Or Aberforth when that goat scandal broke?

I don't know, to be fair it sounds like it almost has the quality of a legend and we only care because we know what the future holds. Rather than a direct Dumbledore needs a shit in the middle of a long bus trip -> Phoenix appears, probably better to think of it as when a phoenix will help.

This won't have a firm answer ever, most likely, or at least until something nonsensical happens in a future film or JK tweet.

Fighting evil, companionship, preserving the good in a Dumbledore and conquering the internal bads, etc. may be a good internal framework. Some sort of moral struggle with a bit of gravitas. Phoenix have gravitas galore.

 

Was Wizard's chess set has automatic repair spell? I hard to image that ron willingly to buy a new set because it was destory.

 

Presumably. It's never said, that I know of, but it would be weird if not.

 

How is it known that the Chamber of Secrets was opened in the 40s? As far as I remember, there was no indication that petrifications happened at that time. There was just a girl who died, and Hagrid was blamed because of his spider. But Hagrid knew nothing about a Chamber, so where did the idea of the Chamber opening occur?

 

We know that one girl died but that there had been "attacks" (plural), so we can assume there were petrifications. There also could have been a writing on the wall back then too.

 

Look at Diary!Riddle's penchant for theatrics, things like writing "Enemies of the heir beware" in blood on a wall, or "Her bones will lie in the chamber forever"

There's no point to it beyond generating fear and creating a mythos for the "Heir of Slytherin"

I wouldn't put it past Riddle to have done similar shit when he first opened the Chamber.

 

Does it actually says "in half" anywhere? It seems way too mathematical for HP. I think I remember it being "a part of the soul".

 

Diary Riddle being different from the rest can be explained by his having made the horcrux at a different stage in his life. That the ring was killing Dumbledore might have been the result of the horcrux's magic, or it might have been a protective enchantment, like how most of them had a no-summoning enchantment. I don't remember the books saying that his soul is split in half, only that it was in seven pieces. I remember that he felt the loss of his cup, but there was no mention of feeling the loss of the ring, nor did it fling him into a hunt to see if his horcruxes were safe. For that reason I would say it is unlikely that the ring contained more of him than the cup.

 

I think that this is a very unmagical way to look at a soul it just seems to mathematical. A soul is probably infinite not bound by phsyical things and not able to be expressed in percantages.

I also would like to think Voldemort wouldn't be such a moron not able to comprehend the implications and possible drawbacks of going so far but he did more idiotic things. ....

 

Even if it is possible to break up the soul into percentage parts, it's a common misconception that a horcrux is half your soul. They are referred to as "fragments", which seems to imply quite a small portion. If I were going the mathematical route, I wouldn't make any horcrux more than say 1%.

Beyond disliking the mathematical approach per se, I also think it's problematic thematically. An important part of Voldemort's character is that there was no difference (contrary to the fandom trope) between Tom Riddle and Voldemort. He was always that evil, he just appeared less so to the public when he was younger because he was hiding his true self. But to his closest followers, he was already Lord Voldemort while in Hogwarts. Somewhat like Batman, Tom Riddle is the mask.

 

I would imagine his character changes over the years, even if in ways that do not relate to his evilness. The theory has more to do with his magical power, which seems patently incorrect anyways, but I've heard variants where he's just less sane every time he makes a horcrux. That's possible, but there isn't a lot of evidence.
Batman and Bruce Wayne are both false personas.

 

I've seen the soul percentage argument come up before. I always figured that a soul is a metaphysical sort of thing, not just something that is 500 ML that you take 250 ML out of. That just seems hokey to me - magic isn't really quantifiable like that. And even it it was, there's nothing saying it doesn't grow back/replenish itself over time like in Dresden Files.

 

Just a thing to break some fanon: are there instances in the books when a Portkey is enchanted before it is placed at its departure point? I think the rules on a portkey are that they have a predetermined source and destination. The only exception I can recall is the Triwizard cup, which had obviously been tampered with to make it stop over in the Little Hangleton graveyard before completing its transit to the maze entrance.

 

There's nothing that directly suggests the opposite. The difficulty would be carrying it around, since they're supposed to take you to the destination the moment you 'grasp' them.

 

As far as I remember from the books all we know is that portkeys can be created in a moment taking everyone touching them* when activated(touch and time-based are the ones shown) and that they can work multiple times with multiple destinations.

I don't believe we are given any details beyond that. So predetermined destination seems to be the case, but can't recall anything that indicates a predetermined source especially since we have been shown them being moved a bit and still work.

EDIT:
*Actually looking back at book five Harry only says he placed his hand on the golden head which implies Dumbledore was still holding it so while all cases shown only take people touching them apparently it can select which to.

 

Do we know just how bad Harry's eyesight is without his glasses?

Is he closer to "nearly blind as a bat, and completely useless in a fight" or "can't read the menu in a low-lit restaurant" if he loses them?

 

Hermione says during the Seven Potters thingy that it's really, really fucking bad. And if I'm not mistaken, there are times when he wakes up and before he puts the glasses, he can only see blurs. So yep, probably the first option.

 

This then begs the question: why did Harry never stick his glasses to his face? Or at the very least get a strap around the back of his head, or some enchanted goggles or something.

He'd really be screwed if a Death Eater decided to summon his glasses off him (though I guess they wouldn't have any way of knowing just how bad his vision is), or if they just happened to fall off during a battle.

 

And since it never happened, you can deduce that 1) Harry/Hermione did charm his glasses to stick to his head after the first time Fred or George hit him over the head and he spent five minutes looking for them, like every sane wizard with glasses, or 2) every character in the books is stupid and the whole plot only works because their enemies are as dumb as they are. I prefer the first explanation.