That actually does fit with the theory I put up on the previous page. It would explain why people still by stuff and don't just transfigure everything. It would kind of suck if your favorite robes suddenly turned backed into a piece of paper, just because a moth found its way into your wardrobe.

When you transfigure something, it completely changes into that thing (if you've done it right anyway). So it doesn't just take on the physical properties or anything. A table transfigured in a pig is a pig, in every single way.

 

The funny part is that a lot of DLP wants to think that Transfiguration is permanent. The only reason so many people are poor or not very-well off is because they suck at Transfiguration and can't be bothered to learn.

 

Replace "Transfiguration" with any other skill/knowledge and your statement remains true - of both the HP world and the real world.

 

It's easier to deal with the food animal problem if you work with the "bad food" hypothesis, instead of the "can't transfigure food at all" hypothesis. If bad food can be transfigured, you could say something like this:

You transfigure a mound of elephant shit into a cow. In all physical respects, it's a cow. It's made out of the components of a cow, it eats like a cow, behaves like a cow, etc. But even though it's a real cow, it has an extra property that natural cows don't have.

There are still lingering traces of the magic that turned it into a cow. This pretty much has to be the case if we assume that it can be untransfigured back into its precise original form, even without knowing that form (as happened at times in canon).

It's more descriptive, then, to say that it's a transfigured cow. That isn't to say that it's some sort of magical construct; it's a real, physically perfect cow that used to be elephant dung. And no matter how perfect your transfiguration is, you can't erase that magical link between its current cow form and its original shit form.

So now you kill your transfigured cow and cut it up into food. Again, the components behave like you would expect cow pieces to behave, and you're left with some nice juicy steak. But killing the cow and cutting it up didn't remove those original traces that lead back to its elephant dung origins. So what you're left with isn't simply "food." It's transfigured food. A wizard can still point his wand at it and turn it back into shit. And if we've got transfigured food, we've got the original issue with the exception to Gamp's Law.

tl;dr: I think you need to envision a sort of duality for transfiguration to work. If you transfigure wood to steel, what you get is both physically perfect steel, and "steel-that-used-to-be-wood." The first describes how it responds to physical manipulation, and the second describes what you can do to it magically (e.g. untransfigure it to get the original wood).

 

While I agree with this, I still don't like the idea that there's some kind of "magical imprint" on the Transfigured thing. I think its causal history is sufficient for Untransfiguration to work: as you put it so well, it is "steel-that-used-to-be-wood". All that is required for this to be the case is that the object has a past, not that it has a magical property in the present.

More generally, while I agree that your idea works as a possible fix (though there are two problems with it, more on that in a moment), I think I prefer to just accept that the story is broken in this respect. I prefer to have a magical system that involves non-sucky Transfiguration and an inconsistent story than a consistent story and a neutered magical system.

But then, that's why I started Lords of Magic.

One problem I see with your idea is this: while you can't make food out of nothing with magic, you can create nutritious food from other nutritous food. Once you have some food in front of you, it is possible to expand it, multiply it, and transform it. This comes from the WOMBAT test, but we also catch a glimpse of it in canon: Hagrid's pumpkins.

(Edit for the post below: As Equinox points out, Hermione also states this in DH, so it is also canon, not just from the WOMBAT test.)

This seems to put a bit of a spanner in the works. If you're right then food transfigured into other food is only as nutritious as the original amount, not the end result, which contradicts the above.

The second problem is that there's something of an internal contradiction in what you say.

You say that a transfigured thing is physically identical to an untransfigured thing of the same type, but that it has some kind of magical trace that contains the object's causal history, which allows for Untransfiguration.

But that isn't all this magical trace is doing. In the case of food, it is rendering the food unable to fuel the human body.

Given that the process of nutrition is essentially a series of physical reactions, what we're left with is a transfigured item that isn't physically identical to the non-transfigured object, because it doesn't physically react with other physical things as it should.

That is: if something doesn't behave as it physically should behave, then it isn't physically identical to a natural object of that type. Physical identity includes physical behaviour.

 

The bolded part is the thing I find most interesting. Sure you may not be able to transfigure/conjure 'real' food, but turning a single mouthful into who knows how much is still pretty awesome (and useful).

I also believe the "summon it if you know where it is" statement provides a rather simple explanation for every time someone has made food or drink appear out of no where.

 

The bold part is interesting, but it also gives me Bible vibes. I have 1 fish, magical swish and I have 40 fish, but no fish means no fish. JKR used Jesus as basis for part of her magical system? Explains the zealots~

P.s. And he was doing it wandless, how awesome is that...lol

 

I agree entirely that the magical traces that link the object to its past don't have to be directly attached to the object, though I don't have any particular dislike for the idea. To put what you said in another way, they may simply exist, and that's all that needs to be said on them; I believe it doesn't affect my attempt at a solution.

As for the question of why food-to-food transfiguration is possible... *twitch*. It's something I haven't actually tried working out in its entirety, because I think it would require some truly convoluted magical mechanics - even compared to what I've tried laying out already. The real mind-bender is the question of how multiplied food can remain nutritious, as you mentioned.

To even have a chance of explaining it, I think one would need a definition of Gamp's Law that's more specific than most people imagine it being, and they'd need an explanation of exactly what happens to food you transfigure out of nothing - why it doesn't work properly, that is.

I did try coming up with an answer to the latter question (older post link; and yes, you did have a few comments about it), but thinking about it, that wouldn't explain how food multiplication is possible while maintaining the original's level of nutrition.

I believe it would answer your third point, though:

If the problem is one of stability, as I discussed in the older post, then the transfigured food would be identical to its natural counterpart...until it degraded back. This would seem to let us have it both ways - transfigured food that interacts with the body precisely like it's supposed to (i.e. the same physical identity as natural food), while still being completely unsuitable for sustenance.

From there, I'd probably need to come up with a separate mechanic that lets food-to-food transfiguration be stable, at least in terms of nutritional content. I think I would deserve to be lynched if I tried thinking that through in this thread. :awesome

 

What in the goddamned fuck?

 

Taure's idea that an object affected by magic, somehow retains a causal memory(therefore a trace) of it's existence is applicable and extendible to the whole domain of magic and it's interaction with the real world as we know it.

A careful examination of the 'observables' of magic in the books, without dipping into a prose-based explanation of the theory(such as Gamp's laws):

The facts that are known:-

Faster than light(FTL) travel has been never been proven, although it has been alluded to. You might think that it's apparation that's FTL, but that is not the most important example, it is in fact the Protean Charm that's the strongest reason that argues for the existence of FTL transfer of information. Even that is not however conclusive of the existence of FTL, so therefore FTL at our present understanding(of magic) does not occur due to magic. [this rationale implies that until proven otherwise conclusively, our understanding of the world at this time is accurate]

Postulations base on the fact

If you think that the conclusion about FTL in the previous argument was accurate, then that can lead to a myriad of possibilities:

1. Magic is not energy independent - rather, it is in some form held accountable to the First and Second laws of Thermodynamics

2. While the exact nature of magics interaction with physical world may remain undefinable at this time, it's scope and limits of interaction and the consequences of those interactions might be predictable. Not predictable in exact terms of the each outcome, but predictable in the sense of what can and cannot be accomplished.

3. If Einstein was correct about the light limit, then it implies that magic does interact with the physical world in a manner that allows the formulation of axiomatic rules for said interaction. While, this might sound like a repetition of the previous point, the difference is subtle. The difference and distinction between this and previous postulate is that, magic's interactions can only be defined by the limits of it's capabilities, this postulate would imply a more accurate predictability of magic.

4. Another factor to be looked at is that, magic is in fact very predictable, since it obviously can be instructed to generations of wizards to accomplish the same magics. This removes the so called idea that magic is chaotic and un-understandable.

For example, even in the pre-Newtonian era, every child knew that when you throw an apple into the air it will fall back down, and this fact could be applied usefully. The full nature of the Law of Gravitation was not appreciated by people at that time, but it was still used to their benefit in a limited manner.

Returning to the macro picture, this could possibly lead to the suggestion of some guidelines for authors who want demonstrate the capabilities of magic an formulate a set of rules that while not fully explanatory, will be consistent and universally applicable in their stories.

 

This discussion makes me wish magic was real

Damn you JKR

 

No. The absolute, unimpeachable confirmation that FTL travel/information propagation is possible in the Harry Potter universe is the existence of Time Turners. (The existence of true prophecies is another such confirmation).

 

Cant' believe I missed that. :facepalm

But still that leaves points two and four somewhat intact.

 

Rules, theories and guidelines are useful, but magic and consistency are two points that do not need to go together. Original universe is a fairytale. Something not meant to be logical or consistent. Magic in it is in kind – something out of fairytale. Not logical, not consistent and not created to be analyzed.

I believe all this can be summed in this way:
- First, there is Rowling HP world. It falls apart when analyzed in almost >any< way.
- Second, we have Rowling world with it’s flaws smoothed – here consistency comes at cost of modification and specification of various canon elements. It has to be done by any author to create his own story, and how exactly it is done depends on personal preferences. From following canon closely and simply avoiding flaws to creation of consistent system, that actually has little common with original universe. It can be discussed endlessly, and it is what we are actually doing now.
- Third, he have Santi take on the canon. Which is specific application of second point.

Transfiguration discussion here is meaningless in the respect that it falls mostly into second and not third ‘universe’.


Currently I’m more interested with rather plausible possibility that Nathan >will< win competition. He is canon Harry’s counterpart after all – and it can easily be done in exactly the same way which original Harry won – since let’s face it, Nathan is comparably as mediocre as original Harry was, and I think it is safe to assume, that in canon original Harry was far below level of Krum. This distance didn’t matter.

First task – dumb luck finding about dragons, one charm and again dumb luck flying. No skills, and very little effort needed. Second task, gilyweed on silver platter and ‘heroics’ with Gabby. No skills and no effort needed. Third task – dumb luck again. No serious skill or effort needed again.

In case of Santi’s Harry, in third task Moody wouldn’t hesitate to simply sabotage him (conceivably it is exactly what it was done in canon). It’s not that hard to slip a potion during breakfast. And then after Nathan is lauded a winner, I wonder how big rift between brothers would grow.

Such situation could lead to interesting development. Emotion in particular would be worth considering. Given Harry’s personality and reaction of the world around – Nathat being hailed as a better, more accomplished wizard than Harry – it could be enough to justify development in any direction. Up to serious rift with family and following darker path.

Heh – and just imagine how terribly Ron would grate at this point, with his light oriented outlook, and good Nathan (with Ron too by association) being thousand times better than any dark wizard – Harry in particular... Homicide anyone?

 

You know, you all complain about syed, but he somehow brings an interesting point - if Nathan competes in the Tournament, will the fact that he has now a worse broom than the Firebolt change outcome of the First Task for him?

Anyway, the more I think about it, the more I actually want to see only Harry in the Tournament. It's just more interesting that way for me. Let him have his moment of glory all for himself with all good and bad, probably even winning in the end.

Only then Nathan starts this ridiculous claim that Voldemort is back, because he's clearly jealous that his brother's newfound fame seems to be bigger than his own as the BWL. Harry can easily confirm what is the truth (Legilimency), but with everybody still talking about craziness of his twin, his personal triumph will be completely overshadowed. And that would make someone like him very angry, but without clear target of this emotion (his brother, because why he must be the BWL? maybe the Dark Lord? stupid wizards and witches?).

 

I made no connection between what syed said and the first task. Beyond being pretty sure that dragons don't speak parseltongue, that's an interesting question. After all, canon-Harry had a lot of difficulty with that, and the Firebolt is supposed to be a lot faster then the nimbus 2000.

 

Sorry if I'm taking the conversation off track, but I've got a question concerning the marriage contract. Why is Calypso's father all of a sudden not finding someone for her to marry? I mean, with all the conspiracy theories surrounding him, isn't it even a little odd that he's just dropping the matter? The contract was the entire reason Harry learned Occlumency, and as a result, Legilimency. It's the reason Calypso is his girlfriend. It's the reason Harry is a better duelist.

So now I'm thinking, was there even a marriage contract? Did Calypso maybe lie about it so she had a valid reason for Harry to learn the skill? Maybe her father came up with the plan so that he would become a Legilimens. Occlumency made Harry more withdrawn (Lily's complaint in Interlude), and Legilimency would make things even worse. He'd know when his family is lying to him; about what, I don't know, but it would breed distrust and could ultimately lead to him becoming alienated from them.

Then again, maybe I'm just looking too far into it and just need to keep lurking.

 

It's because Voldemort has already returned off-screen and Rosier knows it and is now seeking Harry's death, along with all of the other Potters and the Order.

 

No, it's not. It's heavily implied that Calypso is now barren, or that something else is wrong with her. As the main purpose of a marriage contract is ensuring that heirs are produced (something that Calypso is likely now incapable of), there is little point for a contract.

No. It's not. Most of that would have happened anyway, though I'll grant you that Harry would have taken longer to hear of 'mind magics'.

Yes.

I think you have the wrong thread. This is Harry Potter and The Boy Who Lived, not Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.

Bolded for truth. You'll get it one day.