When Ron and Hermione went to the Cha Myer of secrets in DH to get Basilisk fangs, how did they get back up? The way down is what was described as a fairly steep pipe, and Harry needed Fawkes the time he went.

 

Two words: "Wingardium Leviosa", or one word: "Levicorpus"

 

Is this a typo or am I missing something?

Do we have any idea on when Binns died? Like a rough estimate or anything? Marauder time? Riddle's time? Dumbledore's time?

 

Auto correct sorry.

Would wingardium leviosa work on two people that way. We never saw anyone in potterverse do any sort of floating or levitating. Apart from Voldemort who was said to be remarkable.

 

Couch Jr. bounced Malfoy up and down as a ferret.

 

All we know for certain is he was already dead by the Marauders' time. I always got the feeling it happened quite a while ago, but that has no real basis in canon.

 

Is there an upper limit on the effectiveness of the Vanishing Spell? Or, to be specific, is there any evidence to suggest that they don't work on magical objects/creatures?

 

Snape vanishes people's potions, and they would presumably be magical substances, so I'm not sure if that would be a limitation of the spell.

 

Nothing at all to suggest there is a limit (No canon answer), but bear in mind that there must be a reaon why the trio didn't try a vanishing spell on the horcruxes.

 

I seem to recall in HBP that Dumbledore mentions that the protections on the potion protecting the locket prevent the liquid from being altered in anyway and so it had to be drunk. Presumably the same was true for the horcruxes. I think if you don't want something vanished you need to use protective enchantments.

 

That reason is provided in DH when Minerva is entering into Ravenclaw Tower. The Knocker asked: Where do Vanished objects go? to which she replied, "Into nonbeing, which is to say, everything."

If we are to take that as factual, rather than esoteric nonsense, Vanishing a Horcrux doesn't destroy it. It spreads it among everything.

 

I'm probably going to explain this quite bad but I'll give it a go.

The fact that Dumbledore said that there were protections on the liquid implies that the liquid/basin isn't inherently immune to the vaishing charm; rather a ward/charm/whatever had to be cast to make it immune to vanishing.

Except "nonbeing" isn't actually "everything". One or the other must be false. Besides, I always viewed that question as more of a riddle than anything. I thought the Ravenclaw Knocker (Sounds like a euphenism for the most promiscuous person in that house) handed out riddles rather than questions that had factual answers.

Again, I'm going to say that the question doesn't have a canon answer (Other than placing protections on the object itself or how you interpret McGonagall's answerto the Ravenclaw Knocker) and proabably shouldn't be discussed on this thread. I would advise ihateseatbelts; to maybe consider creating a thread specifically for this question.

 

Best Horcrux idea was the guy who used a penny as one. Completely invisible for all intents and purposes. Can just vanish into the world and nobody would ever think about it.

 

I honestly think that you have to have to some kind of attachment to the object you're putting your soul in, otherwise it's just silly. It houses a portion of your soul, after all.

 

I'd use a speck of sand in the Sahara desert. Good luck finding that motherfuckers.

 

Or a cup of water and empty it into the ocean.

 

Air and release it into the sky? It's conceptual, oxygen holds an important place in my life.

 

In the movies Dumbledore says something along the lines "Powerful magic tends to leave a strong evidence afterwards, especially Dark Magic". So yeah.

 

I'd just drop it in the Mariana Trench. You can't get much more secure than that.