In canon, was there every anything said about the relative strengths of the auror forces/Order of the Phoenix (minus Dumbledore) and the Death Eaters (minus Voldemort)? In terms of both talent and numbers?

 

Um no.

1. We don't have all the facts concerning the scene, and that is exactly my point. You cannot make an explicit argument from an implicit assumption, and that is exactly what Cos did.

2. "In theory" anything is possible. But you're example is beyond the bounds of plausibility for the facts which we have been given in the narrative: (a) magic can be done without speech, (b) magic can be done with speech, (c) writing narrative often means not explaining every step of doing something—"he picked up the cup" also means he reached out and then took the cup in his hand. Hence, no conclusion can be drawn from this text, which is what Cos tried to do.

3. Your assumption are misplaced. When they are cast silently, they are not written out. Voldemort's spell to heal Wormtail's hand is cast silent. The spell he cast to make Harry bow was silent. The third time Harry is hit by the Cruciatus Curse, there is no mention of the spell being spoken (though that doesn't mean it was silently cast, either).

4. The only way to "prove" a point therefore, one way or another in this discussion, is to list every time a curse was cast and then decide (a) was it an unforgivable curse, (b) was the narrative such that the author wrote the person casting the curse, but didn't write the person speaking it, and (c) was there any mitigating circumstances for the author not writing the curse being spoken.

So no, there's no logical fallacy in my argument. Making an assertion from an implicit possibility is, however, a logical fallacy and that's what was done.

I'm not sure where you're getting that it's hard to cast with a wand. We get in DH that a barely legal adult wizard or witch can cast two of the three Unforgivables. There's no reason to assume that the Killing Curse is any more difficult magic wise.

On top of that, we're given a number of spells that are cast silently. Hell, Hagrid cast two spells silently with a broken wand stuck inside an umbrella, and he only had a third year education. And, every piece of accidental magic is silent, and issue of the will or emotion commanding magic.

I do agree, however, that the difficulty will increase somewhat with the complexity of the spell, but there's no reason to suggest that the Killing Curse is a complex spell. It's a dark spell, an unforgivable spell, but that doesn't mean it's complex at all. For all we know, it might just be aspecialized Incarcerous Curse that binds the heart.

 

I always thought when Fake Moody said nothing would happen when the students said the words, he meant that none of them hated him enough to cast the spell. This was supposed to be ironic, because if they knew he was really Crouch, a death eater, they would hate him enough to cast the spell.

 

I'm going to repeat myself somewhat because it seems like you misunderstood some of my points. Like I said, this is all about probability but that is really unavoidable in this discussion. That was what I meant about logical fallacies.
There's no reason why the Killing Curse can't be cast silently and we know large variety of spells that can be. This spell is not really different from any other piece of dark magic, which can be cast silently. It's only "unforgivable" because the Ministry made it so.
We can make assumptions based on the evidence at hand, which is all you're doing as well I might add. I don't really understand why you dismiss something because it's not 100% certain. Unless we ask J.K.R. personally, we can't really know for certain.
We know that spell incantations are normally(not always) written as dialogue unless they're silently cast by someone other than Harry. In the case of Bellatrix, there was no incantation, hence we can extrapolate that she would likely have cast it silently. Again, no certainty. This supports the theory that the Killing Curse can be cast silently.

Regarding the Killing Curse, I doubt it's easy to muster the hatred necessary for the curse unless it's someone that you really hate and want dead, hence why I consider it a hard curse to master. It's not really important.
In the HBP we learn of the difficulty in casting silently while Harry and his class are trying to accomplish it. It requires significant concentration and mental discipline. Talking about accidental magic is irrelevant in this case.
Do you honestly think that everything except the Killing Curse(or all the Unforgivables?) can't be cast silently but every other spell in existence can? If so, then what is your reasoning behind this? Is it not more rational to assume that every spell can be cast silently?

 

It should be remembered that the idea that hatred is necessary to cast the Killing Curse is completely fanon.

Most people have drawn an analogy from sadism being a requirement of the Cruciatus casting to the other unforgivables, saying the Killing Curse has a similar emotional requirement, that being hate.

There are all sorts of problems with this:

- It's not entirely clear that sadism is a requirement of successfully casting the Cruciatus. Yes, Bellatrix tells us it is, but Bellatrix is not a reliable source. Harry is able to successfully cast and hold the Cruciatus in DH with righteous anger, and what we are shown has higher authority than what an unreliable source tells us. It seems to me that sadism is simply how Bellatrix casts the curse, and as Bellatrix is very good at it, it's likely that sadism makes for a very powerful Cruciatus.

- The "unforgivables" are a legal grouping, not a magical grouping.

- The imperius curse has no such emotional requirement to cast, completely destroying the idea that the unforgivables share a common "emotion based casting" element.

 

Like I said:

I could very well be wrong regarding the "emotion" thing but it's really not all that relevant for the argument at hand.

 

I think it was more likely that the reason Harry sucked at casting the Cruciatus Curse was the fact it was the first time he ever cast it.

 

Do we know how many hours takes the train ride from King's Cross to Hogsmeade/Hogwarts?

 

Not precisely. We know that the train leaves at 11am, and we also know that it's dark when the train arrives at Hogwarts. Sunset in Scotland, in September, occurs around 8pm (source), so the train must arrive at or after 8pm, which means it takes at least 9 hours.

In real life, the train from London to Edinbugh takes about 6 hours. However, Hogwarts is probably further north than Edinburgh and the Hogwarts Express is an old train, so 9 hours fits quite well.

Arriving after 8pm also fits well with the fact that the first years go to bed almost immediately after the feast. If the feast lasts around 2 hours, that would put them as going to bed after 10pm.

 

The train leaves Kings Cross at eleven am and we know most people go straight to bed after Dinner so it probably finishes at around nine pm. Dinner is probably ninety minutes plus another thirty to get from the train to the Great Hall.

So I would guess eight hours.

 

I forget, what was the reason the Yule Ball was available only to 4th year and up? Was there even a reason given?

 

None was really given, but it stands to reason that 4th year and up was because Harry needed a date and he was a 4th year. I would think that if their had been just Cedric, Fleur, and Krum then it would have only been for sixth and seventh years.

 

Chapter 10 of GoF

This was before they left for Hogwarts, before Harry became a champion. It stands to reason that the 4th years were always going to participate in the Yule Ball.

 

That could also mean that all students needed these robes, if someone from higher year would take them. Remember, even Ginny went to the ball, because Neville invited her. And she presumably had a dress too, and she was third year at a time.

 

I can't see parents being very happy about having to buy expensive dress robes only to not use them because they're in the majority and didn't get asked to go to the ball.

 

Do we have any clue on how rich Harry actually is?

 

I found this article. I think it explains the wealth of Harry Potter pretty well. http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/the-5-richest-hogwarts-graduates/?view=all

 

So Bellatrix is richer than the Malfoys? Interesting. Would be great if they'd offered more sources than a link to pottermore though. Does anybody know what information pottermore has on this? I'd like to know how the specific amount they stated for the mentioned characters came to be. Are these numbers rough estimations based on hints or did JKR release more specific information?