaları - Hizmet   Şartları - Yayıncılar için Bilgiler - Sorun bildir - Yardım - Google Ana Sayfası

    Source : books.google.com.tr

    'Thor: Love and Thunder' review: If you liked 'Ragnarok,' here's the remix : NPR

    Director Taika Waititi goes back to the Thor: Ragnarok well for another sprawling romp starring Chris Hemsworth's pompous thunder god. The water's still thirst-quenching, but not as fresh.

    REVIEW

    In 'Thor: Love and Thunder,' Waititi's familiar strains feel familiar and strained

    July 5, 20229:00 AM ET

    GLEN WELDON Twitter Tumblr

    Natalie Portman and Chris Hemsworth.

    Jasin Boland/Marvel Studios

    In considering Thor: Love and Thunder, the fourth film in the franchise centered on the Marvel Cinematic Universe's pompous, pumped-up thunder god, it's useful to cast your mind back to 2017's Thor: Ragnarok, its immediate predecessor.

    That film broke a mold that ached to be broken — the two previous Thor movies, namely, both of which came so weighted down with unearned faux-gravitas they had people reconsidering their takes on Iron Man 2. (To be clear: Thor was better than Iron Man 2, but its sequel, Thor: The Dark World, stalwartly remains the MCU's lowest point.)

    But with Ragnarok, the dark (and fusty) world of the Thor franchise burst with new light and color and humor. Credit director Taika Waititi, who enlivened the proceedings with a looseness that allowed rock-operatic set-pieces in which the banging of heads was accompanied by head-banging anthems to coexist with muttered, underplayed, often improvised comic dialogue.

    Listen to Pop Culture Happy Hour on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

    POP CULTURE HAPPY HOUR

    These are the summer movies NPR critics are looking forward to

    It was an odd, idiosyncratic fuel mixture — cinema as airbrushed van art — but it worked.

    The good news, in re: Love and Thunder: Waititi is back, and he's determined not to reinvent the wheel.

    The bad news: The wheel's tire-treads are looking worn.

    Thor: Love and Thunder plays like a Ragnarok remix, for good and ill. For a villain, swap out Cate Blanchett's goth drag queen Hela for Christian Bale's creepy Gorr the God Butcher, whose title pretty much lays out his entire schtick: A god ignored Gorr's pleas to save the life of his daughter, so, armed with a god-smiting sword, Gorr sets out to slay the gods of every pantheon.

    Sponsor Message

    Thor: Love and Thunder plays like a Ragnarok remix, for good and ill.

    He's evidently going alphabetically, because Asgardians are next on his list. RIP, Abyssinians.

    (Quick side note: If you find this bit confusing, because all this time you thought that the MCU had established that Asgardians weren't actual gods, just an advanced alien race that people of Earth mistook for deities, sit down here by me.)

    Bale is one of the best parts about Love and Thunder, bringing soulful malice where Blanchette brought sneering camp.

    For a muscle-bound pal to bicker and bash heads with, trade Mark Ruffalo's Hulk for Natalie Portman's Mighty Thor, who's taken up O.G. Thor's hammer Mjolnir ... and his arm routine. It's been a minute since we've had a chance to see Portman get to goof around a bit, and "goof around a bit" is this film's entire mission statement.

    For comic relief, swap out Jeff Goldblum's squirrelly Taskmaster for Russell Crowe's Zeus, who delivers his (pretty funny) dialogue in a Greek accent thicker than day-old tzatziki.

    Tessa Thompson as King Valkyrie.

    Jasin Boland/Marvel Studios

    And for a trusty sidekick, trade out Korg, the chill rock-creature voiced by Waititi, for ... more Korg.

    A lot more Korg. More Korg than seems strictly necessary.

    Which is the whole problem. Thor: Love and Thunder feels like the product of a Thor: Ragnarok focus group. We get more of what audiences liked about Ragnarok — jokes, tunes, the Korg of it all — but what once seemed bracing and revelatory now feels familiar, safe, even rote on occasion.

    Sponsor Message

    The charming breeziness of the previous film is replaced here with an dutiful assiduousness. Boxes to be checked. The jokes land — but, particularly in the early going, they do so in a way that feels effortful, sweaty.

    POP CULTURE HAPPY HOUR

    FX's 'The Bear': A funny, raw, real drama in a restaurant kitchen

    But ... so what? "This movie is too much like that other movie I liked!" is not an oft-heard complaint among filmgoers, after all. And certainly there is a lulling sense of comfort in having one's set of expectations so precisely met, and in the times we find ourselves in, comfort is at a premium.

    Oh, and also: For Marvel Comics nerds, a cameo appearance by a certain Marvel Universe fixture who is [writer pauses to consult his copy of The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe] "an ethereal being, as much abstract concept as actual entity, who exists as the sum total of all living things in the universe" is a pretty neat trick.

    Listen to Pop Culture Happy Hour on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

    Sign Up For The Pop Culture Happy Hour Newsletter

    Stay pop culture savvy with NPR’s guide to TV, books, movies, music and more, sent weekly.

    More Stories From NPR

    Source : www.npr.org

    Universe

    The common metaphysical notion of universe - The universe in scientific perspective - God and the cosmos

    Universe

    Copyright © Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science ISSN: 2037-2329 and the author. 
No part of this article may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without the prior permission of the Editors. 
To refer to the content of this article, quote: INTERS – Interdisciplinary Encyclopedia of Religion and Science, edited by G. Tanzella-Nitti and A. Strumia, www.inters.org

    Date: 2002 DOI:

    10.17421/2037-2329-2002-JS-2

    Juan José Sanguineti

    I. The Term “Universe” – II. The Common Metaphysical Notion of Universe. – III. The Universe from the Scientific Perspective – IV. The Universe as a Philosophical Question. 1. A Manifold and Ordered Unity. 2. The Cosmos and the Transcendentals of Being. 3. Ontological Degrees. 4. The Place of Human Beings in the Universe. 5. The Primacy of Person. 6. Finality and Purpose in the Cosmos. 7. The Future of the Universe. – V. God and the Cosmos.

    I. The Term “Universe”

    The term “universe” is generally used for the physically ordered whole of all of nature’s material realities. The Latin etymology of the word alludes to the fact that the universe is constituted by many different things, that is, by an unum in diversis. This means that the universe is a collective entity or that which encompasses all existing material things in nature. This notion must not be confused with the logical-mathematical understanding of “the collection of all things,” which is obtained by the simple extension of the concept “thing” by means of the quantifying operator “all” (that is, everything). The concept of universe is not limited to set theory logic. Consequently, it does not submit to the well-known paradoxes of the idea of the set of all sets (which comprehends and does not comprehend itself). In other words, the universe is not simply “the whole,” but “the whole physically ordered,” such that the accent is placed particularly on the open physical order (not, then, a purely logical order) observed in nature (this concept will be more fully explained in section II).

    The synonym “cosmos” alludes to such an order. Of Greek origin, the word cosmos contains a connotation of order, beauty, and harmony. The Latins translated the Greek kósmos with the world mundus, world, which suggests the idea of a reality that is ordered, right, and beautiful. While the concept “world” acquired a preferentially humanistic meaning (the world as a reality of social relationships in general or in particular, with which are associated terms such as “mundane” or “secular,” often tied to a moral or religious meaning), “cosmos” and “universe” in general retained a more naturalistic meaning. As the cosmos initiaaly presents itself in the starry sky, we are led to ignore the reality of earth or “our world”, and think that cosmos or universe primarily means the collection of celestial bodies which constitute the object of astronomy or, more amply, cosmology. The term macrocosm is adopted for the cosmos in terms of its widest dimensions, and microcosm for microphysical objects, that is, those objects which are not within reach of ordinary perception. The terms “nature” and “creation” may be considered similar in meaning to cosmos and universe. In the Bible, the universe is often referred to with the expression "the heavens and the earth."

    II. The Common Metaphysical Notion of Universe

    The notion of universe as the physically ordered totality of natural things corresponds to the common knowledge of all people, a sensible but also metaphysical knowledge of ontological import. Every other notion of the universe rests on this original basis. With our senses and intelligence we perceive the existence of natural things or entities, including ourselves. The rational perception of the existence of particular, ordered sets of things, such as a city, an island, or a forest, leads us little by little to the conclusion that everything in our experience participates in reciprocal relationships (spatial, temporal, and causal). Hence, in a very natural way, we arrive at the notion of universe as indicated above. In some sense, the universe “is visible” in as much as it manifests itself in the theater of terrestrial nature and in the observation of the astronomical heavens. Only the human being “comprehends” all that as a universe, that is, as a totality of entities in reciprocal relation. This concept, then, is tied to the first metaphysical notions of reality, such as being, order, relation, cause, space, and time, although different peoples added embellishments of a mythical, religious, scientific, or philosophical nature to the concept of universe, according to the different cultural nuances appropriate to each geographical area and historical epoch.

    The idea of “universe” always remains “open.” We perceive only a part of the universe, that which is directly accessible to our experience, and may not presume to exhaust the direct or indirect observation of the cosmos, even at the scientific level. We cannot know with certainty how much of the universe remains unobserved. This fact, to be expected given the limitations of our observational capacity, does not diminish the validity of the notion under consideration. To understand what the universe is, to perceive that it exists, we do not need to know it in every detail. We need not know, for example, whether it is finite or infinite, or ascertain its precise structure. Common experience gives us a metaphysical idea of the universe, imperfect but sufficient, so that the cosmological propositions of philosophy and the sciences, as well as religion, are true and meaningful. Today, we are sure that the most sophisticated cosmological theories take nothing away from the open character of the cosmos known to us (“open” in the sense that we can always learn more about its aspects and parts). In this way, we can overcome the apparent paradox we encounter when we sometimes speak of “other universes” or “other worlds.” If they truly exist in relationship with “our world,” even in a minimal way, they constitute all together one true universe, of which what is most directly known is only a part. The existence of other universes completely disconnected from ours cannot be excluded but this hypothesis is completely irrelevant to a common philosophical definition of the universe as such.

    Source : inters.org

    Do you want to see answer or more ?
    James 5 month ago
    4

    Guys, does anyone know the answer?

    Click For Answer