Fantasy vs. Science Fiction

Regarding Lukyanenko – I decided not to write about it in detail.

You can do that here ;)
/topic/5355/

Actually, this is exactly what I meant. The discussion continues with an analysis of the means and items used for… well, let’s just say “causing mayhem.” In that case, the topic should be titled: "Whose killing tools are more ultimate - fantasy or science fiction?" But somehow, it seemed to me that originally literature genres were meant. If I'm wrong, correct me.

You're right, but not literature genres, rather everything as a whole.
And all the rest is just pointless bickering.

very many letters.

I said that simply because there was a lot to read.

Why didn't he sink when you actively participated in the discussion between us, Lokken, and you? By the way, you provided arguments, then all your points boiled down to a simple "dragons are powerful, invulnerable creatures."

I didn't need that. When it came to whether a dragon could withstand all the forces of the empire, we still remained each with our own opinion.
When the great battle began, only Lokken argued his points somewhat; everyone else simply said "definitely," "absolutely," "it can't be otherwise," "I guarantee it," and so on. Although I also presented arguments that, from your point of view, were partly foolish "because," and partly because you look at everything exclusively from a sci-fi perspective. This is my opinion; if you don't want to agree, don't.
And it got tiresome, here’s some food for thought: Dragons are invulnerable. Do what you want with it.

A shotgun is magic? What nonsense! (someone, give me Lokken's ICQ, I'll quote him)

Quote him ;)

So, all firearms and not just weapons (fully consistent with the laws of physics, which already excludes their belonging to magic) can be considered magic.

Absolutely correct, all weapons are nothing but magic. And cyborgs are driven by magic too. And spaceships fly using magical propulsion. And the laws of physics are merely side effects of magic.