TobyBartels comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 5 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: NihilCredo 02 November 2010 06:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (648)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 27 November 2010 11:55:54PM 2 points [-]

The only powerful magic in the defense of Azkaban seems to be the fact that time turners can't be used on its premises, which might be deep old magic, but I'm inclined to suspect otherwise.

That's Yudkowsky-only, I think. I expect Azkaban to be as well defended as Gringotts in Deathly Hallows - all sorts of intruder spells, monsters (if they can survive), and whatnot.

Our impressions may differ based on the fact that I still tend to draw most of my background information from the original canon, which didn't actually contain the Golden Age element used in MoR.

I think canon has the Golden Age! The founding of Hogwarts, the heirlooms of the founders, controlling the basilisk, the Deathly Hallows themselves, the Dark spells Voldemort uses, the list goes on. If it's powerful, it's probably old. The entire 20th century sees only a few new magical feats: the Philosopher's Stone (maybe); Inferi; and... some new uses of dragon blood, I suppose.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 November 2010 12:18:39AM 3 points [-]

The entire 20th century sees only a few new magical feats: the Philosopher's Stone (maybe)

Flamel's stone presumably dates from the 17th Century, since that's when Flamel himself (a real historical figure) dates from.

Comment author: gwern 28 November 2010 12:34:33AM *  0 points [-]

I'm not sure. I seem to recall that the language implied that Dumbledore co-created it with Flamel, which would mean 20th century, after all; it's not clear how long wizards naturally live, speculation based on apparent size of Magical Britain to the side.

But it's also possible Flamel created in the 1600s, this is how he survived to the 1900s, and the brilliant young Dumbledore hearing of Flamel's stone, independently reinvented it. Or something.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 20 April 2011 11:04:54PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure. I seem to recall that the language implied that Dumbledore co-created it with Flamel, which would mean 20th century,

The wording in book one which you may be thinking of just says that Dumbledore and Flamel did alchemical work together. Flamel's construction of the philosopher's stone is not mentioned until much later when Hermione finds the reference and there it just says that Flamel is the only person known to have made one.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 November 2010 02:47:10AM 1 point [-]

I don't recall any language suggesting that Dumbledore worked on the Stone with Flamel, only that he worked on alchemy with Flamel (reported on his Chocolate Frog card). And I don't recally anything to suggest that Dumbledore ever had a Stone of his own, only Flamel's for safe keeping. In MoR, Dumbledore cites Flamel's expertise, not his own, for his conclusion that Voldemort couldn't create a Stone. In canon, Dumbledore reports that Flamel has destroyed his own stone, without saying anything about himself.

Comment author: gwern 28 November 2010 03:27:01AM 0 points [-]

Well, all that may be true. It has been a very long time since I read Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. (Although I could have sworn Dumbledore was implied to have been using the elixir, and this was one reason it wasn't surprising that he he died later on.)

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 November 2010 03:38:07AM *  1 point [-]

Not that you should just take my word for it, but I reread the books about this fall, and I'm confident that Dumbledore didn't use the elixir. According the the Wikia (which is more authoritative than I), he died at age 107 (not unusual for a Wizard, although he was killed), and it says nothing about his using the Stone.