Harry Potter HP & Sekirei
- Thread starter chronodekar
- Start date
People throw around the word energy like they understand it, confusing it with "power", "force", hell "matter" and the like.
In the most basic terms "energy" is a byproduct of, well, everything. There are "forms" of energy but these are defined by what makes it, its why you hardly hear many scientists just spout off the word energy without such words like "thermonuclear", "thermal", "kinetic", or "electromagnetic" along with it.
Its not "ki" its not "magic" its not the bloody "force" (contextually the force might be debatable) its not even electricity/lightning.
Magic or Ki would have to be an entirely new source of power.
But hey, its fiction and most people don't know back from front so who cares right?
In the most basic terms "energy" is a byproduct of, well, everything. There are "forms" of energy but these are defined by what makes it, its why you hardly hear many scientists just spout off the word energy without such words like "thermonuclear", "thermal", "kinetic", or "electromagnetic" along with it.
Its not "ki" its not "magic" its not the bloody "force" (contextually the force might be debatable) its not even electricity/lightning.
Magic or Ki would have to be an entirely new source of power.
But hey, its fiction and most people don't know back from front so who cares right?
Minata would have to be muggleborn, else he'd get shut down fast.
I can see the magic world divided, in one group you have the old school who'd want the sekirei considered magical creatures and hidden away. The other group would want to treat them as a litmus test to possibly begin revealing themselves. The fact the governments tried kidnapping and experiments would be against them though.
I can see the magic world divided, in one group you have the old school who'd want the sekirei considered magical creatures and hidden away. The other group would want to treat them as a litmus test to possibly begin revealing themselves. The fact the governments tried kidnapping and experiments would be against them though.
No, it isn't. Energy is a (mostly) quantifiable property things have. Energy is not a thing. And neither is electricity energy. Your statement makes about as much sense as saying people are weight. Because everyone has a certain quantifiable property we call "weight", so it must be that people are weight, amirite?
Please stop mangling physics.
Please stop mangling physics.
I'll point out that in Sekirei canon, Minato has basically used the Sekirei to conquer Japan. He's the Shogun in all but name; I wouldn't be surprised if he wound up ruling the Japanese Magical Community as well. It's not like they're capable of standing up to the might of the Disciplinary Squad; hell, maybe part of the "international forces" that attacked the island, kidnapped and tortured Musubi, and were slaughtered by the Disciplinary Squad were wizards.
Photons (and other bosons)
Phonons (and other quasiparticles)
Compared to the "things" made of fermions...
I've been keeping mostly quiet, but it's getting increasingly clear to me, that there are two groups of people here:
The blind, and those with half an eye.
I mean, if you're going to go with the classical mechanics definition of "energy is the capacity of a system to perform work"...
Don't forget that the classical mechanic interpretation was decisively proven incomplete over a century ago. That's the quantum revolution.
Stop talking like the convenient approximation is the actual truth.
Also, speaking of classical mechanics,
Power is the rate of energy. E = Power x Time
P = Voltage x Amperage
Therefore,
electrical energy has the SI standard unit of
E = V x A x s = V x C
One steady amp of current crossing one volt of potential for one second.
Or, one Columb of charge across one Volt.
"Electricity" being "Energy" is built into the definition derived from the units.
Sheesh.
Phonons (and other quasiparticles)
Compared to the "things" made of fermions...
I've been keeping mostly quiet, but it's getting increasingly clear to me, that there are two groups of people here:
The blind, and those with half an eye.
I mean, if you're going to go with the classical mechanics definition of "energy is the capacity of a system to perform work"...
Don't forget that the classical mechanic interpretation was decisively proven incomplete over a century ago. That's the quantum revolution.
Stop talking like the convenient approximation is the actual truth.
Also, speaking of classical mechanics,
Power is the rate of energy. E = Power x Time
P = Voltage x Amperage
Therefore,
electrical energy has the SI standard unit of
E = V x A x s = V x C
One steady amp of current crossing one volt of potential for one second.
Or, one Columb of charge across one Volt.
"Electricity" being "Energy" is built into the definition derived from the units.
Sheesh.
Its all still the effect of those less-than-microscoptic matter moving that generates energy, its still just a byproduct.
Quantum physics isn't something we need to get into though as much as I'd like too, honestly some of the professors I've heard talking about quantum mechanics seem like they're talking about the Force, I once heard one actually say "and everything in the universe is connected by energy at that level"
... Gotcha, Obi Wan.
Not to say he was an idiot, the man had a doctorates but that line had me thrown out of class for interrupting him -I was laughing too hard. What was I to do?
Alright that I can work with, now since your going with "the more intricate the device" as opposed to "the more reliant on electricity" suppose we could say that its not actually interfering with electricity so much as its interfering with the transistors, amps, and the like - so the actual mechanics of the device are... too sensitive? That would imply that muggles are artificially creating foci that are so good that even a squib could cast spells with them but are too delicate to use by a full fledged magical, which is why they short out.
Suddenly I'm thinking magitech isn't all that impossible in the Harry Potter-verse you just need to make something sturdier to handle more power or shield it better against more power. In this case I wouldn't discount hardening against emp to work.
In fact as far as Foci go I would use the "old" materials of quarts, crystal, or other gems as something that could be "refined" by modern machinery that could be used for a number of things. Ollivander did always say each wand was predispositioned towards a particular casting (charms, transfiguration, ect.) and that comes from core and wood used. The various composite make-ups of precious and not so precious gemstones would also likely act as "predispositions" just as the various cores would as well. Metal, especially gold, also acts as a great conductor and THAT can be refined even more.
Huh, I don't think the wizarding world is ready for all their best tools being made by muggles, because our machines can get precision like no human can, plus, we can mass produce it where Ollivander can't.
Of course if you want to get really fancy doing something like Nanoha's Intelligent Device's wouldn't be impossible now that I think about it.
Quantum physics isn't something we need to get into though as much as I'd like too, honestly some of the professors I've heard talking about quantum mechanics seem like they're talking about the Force, I once heard one actually say "and everything in the universe is connected by energy at that level"
... Gotcha, Obi Wan.
Not to say he was an idiot, the man had a doctorates but that line had me thrown out of class for interrupting him -I was laughing too hard. What was I to do?
Alright that I can work with, now since your going with "the more intricate the device" as opposed to "the more reliant on electricity" suppose we could say that its not actually interfering with electricity so much as its interfering with the transistors, amps, and the like - so the actual mechanics of the device are... too sensitive? That would imply that muggles are artificially creating foci that are so good that even a squib could cast spells with them but are too delicate to use by a full fledged magical, which is why they short out.
Suddenly I'm thinking magitech isn't all that impossible in the Harry Potter-verse you just need to make something sturdier to handle more power or shield it better against more power. In this case I wouldn't discount hardening against emp to work.
In fact as far as Foci go I would use the "old" materials of quarts, crystal, or other gems as something that could be "refined" by modern machinery that could be used for a number of things. Ollivander did always say each wand was predispositioned towards a particular casting (charms, transfiguration, ect.) and that comes from core and wood used. The various composite make-ups of precious and not so precious gemstones would also likely act as "predispositions" just as the various cores would as well. Metal, especially gold, also acts as a great conductor and THAT can be refined even more.
Huh, I don't think the wizarding world is ready for all their best tools being made by muggles, because our machines can get precision like no human can, plus, we can mass produce it where Ollivander can't.
Of course if you want to get really fancy doing something like Nanoha's Intelligent Device's wouldn't be impossible now that I think about it.
Son, I am disappoint.
1) You seem to think that bosons are not things.
Obvious counter-example: helium atoms in ground state. That's why they can form Bose-Einstein condensates. Many other things as well, as would be completely obvious from undergraduate QM.
2) You seem to think that photons are energy.
Photons are quanta of the electromagnetic field. That's exactly what they are. They have three quantum numbers from the PoincarÚ group dictated by special relativity: mass, spin, parity.
Get it straight: photons are not energy. They have energy. Energy is a property that these things happen to have. This is not a conceptually complicated distinction. They have other properties as well, e.g., momentum and spin. So why isn't anyone saying that photons "are" momentum instead? Why not photons "are" spin? Not that it'd be right, but at least the latter would be an intrinsic, frame-independent property that characterizes photons--a slight step up on objectivity. Oh wait, that's right: that would go against the retarded energy fetishism thing people have going.
3) You seem to believe that quasiparticles are always bosons.
Go study, for example, semiconductors. (Well, maybe you don't, but it's not clear to me why this is even here.)
Sad.
Nothing in my previous post necessitated classical mechanics: my statements were applicable to physics in general, classical or quantum. The fact that you even bring it up is yet more evidence of just how poor your understanding of quantum mechanics is.
Ok, fine: since you insist, let's talk about classical mechanics, in the simpler semi-general case. You have physical system, whose possible states are points in the phase space comprised of generalized positions and momenta (q^k;p_k), so that the time evolution of the system traces out some curve determined by the initial state and the Hamiltonian flow.
What's energy? Some particular observable, depending on the kind of energy we're talking about. What's an observable? A function over the phase space. For example, for the simplest case of a particle in one dimension, the kinetic energy is T(q;p) = p?/2m. If it's in a scalar potential, it's simple to add to this to get mechanical energy, etc. As for QM? Well, the observables form a commutative C*-algebra (cf. Poisson bracket), and quantumness happens whenever this algebra is non-commutative instead. It's possible to deform it: imposing [q,p] = i? gives us a non-commutative C*-algebra of formal observables, which by Gel'fand-Na?mark theorem is realizable as an algebra of operators on some Hilbert space.
So we come to the very first thing anyone who studies QM proper learns: observables are operators on a Hilbert space that is the quantum-mechanical phase space. Hell, this is taken as an axiom in general quantum theory: it is literally part of what it means for physics to be "quantum". And even if one doesn't know any algebraic motivations (which never appear in introductory texts), that fact alone should make it really obvious that energy is a property of physical systems: more formally, an observable.
I can't even begin to apprehend the total confusion of ideas that could produce such a statement, but hopefully the following illustration will correct them:
Statement: "The pen is blue."
(Thing: Pen) <-- (Property: Blueness)
Herp.
Statement: "A 1.4 GeV proton hits your forehead."
(Thing: Proton) <-- (Property: Energy)
Derp.
1) You seem to think that bosons are not things.
Obvious counter-example: helium atoms in ground state. That's why they can form Bose-Einstein condensates. Many other things as well, as would be completely obvious from undergraduate QM.
2) You seem to think that photons are energy.
Photons are quanta of the electromagnetic field. That's exactly what they are. They have three quantum numbers from the PoincarÚ group dictated by special relativity: mass, spin, parity.
Get it straight: photons are not energy. They have energy. Energy is a property that these things happen to have. This is not a conceptually complicated distinction. They have other properties as well, e.g., momentum and spin. So why isn't anyone saying that photons "are" momentum instead? Why not photons "are" spin? Not that it'd be right, but at least the latter would be an intrinsic, frame-independent property that characterizes photons--a slight step up on objectivity. Oh wait, that's right: that would go against the retarded energy fetishism thing people have going.
3) You seem to believe that quasiparticles are always bosons.
Go study, for example, semiconductors. (Well, maybe you don't, but it's not clear to me why this is even here.)
Sad.
Nothing in my previous post necessitated classical mechanics: my statements were applicable to physics in general, classical or quantum. The fact that you even bring it up is yet more evidence of just how poor your understanding of quantum mechanics is.
Ok, fine: since you insist, let's talk about classical mechanics, in the simpler semi-general case. You have physical system, whose possible states are points in the phase space comprised of generalized positions and momenta (q^k;p_k), so that the time evolution of the system traces out some curve determined by the initial state and the Hamiltonian flow.
What's energy? Some particular observable, depending on the kind of energy we're talking about. What's an observable? A function over the phase space. For example, for the simplest case of a particle in one dimension, the kinetic energy is T(q;p) = p?/2m. If it's in a scalar potential, it's simple to add to this to get mechanical energy, etc. As for QM? Well, the observables form a commutative C*-algebra (cf. Poisson bracket), and quantumness happens whenever this algebra is non-commutative instead. It's possible to deform it: imposing [q,p] = i? gives us a non-commutative C*-algebra of formal observables, which by Gel'fand-Na?mark theorem is realizable as an algebra of operators on some Hilbert space.
So we come to the very first thing anyone who studies QM proper learns: observables are operators on a Hilbert space that is the quantum-mechanical phase space. Hell, this is taken as an axiom in general quantum theory: it is literally part of what it means for physics to be "quantum". And even if one doesn't know any algebraic motivations (which never appear in introductory texts), that fact alone should make it really obvious that energy is a property of physical systems: more formally, an observable.
I can't even begin to apprehend the total confusion of ideas that could produce such a statement, but hopefully the following illustration will correct them:
Code:
á á á á á á á á á á á+-----------------------------+
á á á á á á á á á á á| Properties stuff can have á |
+--------------+ á á | á á á á á á á á á á á á á á |
| Stuff/Things | <-- | (Current, voltage, energy, á|
+--------------+ á á | áMomentum, Spin, Charge...) |
á á á á á á á á á á á+-----------------------------+
á Not a fucking complicated distinction.(Thing: Pen) <-- (Property: Blueness)
Herp.
Statement: "A 1.4 GeV proton hits your forehead."
(Thing: Proton) <-- (Property: Energy)
Derp.
We don't even know if magic actually fucks up electricity to begin with. That's just a guess. I know it's just a guess because I'm the one who invented that theory, and admitted as much when I did so.
One of the sure ways you know you're an oldfag is when you see people quoting you at each other without realizing who they're quoting.
My hypothesis, such as it was, was that magic does not get along with electronics specifically. Clockwork should, and indeed is proven to, coexist alongside magic perfectly fine; see the pocket watches, the Wesley Family Clock, and assuming it is actually an enchanted lighter and not just something that looks like one, the Put-Outer. When it is said that magic 'interferes' with muggle technology (and interferes is the specific word used in canon; not shuts down, fucks up, or renders nonfunctional), it is:
a.) in relation to Hogwarts, which definitely has more magic in one place than anywhere else in the UK, and possibly has more magic in one place than anywhere else in the world.
b.) seems to be implying high tech things, which I postulated would be defined as anything that involves circuitry. Clockwork, and even basic electronics, should be fine, but anything with a microchip or circuit board of some sort is not going to work.
Do note that this was a hypothesis and nothing more. Also note that there is a decent chunk of evidence that some electronics can indeed work perfectly fine around magic, even ones that involve circuitry, even when in contact with Hogwarts specifically, and that, even if this were not the case, the actual effect rendered is still poorly defined. We never saw it in person in any of the books, and 'interferes with muggle technology,' given wizarding ambiguity and general ignorance of technology in general, could be anything from making compasses spin to not making your laptop in any way nonfunctional but making it randomly sprout legs and dash around.
We do not know what actually is and is not affected by high concentrations of magic, even if we did we don't know what those effects would be, and just because it doesn't work around Hogwarts doesn't mean the two are incompatible, since Hogwarts is the Chernobyl of magic. There's nothing that says a wizarding household couldn't have a perfectly functional computer to no ill effect, or even that said computer could not be enchanted or otherwise modified with magic and still remain functional, and even be improved by said enchantment.
All we know is that if you get an absolute metric assload of magic in one place, 'something' happens that makes it 'interfere' with certain specific kinds of 'muggle technology' that are not elaborated upon.
tl;dr, the person who invented the theory you're all throwing around is of the opinion that magitech is perfectly viable, and that much of the fandom has gotten too wrapped up in it's own assumptions to realize that fact.
One of the sure ways you know you're an oldfag is when you see people quoting you at each other without realizing who they're quoting.
My hypothesis, such as it was, was that magic does not get along with electronics specifically. Clockwork should, and indeed is proven to, coexist alongside magic perfectly fine; see the pocket watches, the Wesley Family Clock, and assuming it is actually an enchanted lighter and not just something that looks like one, the Put-Outer. When it is said that magic 'interferes' with muggle technology (and interferes is the specific word used in canon; not shuts down, fucks up, or renders nonfunctional), it is:
a.) in relation to Hogwarts, which definitely has more magic in one place than anywhere else in the UK, and possibly has more magic in one place than anywhere else in the world.
b.) seems to be implying high tech things, which I postulated would be defined as anything that involves circuitry. Clockwork, and even basic electronics, should be fine, but anything with a microchip or circuit board of some sort is not going to work.
Do note that this was a hypothesis and nothing more. Also note that there is a decent chunk of evidence that some electronics can indeed work perfectly fine around magic, even ones that involve circuitry, even when in contact with Hogwarts specifically, and that, even if this were not the case, the actual effect rendered is still poorly defined. We never saw it in person in any of the books, and 'interferes with muggle technology,' given wizarding ambiguity and general ignorance of technology in general, could be anything from making compasses spin to not making your laptop in any way nonfunctional but making it randomly sprout legs and dash around.
We do not know what actually is and is not affected by high concentrations of magic, even if we did we don't know what those effects would be, and just because it doesn't work around Hogwarts doesn't mean the two are incompatible, since Hogwarts is the Chernobyl of magic. There's nothing that says a wizarding household couldn't have a perfectly functional computer to no ill effect, or even that said computer could not be enchanted or otherwise modified with magic and still remain functional, and even be improved by said enchantment.
All we know is that if you get an absolute metric assload of magic in one place, 'something' happens that makes it 'interfere' with certain specific kinds of 'muggle technology' that are not elaborated upon.
tl;dr, the person who invented the theory you're all throwing around is of the opinion that magitech is perfectly viable, and that much of the fandom has gotten too wrapped up in it's own assumptions to realize that fact.
Whatever, Raine. It's not like Hermione specifically mentioned electricity as one of those things that goes "haywire" around Hogwarts (and yes, those words verbatim, 'electricity' and 'haywire') in The Goblet of Fire. Now you partly have a good point that in canon it's still pretty ill-defined and unexplored that it's hard to tell what that means and just what the limits of this are (although most of that has been brought up in this thread before, e.g., by Tsuki_CB), but your claim that the fandom took direction from you personally on this issue is just arrogant bullshit.
I'd bet most people just read the books and didn't bother thinking about any theorizing, whether their own or that of others, just taking the line at its word. It's certainly a simpler and more plausible theory that explains the presence of the common "magic fucks with electricity" belief compared to "Lord Raine's personal insight mutated and infected the fandom."
I'd bet most people just read the books and didn't bother thinking about any theorizing, whether their own or that of others, just taking the line at its word. It's certainly a simpler and more plausible theory that explains the presence of the common "magic fucks with electricity" belief compared to "Lord Raine's personal insight mutated and infected the fandom."
And you are an impolite twat. Doesn't change the fact that the electronic bit was, in fact, my hypothesis, and as far as TFF is concerned, yes, I did invent it. That doesn't mean I was the only one ever, or that I started it for the entire fandom. I never claimed that, but you're being a twat, so expecting you to do things like not putting words in my mouth is probably a bridge too far.