The blood quill from OoTP is a unique magical artifact, created by Umbridge, not a contractual tool for Gringotts or the ministry, or anything like that. From all accounts, it's an attractive quill, and it hides an insidious evil inside it, though Dolores would probably call it necessary, not evil. I like to think that it wasn't created on purpose though, it just came to be as she unknowingly poured all of her day to day, mundane malice into, what was, her day to day writing utensil. Then she was able to improve it with more enchantments.

It adds some depth to her character and abilities. Fanfiction would have you believe that she is barely a squib that only managed a single OWL, but it's more likely that she's a decently powerful witch with a talent for charms and the dark arts.

 

I like that. It works better with the other teachers' not realizing what she was doing than if it were a standard, known device.

 

That's actually canon, it was mentioned in her Original Pottermore article, which you can now only see in the E-book Short Stories from Hogwarts of Power, Politics and Pesky Poltergeists.

 

I know a lot of stuff gets debated around how HP magic works. While I find a lot of the ideas interesting, I've outlined here how I personally headcanon it working. It's very much an... -elastic- system I guess; hp magic is not amenable to rational fixed rules and reconciling the contradictions basically requires fuzziness.

---------
The four necessary component to doing magic are belief, intent, focus and understanding [the result]. The first three are relatively straightforward but "understanding" remains the most dynamic and unpredictable aspect.

Both incantation and wand movements are representative/shortcuts to "understanding". There is a group effect where 'magic' taps into the knowledge/understanding of all witches and wizards in the area, making it far easier to cast a spell you don't know well yourself if you are in the same general location as someone who does know it well.

* A spell's creator has basically crafted a sufficiently detailed and independent understanding of a new spell in the own imagination to be able to cast it without any help from the "group effect". Divination or any kind can help someone do this but ultimately it's a bit like painting a picture or composing a song. Unless understanding of a spell has gone far and wide enough to compensate, once a spell's creator dies (or forgets), the spell decays into unusability. Ancient spells? Pfft. They don't work with no one alive understanding them well enough. (Although, someone sufficiently determined and intelligent enough could recreate a spell, it is impossible to say how close they truly are to the original. E.g. Tom Riddle and the Horcrux creation spell.)

* Because the group effect fades with distance, travelling to somewhere that doesn't do magic like yours may significantly reduce the efficacy's of a wizard's spell casting. Europe is mostly similar enough but go to (say) China, and you'll be at quite a disadvantage. Similarly, foreign wizards visiting England, however powerful in their homeland, are not going to be quite so great.

* The group effect is why the top magical families still send their kids to Hogwarts. Due to the collective expertise and understanding of the teaching staff there, the kids will be able to cast and therefore learn many more spells, much more easily.

* All those essays? That's about expanding a kids understanding of a spell enough to not need to rely on the group effect to cast it by themselves.

* There are lots of spells being created all the time, and most of them are about a valuable as McDonald's happy meal toys. They last about as long too, before the inventor forgets them enough they don't work any more.

* Accidental magic is basically one off, unique spells, where strong emotion combined with imagination momentarily shortcuts the normal work of creating a spell.

* The difficulty of a spell is mostly influenced by the difficulty of grasping the "understanding" needed to cast it. The killing curse is extraordinarily difficult to cast as it needs a great deal of contemplation of death before the caster can grasp it; the levitation charm exceedingly easy as the concept of a floating feather is understood even by even the slowest of Howarts first years.

* Incantations need precision only in the mind of the caster. Everyone has a different voice and accent; it's not so much the exact *sound* (as might be reproduced on a recording), but rather the *meaning* the caster is putting onto it. Sometimes multiple incantations tap into the same spell, especially if it is a very common one. But saying buffalo instead of baruffio means you had buffalos on the brain and that, rather than the word said per say, causes problems.


## Extra note on "focus". Wands are the focus usually used, and they are very good at it and the best/easiest option for most magic. But they are not the only way of fulfilling the "focus" component. Wandless magic might use another item as a focus or more commonly, uses the caster's body as the focus. At one end of the range, the animagus transformation works very well using the caster's body for a focus but at the other end, casting the killing curse using one's body for a focus might just kill the caster instead of the target.

### Extra extra note on belief and intent. That first wingardium leviosa? It wasn't that Ron was saying it wrong, Hermione darling, it was him not quite pulling off the belief and intent. A common problem in first years, overcome naturally as the class all working on it together bolsters belief and encourages intent. Once that first hurdle is past, Ron and the rest of the students like him were fine. Hermione is just one of those individuals who didn't need that boost past initial doubts and fears; she has that required determination that it _will_ work all on her own.

 

Don't these kind of go against each other? Isn't all understanding helpful? I'm quoting this old reply because my own "headcannon" which I'm using to write my story uses muggle scientific knowledge. I admit that HPMoR is my favorite fanfiction and the reason I'm into this thing; that does not mean it is without its shortcomings (it has plenty).

My own "epiphany" and a large driving force behind my story is that of course scientific knowledge (muggle understanding) of the world is going to be helpful for wielding magic. And that can be true even largely keeping with hp's nature of magic: we see that academic knowledge matters, that practical familiarity and magical instinct as well as emotion play a big role. Why shouldn't understanding of the real (muggle) world be somewhat useful? Scientific knowledge could be largely useless for lots of magic, but perhaps it can be unexpectedly useful in different branches of magic but for wizards' superiority/ignorance.

My "headcannon" basically states that: all understanding of the world that surrounds us can help in magic.

For example, creating fire (incendio) would be easier to master if the wizard has practical experience with fire. If he has created fire by muggle means, if he knows about fire scientifically, if he has felt its heat or been burned. If he has put out a candle with his fingers. Of course, magical theory is the primary factor, but one cannot truly master the magic if he does not have a complete understanding and experience the phenomenon/object.

 

I start with four observations:

1. We observe that students at Hogwarts are capable of performing complete transfigurations of animals. As far as we know, Hogwarts does not teach biology or chemistry. Even if it did, there would be no way that teenage students could have a complete understanding of the biology and chemistry of a complex animal. So it seems that no knowledge of biology or chemistry is required to perform a complete transfiguration. It is therefore difficult to conceptualise what chemical/biological knowledge would add - a complete transfiguration is already a permanent transformation which is physically (but not magically) identical to a naturally occurring object. There is no "better" transfiguration possible.

2. In JKR's article on wizarding medicine, she says "broadly speaking, wizards would have the power to correct or override ‘mundane’ nature, but not ‘magical’ nature". As a general magical rule, this is borne out in canon: we constantly see magic completely defy "physical nature" without any particular regard for its so-called laws (e.g. conservation of energy), but we also see magic coming up against the limits described by "magical nature" - inability to raise the dead, inability to act across time and space, inability to act on objects above a certain size.

3. Additionally, it can be observed that magical theory is complex, academically rigorous, and likely contains a description of the world. For example, given that alchemy is real in the HP universe, it is likely that magical theory has its own description of the nature of matter, which (going by historical alchemy) probably describes the world in some variation of the classical elements. And in the HP universe, this description of the world is true.

4. Finally, we observe that the contents of magical theory are items such as food, secrets, and the soul, which magic treats as "natural kinds" (or perhaps we should say, magical kinds). These are not just things which do not appear in scientific theory; treating sociological concepts as naturally occurring kinds which are a part of the objective description of the universe is simply incompatible with the reductionist, physicalist worldview. The existence of the soul (i.e. non-physical substance) also contradicts the physicalism which underlies modern science.

From these four observations, I draw certain conclusions:

A. The relationship between magical nature and physical nature must take one of two possible forms.

B. Firstly, it is possible that there is no such thing as physical nature at all, and that in fact the correct description of the universe is magical in nature. Muggle descriptions of the universe are simply wrong. They may be useful fictions which can provide reliable predictions when used within a limited empirical domain, but they are still just fictions. The ontology of physics is fundamentally incorrect. The real world equivalent of this physical-magical relationship would be the relationship of Newton to Einstein.

C. Secondly, it is possible that there are two parallel, independent, and ontologically inconsistent sets of rules running the universe: the physical set of rules and the magical set of rules. The physical rules work fine until they come into contact with something magical, at which time the physical rules are suspended and the magical rules dictate reality. This is the "cheat code" model of magic, and the possibility of two true but inconsistent sets of rules governing the universe has a real world description in the form of scientific pluralism.

D. Most importantly for this discussion, either way, there isn't any point in learning Muggle science. In the first model, Muggle science is simply false; if anything, learning false concepts is likely to hinder rather than help the aspiring wizard. In the second model, Muggle science is at least true, but there is also an equally true magical description of the universe which contradicts the physical one, and it is on that description that magical phenomena occur. Learning the rules which do not apply to magic, and the description of the universe which is suspended in the presence of magic, is unlikely to assist with using or understanding magic.

In conclusion: at best, Muggle scientific knowledge is useless and irrelevant, at worst, it will confuse the student of magic and send them down incorrect paths of investigation.

For what it is worth, however, given that JKR describes the world as divided into "mundane nature" and "magical nature", I suspect the second model is how the author instinctively conceptualises HP magic.

 

Oh, a detailed answer! I'll try answering to the best of my ability and understanding of what you write (hoping I've not misunderstood you and that I'm able to convey what I'm thinking). That being said your fourth observation isn't very clear to me.

I disagree with your conclusion; there is a third form that the relationship between magical nature and physical nature can take. Two sets of rules running the universe that are not incompatible and independent from one another, but complementary if not interdependent. Both sets valid given some limits and both may break in different situations. I don't see how your observations go against this

A real-life example is the relationship between classical physics and modern (post quantum mechanics) physics. A physical system can still be described by classical physics provided certain limitations. Going into subatomic levels the laws of classical physics break down and generally do not provide a correct description of nature. However they are not worthless or incorrect, just a limited explanation of reality. The same goes for quantum mechanics, and the same I would argue would be true for magical theory. All are theories that try to explain nature and are all valid within certain limitations.

For another example think of non-Euclidean geometry and the relationship between those geometries with Euclidean geometry.

Also, regarding your first observation:

Transfiguration of animals: What you are describing points to the fact that knowledge of muggle science is unneeded/not required for this act of magic. What I'm proposing is that it may still be useful. As personal experience could be useful. Perhaps someone who has a pig farm (knows their habits, has experienced their smell, has butchered them, cooked and eaten them, etc) would get into transfiguring something as a pig more easily than someone with an equal understanding of magical theory.

D. The magical description of the universe does not have to contradict the physical one, but rather supplement and expand it. Whether your approach to understanding the world is through magical theory or "muggle" knowledge or based on lived experience it is an understanding of the world. I don't see how this could ever be useless or irrelevant.

For what it's worth, I treat the story I'm writing as a vehicle for learning about stuff and trying to explain it and fit it in an interesting universe filled with magic. As science/technology, philosophy interest me I'm inclined to cover as much as I can in novel ways.

 

Habits of those old times, at least the armor part. Or maybe for hunting magic beasts in a world where dragons didn't exist only in reservations. Or maybe to supply the castle with enchanted armors they can later animate in case of an invasion.

Sure, magic weapons/armor probably isn't the bread-and-butter to magical smiths, but it's something I can imagine being part of medieval Hogwarts as well lol.

You're at least partially correct there. From what I remember, temporary transfiguration is canonically wrong, but all transfiguration is indeed reversible by competent wizards.

Love this! Particularly the Librarian, but all of them are really well put.

Taking that for my headcanon too ^_^

A bit of my own headcanon is that writing with a quill is not difficult at all.

*Even basic wizarding quills come with a minor charm to prevent leaking ink everywhere (ubiquitous to all quills ever, including anti-cheating).

*First year students usually get "beginner student quills" which are charmed to always have at the very least legible writing. Sure, those charms won't be on the anti-cheating quills when the tests come around, but by then they'll all have at least passable handwriting from muscle memory alone.
Beginner quills aren't mandatory (maybe the kid learned beautiful penmanship from their parents already) so it isn't something that's noted on the school list, but shopkeepers do push them on young students and it's just something that everybody does without much conscious thought.

I like to think wizarding paper (stationary in general) developed side by side with muggles, so I quite agree with your version of wizarding paper.

Wizarding paper would be both better (like you listed) and more eco-friendly (not because wizard folk are overly concerned with it, but because having magic on the manufacturing causes less environmental destruction).

Not necessarily. Taure answered it best, so I'm just gonna reiterate that while it could help depending on your worldview, it could also be irrelevant or ever counterproductive, depending on how you decide the cosmology goes.

I agree very much so.

I have to admit that @moribund_helix 's take on the physical and magical natures being complementary could be possible, but even if it is, if having muggle understanding can have some impact, it is not something that plays much of a role or gives significant advantage. We can infer that by knowing that people without much (if any) contact with muggles or muggle sciences pass transfiguration.

Approaching Muggle Sciences as relevant, understanding of a pig's anatomy and biochemistry would aid one in transfiguring them (or targets into them), which IMO clashes with canon. Transfiguration between species, inanimate-to-animate, conjuration and more rely on magic theory not muggle science and not understanding the latter isn't a detriment to advancing in the class.

Actually, the example of someone who lived on a farm and had personal experience with pigs potentially having an easier time working on Pig-related transfigurations is something I can agree with, but not because Muggle Sciences are relevant, but backed by Magic Theory.
Someone with loads of personal experience with pigs could have a better grasp on the platonic ideal Pig image/concept and thus have a slight edge in such transfigurations. Of course, that's taking the transfiguration approach that relies on platonic theory.

I mean, if the physical and magical nature are complementary to each other, then I concur that muggle sciences aren't useless or truly irrelevant, just impractical and unnecessary (by virtue that people without any knowledge of such actually pass transfiguration). They could give a certain edge, smooth the learning process, but still wouldn't be something world-breaking.

However, while possible, Taure's two other worldviews are just as likely to be "true" and taking any of those it's very hard not to see muggle sciences as a novelty at best.

I can certainly understand all three ideas and choose my own preferred for my headcanon (which is currently that magical theory is the correct one and muggle's understanding of the universe is inherently flawed because they lack key information).

If you'd rather see them as complementary, it's totally valid and you do you. I just don't see muggle sciences being ultra-relevant even in the theory you proposed. They just wouldn't be as irrelevant as in the other two cosmologies presented.

That's pretty neat.

I've got to say, I like HPMOR as well and I think I get what you're going for. A more science-tech based worldview can be fun to read sometimes (even if I'm more into fantasy heavy fics lately) and if that's something you want to explore, fanfic is a really cool sandbox where you can play with the concept. I just don't think the science heavy take is very canon-compliant (and doesn't have to be for a fic).

 

Yes, of course at the end of the day one can choose to go one's own way and write whatever he/she wants. However:

I do believe this is not a particularly good argument. It is true that in canon we never see scientific knowledge being relevant or needed anywhere. But we never see it anywhere. My point being that since we do not have any mention of it, there is room to play without it _clashing_ with canon. Meaning, scientific knowledge wouldn't be a prerequisite, but could make some things easier or even be used to create novel spells/effects. In the sense that if real understanding is achieved it is not too dissimilar to experiences (as in the pig example) which really fits with canon. Also, keep in mind that big leaps in chemistry & biology have been made very recently (due to technological advancement), although I have to admit, knowledge of anatomy is a lot older (but I could imagine a magical theory textbook having the very basics of the anatomy of an animal).

I do understand that such an approach could easily clash with canon & its spirit (rather severely even) as done with HPMoR, but I hope to retain hp magic's quality (which is very much based on feelings/meaning/experience) while also exploring, say, Lobachevskian & Riemannian geometry. Or how stuff like a camera works & is made. But I suppose what I really mean is, I'd like it to remain a fantasy story that one could daydream about even if it contains parts of quantum mechanics.

Anyway, I'll see how it plays out, thanks for the reply!

 

No, I get that... it's just that, if it played a big part in the universe, a lot of the setting that we've seen would be different and people couldn't really afford being so science-blind. Or at the very least we'd see a lot more muggleborns being front and center when it comes to new discoveries.

It's not that it's impossible for muggle sciences to play a bigger part in the cosmology, it's that it doesn't strike me as realistic in-universe.

That's interesting, but you'd have to find some way to make peace between our modern understanding of the world and wizards being "stuck" with scientific theories from before the Statute of Secrecy and having them working when they shouldn't by modern standards (because healing magic actually works, can easily heal anything that isn't magic in nature and predates germ theory).

Sure, muggle sciences advanced a lot in the last couple of centuries, but magic likely has as well. They have moving globes that accurately depict the entire galaxy (highly advanced astronomy - possibly better than the muggle version), potions are always being perfected and advanced, magic isn't standing static as muggles advance.

Oh, it can definitely be done lol. Not trying to discourage that at all! Even if our takes on what is a canon-compliant cosmology differs, it doesn't really matter for me to enjoy your story and if you post it, let me know 'cause I'm definitely interested ^_^

And you know, HPMOR's setting is not exactly canon compliant. Magic theory is different, there's the whole Atlantean thing, Transfiguration is very different from canon, parselmouth as a "curse" to ensure he Slytherin couldn't be lied to by his own family members... but its magic does feel whimsical and fantastical! While I do have some problems with HPMOR's Harry and the story, I love the way the characters interact and I truly enjoy the way magic is portrayed, plus its got my favorite Quirrel in all fanfics ever.

 

1- Squib is only a title given to witches and wizards who are magically inept, they are "magically illiterate" due to a variety of unfortunate circumstances such as poverty and neglect.
No squib has ever received any magical education during their childhood and teenage years. It is possible to overcome this and learn magic later in life as squibs were born with the spark within them, they have magic and it's what allows them to perceive ghosts and other things invisible to muggles.


2- Magic is everywhere, movements of the planets can affect the weather and even give different magical properties to things, for example, Veritaserum takes a full moon cycle to mature, and Hermione picked the fluxweed beneath a full moon to prepare the Polyjuice Potion.
And because magic can both passively and negatively interfere with technology and magic is everywhere, I think that all muggles are stuck with 1990's technology and very slow internet. That means that even in the year 2050 muggles will still be using those bulky old phones and watching low-quality color tv.

From Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Chapter 28:

 

I really like the idea that there is a small cabal of wizards that keep up-to-date on muggle technology. And that these wizards are behind every innovation and advancement in the development of CGI and photoshopping technology. They are pioneering these technologies explicitly so no-one will believe photographic or video evidence of the existence of magic.

 

Nice. They could be an offshoot of the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts office. The Office of Muggle Misinformation.

As technology advanced, they leeched funding away from the Misuse Office

 

They also propagate ridiculous conspiracy theories so they'll have ammunition to discredit people who try to blow the secret. "You believe in magic? Whatever, flat-earther!"

 

I agree it is just ridiculous

 

A lot of Muggle maths Wizards don't use in Arithmancy or the like because 1) Arithmancy isn't just magic maths, it involves a lot of magic things and can skip over logic in places because magic
2) Wizards think muggle stuff is at best a curiousity and it would be above them to use such things.
3) parts of muggle maths (like combintorics) are useless because magic obscures things magically and not through a system.

 

My head-canon is some stuff (mainly Transfiguration related) is closer to muggle logic, while others (Charms, Curses) are more whimsical. Not sure about Potions, but maybe somewhere in the middle...

 

Interestingly about math in canon, is that according to Rowling's Wizarding World article about Measurments, Wizards don't really have a problem with using it, as they just use magic.

 

Here's a small one: Phrenology is an accepted magical field. Due to it's nuance and the fact that it is best used for generalities, it is mostly a hobbyist endeavor.