Hypothesis: the Source of Magic is an AI with the goal to work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. Or maybe, to make the world work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. The strength of belief appears to be important, so a strong belief can override weak ones. On the other hand, when something is already “generally known” to work in a certain way, this is a very strong belief.
Examples:
Broomsticks work by Aristotelian physics [because it was what people believed when the broomsticks were invented, and now people just know (=believe really strongly) that’s how broomsticks should behave]
Spell names and laws [inventors create spells by finding sounds they believe should work. When spells become known,
they stabilize in that form]
Potions Law
Ritual magic [people really believe in sacrifices and not getting something for nothing]
Ghosts (and afterlife?) [effects of religious beliefs]
Harry’s partial transfiguration [very strong belief, finds a loophole to not be in conflict with existing strong beliefs of other people]
Magic doesn’t make sense to Harry because it now reflects lots of ad hoc rules and beliefs accumulated in centuries. Wizards and witches believe them from childhood. [No wonder they are half-insane.]
Interestingly, this hypothesis implies that Dumbledore’s narrative causality may actually work—people do believe in stories.
Wow. That’s just an absolutely fabulous theory. In one fell swoop, you explain why EY appeared to leave AI out of his largest story yet, plausibly account for a vast array of in-story phenomena, and rehabilitate a character (Dumbledore) who seems suspiciously irrational for someone who’s supposed to have oodles of meaningful in-story-real-world accomplishments. The theory has falsifiable, concrete predictions—for example, we should not expect the AI to care if Harry asks it really nicely to give everyone magic powers; nor should we expect magic to be able to do anything that a super-intelligent AI couldn’t do (simulating cat-brains is AOK; uncomputably complicated time loops are not OK). The theory also seems to fit with Chapter 82′s hint that people subsumed by pheonix fire are re-instantiated “instances” of a more general Fire. In other words, the AI can maybe call the “Harry” subroutine somewhere else if it wants.
I’m in awe.
One possible victory condition if the AI in fact is coded to enforce the beliefs of people with a particular genetic marker is for Harry to find a way to put that marker into most people / his friends using a retrovirus. Does anyone else find it in the least suspicious that Harry’s father is an expert biochemist?
So, have there been any fundamentally uncomputable events in the story so far? :-)
Hypothesis: the Source of Magic is an AI with the goal to work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. Or maybe, to make the world work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. The strength of belief appears to be important, so a strong belief can override weak ones. On the other hand, when something is already “generally known” to work in a certain way, this is a very strong belief.
Examples:
Broomsticks work by Aristotelian physics [because it was what people believed when the broomsticks were invented, and now people just know (=believe really strongly) that’s how broomsticks should behave]
Spell names and laws [inventors create spells by finding sounds they believe should work. When spells become known, they stabilize in that form]
Potions Law
Ritual magic [people really believe in sacrifices and not getting something for nothing]
Ghosts (and afterlife?) [effects of religious beliefs]
Harry’s partial transfiguration [very strong belief, finds a loophole to not be in conflict with existing strong beliefs of other people]
Magic doesn’t make sense to Harry because it now reflects lots of ad hoc rules and beliefs accumulated in centuries. Wizards and witches believe them from childhood. [No wonder they are half-insane.]
Interestingly, this hypothesis implies that Dumbledore’s narrative causality may actually work—people do believe in stories.
Wow. That’s just an absolutely fabulous theory. In one fell swoop, you explain why EY appeared to leave AI out of his largest story yet, plausibly account for a vast array of in-story phenomena, and rehabilitate a character (Dumbledore) who seems suspiciously irrational for someone who’s supposed to have oodles of meaningful in-story-real-world accomplishments. The theory has falsifiable, concrete predictions—for example, we should not expect the AI to care if Harry asks it really nicely to give everyone magic powers; nor should we expect magic to be able to do anything that a super-intelligent AI couldn’t do (simulating cat-brains is AOK; uncomputably complicated time loops are not OK). The theory also seems to fit with Chapter 82′s hint that people subsumed by pheonix fire are re-instantiated “instances” of a more general Fire. In other words, the AI can maybe call the “Harry” subroutine somewhere else if it wants.
I’m in awe.
One possible victory condition if the AI in fact is coded to enforce the beliefs of people with a particular genetic marker is for Harry to find a way to put that marker into most people / his friends using a retrovirus. Does anyone else find it in the least suspicious that Harry’s father is an expert biochemist?
So, have there been any fundamentally uncomputable events in the story so far? :-)