The complement of hot is not-red?

His attitude after hearing the prophecy can be summed up by his words to McGonagall, which are consistent with everything he does thereafter

I would say that his request to McGonagall is consistent with my theory - he knew that her attempts to stop Harry would have the opposite effect. I am guessing that Quirrell has some alternate interpretation to the prophecy.

One possibility for this is "The End of the World" corresponds to an change to the natural order that makes the world unrecognizable, such as the removal of mortality.

It is possible that instead of burning up his own life to destroy all the dementors or defeat death, Harry could burn up some stars, which could explain the rest of the prophecy.

I'm not saying that I am correct, but I still see no actions that are inconsistent with my theory.

I think part of the confusion is that we are interpreting the punctuation differently. I don't interpret your second quotation (first quotation from the text) as meaning that he was happy, until interrupted by hearing the prophecy, but rather that the prophecy was the reason he had smiled.

Personally, I think Quirrell killed Hermione, in the hopes of getting Harry to actually figure out how to defeat death - something no one else has ever done.

The reason he was happy when he heard the prediction that Harry would break the Universe is that this was near-confirmation that Harry would be successful.

In short, here is my version of Quirrell's plan:

1) For deniability reasons, be anti-resurrection from the start, and horribly worried about what Harry will do - tell Harry this

2) Kill someone Harry won't allow to stay dead (Hermione)

3) Become convinced by Harry to help with the plan - provide magic knowledge he doesn't have access to on his own

4) Use any means necessary (Unicorn blood) to stay alive until Harry is close to success

5) Harry is now the solution to whatever is slowly killing you

Magic and supernatural might often work as synonyms, but I still think hearing God called "magic" is not generally accepted, even if "supernatural" is.

Your point is well taken about D&D - although I wasn't proposing that we actually use the D&D system to describe the belief system. I was expressing regret that a similar dichotomy doesn't exist within the language already.

Hearing the Christian God referred to as "magic" reminds me of another apparent lexical gap in English. I think most theologians would be uncomfortably hesitant to call the purported miracles in their faith as the result of magic - although to my knowledge there is no better word to replace it.

I wish that our culture expressed the Divine Magic vs. Arcane Magic dichotomy that exists in Dungeons and Dragons.

My sense of the word complement is that if two things are complements, they sum to 1, or some equivalent.

A is the complement of ~A because P(A or ~A) = 1

Red and green are considered to be complementary colors because together they contain all primary colors of pigments. [although, that is based on the societal understanding that the primary colors are Red, Yellow and Blue. This is actually incorrect. For pigments, the primary colors are really Magenta, Yellow, and Cyan. For light, they are Red, Green, and Blue.]

That is a very good suggestion.

While better than anything I came up with on my own, I'm not sure that antonym is a perfect fit though.

For one, while hot/cold works, I'm not sure that red/green works.

Plus, antonym has a different connotation - it is the antonym of synonym. Antonym implies a word with the "opposite" meaning, not a concept with the "opposite" meaning.

I wouldn't be comfortable talking about the antonym of a concept.

Does anyone know if there are any languages that don't have this problem?

But many explanations which use "entropy" could also use "disorder" without becoming overtly incoherent or contradicting accounts given by most others; which was the requirement of #5.

That works for physical entropy. For the sense of entropy used in information theory, a better substitution would be uncertainty.

You are right - my mistake.

An increase in entropy is a movement from a macrostate with a smaller number of microstates to a macrostate with a larger number of microstates.