> I rather suspect most people - with the apparent exception
> of you - will be able to understand that when something is
> being stated definitively and backed up with evidence then it
> can be understood as being factual. If something is presented
> as hypothetical with little or no evidence then it is an
> unproven hypothesis.
You said here that:
... the mateial you refer to by me is obviously fiction, so I shall let you work it out for yourself.
I asked you:
to establish a distinction between the allegedly factual, and actually fictional, parts of your work.
But your response doesn't answer my question.
My question wasn't about those elements in your work that consist of "unproven hypothesis". I'm sure you're well aware that an "unproven hypothesis" is not the same thing as "fiction" - i.e., imaginary events.
You seem to be implying that the Blue Sun of Illiantia (and the Great Pillars of Xhallir) are fictional, rather than hypothetical, events. So I'm asking whether there are other elements of your work that are also fictional, as distinct from elements that form part of an "unproven hypothesis"?