Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen

     Of course Carlsen would have a great advantage should the two play a match--more than 150 years of ever-growing chess theory. That he would crush Morphy is unlikely, just notice how Morphy would do relatively poorly early in his matches but after seeing how his opponents played he wiped them out. It's ridiculous to think that a player that strong would b unable to see what his better-prepared opponent was doing and alter his own game to compensate.

     There is no way that Morphy would get into the top 10 of today's players as he didn't consider chess as a serious pursuit and would never play enough games to qualify for the top tournaments.

Carlsen is way better, but Morphy had more fun. 

Morphy, if we are talking about him as an artist.
Magnus, if we are talking about him as a computer.

Probably because Morphy lived in New Orleans, one of the world's most enjoyable cities. (And he was born rich.)

Carlsen plays more accurate chess.

But Morphy contributed more to the development of the game.

I agree with the first part, not the second. Morphy gave up competitive chess because he wasn’t having fun. Carlsen really enjoys his chess, as can be seen in almost any banter blitz session.

     Morphy did NOT give up chess. He continued to play occaisionally (giving odds) with a few friends. He quit high-level competitive chess because he thought the game was not worthy of that much of his time, as he had a real, much more important legal career. He even cut back on his law practice, limiting it to a few friends and family, because too many prospective clients were more interested in having him play chess with them than they were in hiring him as a lawyer.

I am nearly half way there, only six weeks short. I have plenty of time to make the top 50.

I think Paul Morphy is better, rating doesn't necessarily matter but Morphy was in a league of his own at the time, and in present day may have reached 2900. He also created many different common strategies we use today, while Carlsen follows old strategies. Both are remarkable players however.

Morphy is  for chess players what  Bach or Mozart means to musicians… Morphy was an Artist…. Carlsen is not.

As a better musician than Chess player, I appreciate that comment.

Why Carlsen is not?

No doubt. 

can't really compare, Morphy had more worries to deal with, what adversities has carlsen had to deal with.

Well yeah, today's there's maybe more complex music than before, but this guys were really geniuses, more outstanding than the artists today.

morphy was better for his time period, but in skill level, magnus is definitely better

I think that if morphy was born around the same time as Magnus and studied modern openings it would go a bit like this. Morphy would be better at openings, attacking, and be faster. While Magnus would be better at endgame, and defense. And I believe they are both about equal in midgame

If they are limited to the knowledge of their time Carlsen wins

if it’s a 10 minute or more game Carlsen probably wins

if it is a blitz morphy probably wins

If morphy is defending against peak Magnus he will probably loose. if morphy is attacking at his peak there is a good chance morphy may win. So overall if they played today and had the same opening, mid-game, and endgame knowledge they would probably draw.

Have I mentioned yet that Morphy is dead, so...?

Yeah, that was my point. Morphy is dead, so Magnus wins all day long. So Magnus is better...