You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Izeinwinter comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 18, chapter 87 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Alsadius 22 December 2012 07:55AM

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

Comments (592)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Izeinwinter 22 December 2012 08:45:50PM *  10 points [-]

Harry is missing a point, tough. Flamel is 600 years old, and started out powerful. Presumably, "trying to blackmail / kidnap Flamel" has been the endpoint of the careers of enough dark lords that they do not attempt this anymore.

,,, Wait. alchemical diagrams need to be drawn "to the fineness of a child's hair"? ... ... Eh,, I think it entirely possible that Flamel is the only wizard to ever manage to make a stone because he is the only wizard to ever try it while young enough to use his own hair. In which case, Hermione is going to show up with a working stone shortly.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 23 December 2012 02:29:45AM *  28 points [-]

Harry's failing pretty badly to update sufficiently on available evidence. He already knows that there are a lot of aspects of magic that seemed nonsensical to him: McGonagall turning into a cat, the way broomsticks work, etc. Harry's dominant hypothesis about this is that magic was intelligently designed (by the Atlanteans?) and so he should expect magic to work the way neurotypical humans expect it to work, not the way he expects it to work.

In particular his estimate of the likelihood of a story like Flamel's is way off. Moreover, the value of additional relevant information seems extremely high to me, so he really should ask Dumbledore about it as soon as possible. Horcruxes too.

Edit: And then he learns that Dumbledore is keeping a Philosopher's Stone in Hogwarts without using it and promptly attempts a citizen's arrest on him for both child endangerment and genocide...

Comment author: Solvent 27 December 2012 12:10:56PM 2 points [-]

Harry's failing pretty badly to update sufficiently on available evidence. He already knows that there are a lot of aspects of magic that seemed nonsensical to him: McGonagall turning into a cat, the way broomsticks work, etc. Harry's dominant hypothesis about this is that magic was intelligently designed (by the Atlanteans?) and so he should expect magic to work the way neurotypical humans expect it to work, not the way he expects it to work.

I disagree. It seems to me that individual spells and magical items work in the way neurotypical humans expect them to work. However, I don't think that we have any evidence that the process of creating new magic or making magical discoveries works in an intuitive way.

Consider by analogy the Internet. It's not surprising that there exist sites such as Facebook which are really well designed and easy to use for humans, rendering in pretty colors instead of being plain HTML. However, these websites were created painstakingly by experts dealing with irritating low level stuff. It would be surprising that the same website had a surpassingly brilliant data storage system as well as an ingenius algorithm for something else.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 27 December 2012 11:27:45PM 1 point [-]

We have some weak evidence, namely McGonagall asserts that new charms and whatnot are created on a regular basis, which puts an upper bound on how difficult the process can be. But point taken.

Comment author: MixedNuts 23 December 2012 12:09:07PM 2 points [-]

It might be too surprising and horrible for him to let himself think that people might have access to the obvious stand-in for cryonics and just ignore it.

Comment author: ikrase 24 December 2012 12:28:43AM 0 points [-]

He already knows that the Dark Lord's death protection requires killing people. (Does it prevent physical degeneration or dying of old age?)

Comment author: PotKettle 17 May 2013 05:33:42AM 0 points [-]

Somehow circumventing the Hayflick Limit is a possibility I suppose.

Comment author: ahartell 23 December 2012 02:54:45PM *  4 points [-]

You can't use the fineness thing as a reason for the Philosopher's Stone to be unique to Flamel as it says explicitly in the chapter that all alchemical magic has the same requirements, and it doesn't sound at all like Flamel is the only one who can do alchemy.

Comment author: Desrtopa 23 December 2012 03:32:47AM 3 points [-]

,,, Wait. alchemical diagrams need to be drawn "to the fineness of a child's hair"? ... ... Eh,, I think it entirely possible that Flamel is the only wizard to ever manage to make a stone because he is the only wizard to ever try it while young enough to use his own hair.

I don't see why this would be an advantage over an experienced alchemist who's old enough to use their own children's.

Comment author: DanArmak 23 December 2012 04:40:14PM 0 points [-]

Or any other children's for that matter. Or they just know from experience how thick hair is. (It varies a lot between people, at least as much as between ages.) Or they're dedicated enough to make it much finer than needed just to be sure.

Comment author: gyokuro 22 December 2012 09:30:44PM 0 points [-]

Do strands of hair really become thicker over time? I doubt this.

Comment author: Izeinwinter 22 December 2012 10:58:06PM *  7 points [-]

No, I am thinking that the process of making the stone may simply not work for wizards that have begun to age. - That the crafting process draws on the youth of the wizard or witch crafting the stone, - the hair of a child. And it has to be the hair of the crafter - Everyone after Flamel have substituted the hair of some random kid, which just does not work. it is a spell that can only be done at all by a child prodigy, Which explains why it has not been duplicated - Very, very few teenagers and below would try it. This would also explain why he has not mass produced it - He can not make it again.

Also, there is the point that Hermione knocking off a philosophers stone out of the blue would derail everyone's plots in the most hilarious fashion. Flamel's Stone locked away behind insane security? Too bad Dumbledore, there is a second one in a students trunk. Heck, she would probably start selling the darn things.

Comment author: tenshiko 23 December 2012 05:02:55AM 2 points [-]

Probably? Definitely - the whole idea is her Get Rich Quick scheme to repay Harry.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 23 December 2012 07:41:32AM *  1 point [-]

You don't need to sell the literal hen that lays the golden eggs to make money from it. It turns stuff into gold, remember?

Comment author: Pluvialis 23 December 2012 07:52:46AM 3 points [-]

the literal hen

Penalty for incorrect use of the word 'literal'.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 23 December 2012 08:17:15AM 4 points [-]

Hmm. In my head I wanted "literal" to modify "golden" but not "hen" or "eggs." I guess that didn't work out so well on paper.

Comment author: TobyBartels 23 December 2012 09:18:50AM 1 point [-]

Try ‘You don't need to sell the hen that lays the literally golden eggs’.

Comment author: victordrake 27 April 2013 07:54:30PM *  1 point [-]

I thought it was a goose.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 April 2013 03:08:08PM 1 point [-]

So it was!

Comment author: Izeinwinter 23 December 2012 08:18:32AM 0 points [-]

Yhea, the open selling of stones would be more about "Not being kidnapped" than "making money". Her defenses rather obviously not being up to Flamels standards (and Flamel appears to rely in large part on hiding!)

Comment author: Alicorn 22 December 2012 09:34:14PM 0 points [-]

Baby hair is very fine...

Comment author: gwern 22 December 2012 11:46:52PM 0 points [-]

I have read that the reason shaving seems to make hair thicker and stubbier has something to do with the thicker hair taking longer to grow. The baby hair may remain as fine all one's life, but be slowly hidden under the slower-growing thicker hair?

Comment author: Desrtopa 23 December 2012 03:36:28AM 10 points [-]

Shaving doesn't actually make hair thicker and stubbier, it just takes off a hair's tapered point and exposes a cross section.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 23 December 2012 05:00:56PM *  0 points [-]

I'm pretty sure not. While I don't examine the hair in my hairbrush hair by hair, it all looks to be of about the same thickness.