pedanterrific comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 11 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 17 March 2012 09:41AM

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

Comments (1174)

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

Comment author: pedanterrific 25 March 2012 12:41:17AM 1 point [-]

Partially it depends on the difference in size between the base materials and the target form. Things can be Transfigured smaller (Harry's father's rock to tiny diamond) or bigger (ice cube to rocket). The rock reverting could tear Harry's hand off, conceivably- shards of metal (or rust) getting significantly bigger or smaller once inside your body seems likely to be uncomfortable.

Comment author: nohatmaker 25 March 2012 01:00:52AM 1 point [-]

That would make for a pretty nasty situation. I had considered throwing a large rock that was transfigured to be smaller, then dropping the transfiguration in the air. This would be even nastier (though maybe not as effective): transfigure a large rock into a needle and throw it at them, then when it's inside them reverse the transfiguration.

Comment author: linkhyrule5 25 March 2012 02:57:22AM 1 point [-]

Huh. I wonder how that interacts with conservation of momentum. (Or if it does.)

Comment author: pedanterrific 25 March 2012 03:02:29AM 1 point [-]

I think if you can Transfigure an ice cube into a solid-fuel rocket conservation of momentum is the least of your concerns.

Comment author: linkhyrule5 25 March 2012 03:36:56AM 1 point [-]

Which is easier: "Become a solid-fuel rocket, which is shaped like this and this and has these parts...", or "Smaller, please."

Comment author: nohatmaker 25 March 2012 05:21:11PM 0 points [-]

Probably cheerfully ignore them, considering magic's general relationship with physics.