- 1,329
- 459
Them not mentioning it doesn't mean it didn't happen
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
The speed of light for Avada Kedavra
- Thread starter Gendolfgg1
- Start date
- Status
- 19,803
- 16,216
Reading the thread I'm against the proposal. Even being generous and accepting some statements as qualifiers, AK has to many things going against it for a SoL rating.
So put me in disagree.
So put me in disagree.
- 150
- 60
Yeah, put me in disagree too.
- 56
- 28
The reason I didn't take into account anything from the movies is because they're so wildly different that other aspects would instantly fail them. In fact, in one of your comments you stated to disregard what was in the movies because they weren't book accurate, but in the reply to mine you use movie evidence instead of book evidence. The rainbow circles do not exist in the books. If you prove that AV diffuses liquid in the books, I can give you one point, but that still won't be enough. The statues (As far as I remember) were both from the MoM entrance, and they were all gold. The fact that the Patronus is also described as light is not a point in your favour, but a point in mine that light is not meant to be accurate. Just being called light does not in fact mean that it is being described as being made out of photons, especially by a reliable source (I don't think Harry Potter has even passed non-magical elementary school and Hogwarts doesn't teach "muggle sciences")
TLDR AV scores 0/5 to generously 0.5/5 on light requirements, disagree with putting book AV or movie AV as light.
TLDR AV scores 0/5 to generously 0.5/5 on light requirements, disagree with putting book AV or movie AV as light.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #86
No, it wouldn't be smooth, because the spell comes from a wand that is shaking. And no, you gave the wrong example, because the light from the flashlight is not concentrated, it just scatters in the air, so its beam will be straight. In the case of a laser, this will not work.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #87
No, green light is emitted from the laser, but the laser itself is white due to the fact that all the energy is concentrated in one light wave. I do not understand what you are trying to prove, given that diffraction is STILL present in those screenshots that I sent above. You are simply denying the fact that rainbow light waves are clearly visible in the screenshots
It's strange, but I don't have any diseases related to flowers. I can clearly see rainbow circles around Avada Kedavra. And yes, this is the diffraction of a light beam.
You absolutely cannot claim that there is stone armor in the movies. This is literally not mentioned anywhere. And book proofs can be used as additional materials for films, because so far this is a single canon.
Can you throw other examples when a spell blows someone or something up? I think not. This could have been done purely for the beauty effect.
cheburek
You have no evidence to back up your opinion. I have
- 1,329
- 459
Ok, imagine you take a laser pointer and vibrate it. Would the beam not be straight? Would it appear jagged?
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #89
I replied in another message about similar spells (The Patronus consists of light).
It could be a real enchanted light. The statement that if it is a magical light and therefore cannot travel at the speed of real light should work the other way as well. Due to the concentrated energy in the laser, it has sufficient momentum. And Hagrid is very strong by himself, so the rays just bounce off him, because there is a magical protection on him. Like a Protego.
I can give you a BUNCH of examples from other verses, where such strangeness also manifests itself, but the speed is still many times higher than human.
Because Rowling did not think that in the future the speed of her spells would be discussed on VSB
It's just that Harry was able to move so fast that he tore up space-time by teleporting.
Because FTL travel is a common routine for wizards if they can easily fend off light spells. It is precisely by such feats that the speeds of characters who evade or react to something are scaled.
So far, the canon has not been divided, which is why I use evidence from two sources. I have already answered other people about the vibration of the wand, I did not get enough counter arguments.
In my opinion, no one has ever refuted the diffraction of light and reflection from metal surfaces, which are the main ones for proving the speed of light. No one has discussed scaling Dumbledore's spell to Avada Kedavra, by the way, lol, although it has light speed
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #90
The passage accurately states that the Patronus consists of light. It is already your right to deny this fact.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #91
Hmm, but the laser pointer is not as powerful as the Avada Kedavra, it does not have momentum
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #92
They literally wrote to us what Harry felt and saw before he "died." You're just trying to suck nonexistent information out of your finger right now.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #93
Thank you for coming, but I still don't understand why Avada Kedavra doesn't fit the speed of light, given that I've proven how it reflects off metal surfaces and exhibits light diffraction. This is directly the main evidence in favor of the speed of real light. And the "contradictions" that the thread participants noticed are not valid against the proof of diffraction /reflection (this is literally written in the rules about the speed of light). I would like to hear your opinion on this, if it's not difficult for you.
- 9,281
- 9,755
Yet also made a metal statue shatter. Not melt, directly shatter.
It doesn't. What you call light diffraction is not a property of Avada Kedavra, but of Priori Incantatem which is an entirely different phenomenon.
So your main proof has contradictions or outright doesn't truly apply to the spell.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #96
Literally, the facts that I have given in favor of the fact that the spell moves at the speed of light apply to Lumos as well. Or do you want to say that Lumos is subsonic? Visually, it glows the same way as Avada, just not green.
Or at least it's like Stupefy
Or at least it's like Stupefy
- 9,281
- 9,755
That's an entire different beast altogether. It's a spell meant to create light, is not offensive, and nothing scales to it.Literally, the facts that I have given in favor of the fact that the spell moves at the speed of light apply to Lumos as well. Or do you want to say that Lumos is subsonic? Visually, it glows the same way as Avada, just not green.
Or at least it's like Stupefy
- 150
- 60
???
What? Does real light bounce off tree trunks, ricochet off other jets of light, push people or objects, et cetera?
Magic bounces off him, but light shouldn't, unless he's secretly a mirror or made out of metal.
Okay? That doesn't make it any less strange in this case.
Yes, and? My point is that there is nothing in the books that suggests what you're saying is the case. It sounds more like a head-canon you have made because you want Avada Kedavra to be lightspeed.
He teleported, meaning that this is in no way relevant when discussing his speed.
Wizards can travel faster than light? Why on earth would they ever use brooms that fly at 150 mph, then?
I know they haven't been divided yet, but things still get rather messy and hard to follow when you use sources that directly contradict each other.
You got plenty of counterarguments, and your answer was basically repeating the same baseless assumption over and over.
LephyrTheRevanchist refuted both here:
Dumbledore's spell was described as a jet of light, but can't have been real light since it was jagged. This means that J. K. Rowling uses the term "jet of light" even when describing something that isn't really light, meaning that Avada Kedavra being described as such doesn't have to mean that it actually is light.
This will be my final reply regarding these issues, as I'm tired of this debate, and really our debates in general.
Last edited:
- 120
- 33
I'm netural on this on. I think the only way to have offensive projectile spells anywhere close to lightspeed is using the near light speed summoning spell WOG which this wiki had rejected. Object summoned by this spell was casually caught by wizards which indicates they had the reaction speed enough to see it and catch it when it came close enough to them. And combat projectile spells should at least be the same speed as this spell. Regardless, we have lightning feats so we could use those to get mhs+ spells instead if accio wog is still rejected.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #100
Let's say, but this does not negate the fact that Lumos exhibits exactly the same phenomena as Avada Kedavra.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #101
Let's say, but the rules on the speed of light do not specify anywhere that one contradiction is needed against the evidence of how light is reflected and refracted
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #102
A light that travels at a speed of 300,000,000 m/s, with magical properties.
higher, but it's still not Avada Kedavra
can a spell be cast on it that reflects light?
in that case, do we need to review ALL the verses that have the speed of light?
literally, Rowling wrote that her spells are light rays. It wasn't my idea.
Why?
Because teleportation can be dangerous. And they can't fly with it.
I don't understand exactly where they contradict
my assumption is still valid and no one has refuted it.
1) Reflected from the golden statue
2) No, with all flash spells there is light diffraction.
3) No.
You can't claim that it was uneven, because you didn't even see that stream of light (it wasn't in the movie). There are absolutely no contradictory facts anywhere that a light ray does not consist of light. Patronus is also a spell that is described as a flash of light, and Rowling wrote that this spell consists of light, so it does not leave traces in snow.
ok
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #103
Yes, it was worth doing the same for a long time, but I decided to try to start with Avada
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #104
So you're not denying the fact that the spell bounced off the golden statue?
- 11,963
- 18,906
The light bending isn't really an anti-feat in this case since the anti-feats section for light says that this is fine if reflection/refraction can be proven
That being said, I still think the other stuff - combined with wizards legitimately having no feats on this level, being like Subsonic at best - makes this not really viable at all. I disagree with the OP
That being said, I still think the other stuff - combined with wizards legitimately having no feats on this level, being like Subsonic at best - makes this not really viable at all. I disagree with the OP
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #106
However, it's worth trying to make a thread at the speed of light on Stupefy, I wonder which way the facts will be denied
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #107
OH YEAH, SOMEONE READ THE CRITERIA
Why? Wizards can use Lumos Solem, which moves at the speed of light. The question is not the reaction, but the speed of the spell
- 11,963
- 18,906
I believe you were bringing up earlier how there's "no reason for wizards to not be at that level of speed" which implied to me that wizards can react to Avada Kedavra
And even ignoring that, things like the spell having mass and exploding would be anti-feats that couldn't be explained away by reflection/refraction
- 9,281
- 9,755
- 11,963
- 18,906
This is more interesting. With this in mind, what would you say is why Avada Kedavra doesn't quite meet our standards?
- 9,281
- 9,755
The only main 2 criteria it meets is being called light and being reflected by the statue. However, Dweller brought how other spells that definitely don't have nearly enough proof to qualify also receive a similar description of "jet of light", reducing the veracity of it. And for the statue reflecting it, later during the same fight, the same statue shattered when being hit by it.
So the two main requirements it qualifies for are suspect.
- 7,651
- 1,279
On the topic of HP CRT's, we oughta look at making a video game profile for harry one of these days PoA on the gamecube was my childhood fr
- 9,281
- 9,755
Not the thread for this.
- 11,963
- 18,906
I understand. That does make the veracity of it being real light super suspect, yeah
- 56
- 28
Small correction, it was a different statue but from the same location and both the statue that was shattered and the one that deflected AV were made of the same material which is gold. AV also apparently made a desk burst into flames, but I'm not confident if that was movie only or also in the books, someone would have to verify that.
- 9,281
- 9,755
- 56
- 28
I missed the quote yeah
No, the centaur statue was the one that exploded. The wizard was the one who deflected.
"But the headless golden statue of the wizard in the fountain had
sprung alive, leaping from its plinth to land with a crash on the
floor between Harry and Voldemort. The spell merely glanced off
its chest as the statue flung out its arms to protect Harry."
"Another jet of green light flew from behind the silver shield. This time it was the one-armed centaur, galloping in front of Dumbledore, that took the blast and shattered into a hundred pieces, but before the fragments had even hit the floor, Dumbledore had drawn back his wand and waved it as though brandishing a whip. A long thin flame flew from the tip; it wrapped itself around Voldemort, shield and all. For a moment, it seemed Dumbledore had won, but then the fiery rope became a serpent, which relinquished its hold upon Voldemort at once and turned, hissing furiously, to face Dumbledore."
- 9,281
- 9,755
Yeah, just went to reread it. Somehow I merged "headless" and "armless" as the same lol.
- 5,964
- 2,970
It wouldn't matter as anti-feat if the reasoning for the light bending was possible to explain through reflection/refraction. If one looks at literally the first scan shown in the op, one can easily see the beam making an irregular pattern in midair without any logical explanation through light physics, the beam is more similar to lightning in aesthetics (not saying it would even scale to that) due to the irregular path, the bits of light that come from the beam itself and the other rays that come from it, so it's evident that the people who made the visuals of the spell were taking as reference lightning instead of an actual beam of light.
- 544
- 101
- Thread starter
- #120
We assume this if the spells really move at the speed of light, but it will still need to be discussed. So far, the discussion is solely about the speed of Avada Kedavra
How can a spell have mass if it bounces off metal surfaces? This is outside the laws of physics, especially since a beam with mass exhibits LIGHT diffraction.
- Status
Similar threads
