- 1,526
- 553
Can you provide the scan of the spell doing that?
-
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
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #122
And also that it is reflected from a metal sword and exhibits the phenomenon of light diffraction, yes, we do not forget. You have now listed only the exploits from the books, without touching on the films. I don't see any point in comparing completely different spells, because the spells that Dweller listed did not show diffraction of light and reflection from metal surfaces. I gave an example of other spells from movies that look like flashes of light and are DESCRIBED in BOOKS in the same way, and they exhibit light diffraction (rainbow circles are clearly visible).
Moreover, I do not understand why you decided that the spell destroyed the golden statue, it is literally not mentioned anywhere (the centaur's material is unknown). The trick of the spell is also that its main hax is the destruction of everything it touches, if it is material. This is ignoring durability, obviously it will destroy stone statues and buildings without heating or vaporizing the liquid.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #123
read the argument I have given under number 2 at the very beginning
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #124
This is called the curved line of the beam of light, because Tom has a magic wand vibrating in his hands, creating "interference" in the beam of the spell. Yes, it looks like lightning, but it can also be explained that AFTER Avada Kedavra Voldemort emits lightning bolts from Avada Kedavra into Harry. This may be one of the reasons for the similarity at this point. But, as I have already thrown evidence A BUNCH of TIMES in favor of the fact that Avada Kedavra is a DIRECT RAY, I will throw another example with Bellatrix, Who sends only a flash of light.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.
In any case, as it is written in the criteria for the speed of light, even if the beam is curved, then if reflection or refraction is proved, then this contradiction has no force.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #125
I've already thrown these screenshots, but I'll throw them again and you won't be able to notice a curved line like lightning on them, nothing at all, because it's a light beam, you'll only see a flash:
You can notice a "curved ray" ONLY IF AND ONLY if the spell rays collide and form a "Priori Incantatem" (let's skip the point that this is only available when the wands are the same, the movies ignore it). However, with short spell emissions, you won't be able to see the curved rays.
And, as we can see, the spell does not emit any explosions. This is simply a collision with a dense material body, which is why the laser beams come into contact with it and emit a small pulse, because it contains a lot of energy and a magical effect, after being hit by a spell, the matter to which the spell is applied is destroyed.
HOWEVER, EVEN SO, you can see a completely direct light beam here, the spell just creates a stream of light.
And, since you are giving an example of other, similar spells, then I will give you an example of Stupefy, which looks like a flash of light showing the phenomenon of light diffraction. What is not the speed of light? It's just a flash of light that instantly travels the distance to the wizard's target. Avada is exactly the same.
Wriggling around he cried, “Stupefy!” and a red bolt of light shot from his own wand, cleaving a gap between the four pursuing Death Eaters as they scattered to avoid it.
You can notice a "curved ray" ONLY IF AND ONLY if the spell rays collide and form a "Priori Incantatem" (let's skip the point that this is only available when the wands are the same, the movies ignore it). However, with short spell emissions, you won't be able to see the curved rays.
And, as we can see, the spell does not emit any explosions. This is simply a collision with a dense material body, which is why the laser beams come into contact with it and emit a small pulse, because it contains a lot of energy and a magical effect, after being hit by a spell, the matter to which the spell is applied is destroyed.
HOWEVER, EVEN SO, you can see a completely direct light beam here, the spell just creates a stream of light.
And, since you are giving an example of other, similar spells, then I will give you an example of Stupefy, which looks like a flash of light showing the phenomenon of light diffraction. What is not the speed of light? It's just a flash of light that instantly travels the distance to the wizard's target. Avada is exactly the same.
Wriggling around he cried, “Stupefy!” and a red bolt of light shot from his own wand, cleaving a gap between the four pursuing Death Eaters as they scattered to avoid it.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #126
Since there are no more counter arguments, it should be noted that the VSB criteria indicate that if it is proved that the light beam is reflected from a metal surface (a golden statue and a metal sword), then the quibble about the alleged laser moving not in a straight line, but in a curved line, simply has no force. Therefore, if it is impossible to refute the fact of light reflection, then the speed of the Avada Kedavra should be updated to light, otherwise there is SIMPLY NO POINT in the criteria, because they are not observed, lol 
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #127
And since I understand that there are no more strong contradictions in the Avada Kedavra light beam (your only counterarguments are that it follows a curved line in the film and that it "explodes" (although all lasers somehow produce an impulse when colliding with dense matter, creating a mini-explosion)) + that you ignoring the fact of reflection and simply denying the existence of light velocity casts doubt on the objectivity of most opinions.
- 43,118
- 37,263
You need 2-3 of the criteria to fit for it to be light, and moving in a straight line is probably the most important killer for it. Where IN THE NOVELS has Avada Kedavra been stated to move in a straight line
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #129
Proofs:
1) Light diffraction
2) Reflection from metal surfaces
3) The description of the spell is like a light beam. That is, it consists of light
4) Scaling from other spells
Simple denial or some other problems?
Movement along the curve has no power, because the spell is reflected from metal surfaces:
- They do not travel in straight lines (unless you can prove refraction/reflection, see above.)
- 10,544
- 12,375
While not literally stated to move in a straight line, it's the most basic assumption you can make, since the spell can be aim-dodged, with even a slight misalignment provokes it to completely miss a target. If it curved or could be curved (besides reflection), then missing would be bit harder one would think. Specially on a high speed chase like in Deathly Hallows, where the spell missed Harry by milimeters several times.
- 43,118
- 37,263
A very weak proof at the best of times
See bottom of post
LIKE a light beam. Not a beam of light. Weak proof.
Why should it scale to other spells?
And it's also more crooked then my **** in a tight pair of undies.
That is to say, show me where it bounces like a video game beam from things like a mirror.
- 43,118
- 37,263
In the films, it's rather crooked, and you can miss by millimeters even if it's fluctuating
- 31,588
- 28,048
From the arguments I've seen here, the side against Avada Kedavra being lightspeed looks more convincing. Mark me down as disagree in the OP please.
- 12,806
- 5,939
- 10,544
- 12,375
- 43,118
- 37,263
"Its an Assumption"
"Here's something against that assumption"
"NUH UH!!!"
- 10,544
- 12,375
The films also directly contradict several things about the spell. Something I've brought up multiple times.
See the above.
You brought something from the films that is never stated, used or portrayed on the books to discredit them. You can see the problem right there.
Edit:
Fun fact, this flashback has the most accurate depiction of the spell in the films
Last edited:
- 31,645
- 34,699
Yeah, I do not think this meets criteria for SoL.
- 10,544
- 12,375
With 5 staff disagreements, this has been thoroughly rejected.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #140
But still the proof
I do not know what is there
The adjective "light" itself means that a ray consists of light.
Because the Avada Kedavra is comparable in speed to the light spell that Albus sends to protect Credence.
Understandable, but I proved reflection anyway, so it doesn't make sense.
why? I showed how it reflects off the metal, that's enough, you're just ignoring the proof right now, lol
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #141
Well, the speed of light, which was required to be proved
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #142
Can you comment more specifically?
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #143
is it surprising that the criteria for the speed of light are ignored, then do they need to be changed? Otherwise it is illogical.
IdiosyncraticLawyer
Username OnlyVS Battles
Joke Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Translation Helper
- 3,256
- 3,961
This has been rejected, and it reflects poorly upon you to claim that the standards are bad or that everyone else is ignoring proof. I'm going to have this closed if you continue.
- 72
- 38
Not only did you arbitrarily decide that there were no counter arguments to your claim, you also decided to ignore the counter arguments in the first place, such as the fact that the spell bounced off gold and also shattered gold in the same fight, something that light would not do unless it was unnatural. I hate to have to keep writing this, but the anti-criteria does not matter because AV has not meet any of the actual criteria for light. If you continue to ignore counters to your claim, then state that there is no counters so staff disagreements are illogical and this thread should go through because you think people aren't paying attention to the standards, then there's no point in have a discussion in the first place.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #146
in fact, not all people ignore my evidence, but come up with reasons so that they are invalid, although the criteria are quite the opposite.
In any case, most of the employees refused the topic, so if it's not difficult, you can close it
Last edited:
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #147
However, the spell was reflected from the metal sword, which also does not cancel the reflection effect. I also didn't see any proof that the centaur statue was made of gold. It's not my fault that people express their opinions without reading the beginning of the post, where all the criteria for the speed of light of Avada Kedavra are reasoned. And then they ask where this spell showed the effect of diffraction or reflection from metal surfaces. I'm tired of throwing off the same thing, obviously I won't be thrilled.
- 555
- 116
- Thread starter
- #148
Yes, I don't see the point in this thread anymore, so it needs to be closed.
- 31,588
- 28,048
Closing.
- Status
Similar threads
