Feruchemy is not completely end-neutral

[AbsentKeeper]

We've been led to believe since the very beginning that feruchemy is completely end-neutral, meaning that you always get out the same power that you put in. (Excluding compounding)

Something that I noticed while rereading the Mistborn era one books, however, seems to not match the pattern!

Atium! Atium is not end neutral! The trait that it stores is age, which means that as soon as you store it, you've lost the time that you spent being old to store it in the first place!

Let me explain better: if you were to store age in an Atium metalmind, even only for a few seconds, then use it to become equally younger for the same amount of time, you would be OLDER by a few seconds at the end, then when you started!

Someone needs to ask Brandon if this is a quirk of storing an atribute that naturally decays over time (people age constantly), or if the feruchemical use of Atium is end-negative on purpose, because it is of Ruins power.

If it isn't just a quirk, or I'm not a crazy person, this could mean that lerasium should be able to store something end-positive, which people gain over time rather than loose, (wild speculation ahead) such as wisdom or experience.

Stormfather! I think I might have found something!

Thoughts and criticisms?

Edited July 25, 2017 by Cowmanthethird
Edited for clarification

[Spoolofwhool]

You're not older because the charge has, in any way, diminished. You're older because during this entire process, you're still naturally aging. 

To break down the entire math.

t = 0 min: Start storing so that you're 5 minutes older. [Relative age from start, 5 min; Actual age from start, 0 min]
t = 2.5 min: Still storing so that you're 5 minutes older. [Relative age from start, 7.5 min; Actual age from start, 2.5 min]
t = 5 min: Stop storing and start tapping so you're five minutes younger. [Relative age from start, 0 min; Actual age from start, 5 min]
t = 7.5 min: Still tapping so that you're 5 minutes younger. [Relative age from start, 2.5 min; Actual age from start, 7.5 min]
t = 10 min: Stop tapping, charge is depleted. [Relative age from start, 10 min; Actual age from start, 10 min]

As you can see, you've continued to age during the process, which is why you still end with a net addition to your age. This isn't a quirk of atium or feruchemy, this is part of the fact that this is an attribute which is constantly changing. Your soul is continuing to count your age as time advances. While the tap does trick the soul into being younger than it actually is, it's still counting from the relative younger point.

[AbsentKeeper]

23 minutes ago, Spoolofwhool said:

You're not older because the charge has, in any way, diminished. You're older because during this entire process, you're still naturally aging. 

To break down the entire math.

t = 0 min: Start storing so that you're 5 minutes older. [Relative age from start, 5 min; Actual age from start, 0 min]
t = 2.5 min: Still storing so that you're 5 minutes older. [Relative age from start, 7.5 min; Actual age from start, 2.5 min]
t = 5 min: Stop storing and start tapping so you're five minutes younger. [Relative age from start, 0 min; Actual age from start, 5 min]
t = 7.5 min: Still tapping so that you're 5 minutes younger. [Relative age from start, 2.5 min; Actual age from start, 7.5 min]
t = 10 min: Stop tapping, charge is depleted. [Relative age from start, 10 min; Actual age from start, 10 min]

As you can see, you've continued to age during the process, which is why you still end with a net addition to your age. This isn't a quirk of atium or feruchemy, this is part of the fact that this is an attribute which is constantly changing. Your soul is continuing to count your age as time advances. While the tap does trick the soul into being younger than it actually is, it's still counting from the relative younger point.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Maybe I didn't quite explain what I mean well enough, but I think it's the fact that atium stores a trait that is constantly decaying like this that is anomalous. Ruin's metal stores something that is inherently end-negative, and I'm just wondering if it follows that Preservation's metal would have stored something inherently end-posistive?

[Calderis]

9 minutes ago, Cowmanthethird said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Maybe I didn't quite explain what I mean well enough, but I think it's the fact that atium stores a trait that is constantly decaying like this that is anomalous. Ruin's metal stores something that is inherently end-negative, and I'm just wondering if it follows that Preservation's metal would have stored something inherently end-posistive?

Look at it this way. If you stored age so that your 15 years younger, for a full year, you've still aged a full year. Then if you wait 20 years to use it, you can be 15 years younger for a full year and and you'll never be younger than you were when you stored it. 

You get exactly what you put into it. There's no loss. 

[AbsentKeeper]

20 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Look at it this way. If you stored age so that your 15 years younger, for a full year, you've still aged a full year. Then if you wait 20 years to use it, you can be 15 years younger for a full year and and you'll never be younger than you were when you stored it. 

You get exactly what you put into it. There's no loss. 

I'm not arguing this, the power that goes in and comes out is balanced, but Atium is the only metal that stores a trait that is itself end-negative. Strength, physical speed, mental speed, and even healing speed are all things that don't change over time, unless an outside force causes them to, whether it be excersices, or illness or whatever. Age is anomalous among the feruchemical traits can be stored, in that age is end-negative.

Are you telling me this is just a coincidence?

Edit: I think its the title that's causing the most confusion, but I couldn't think of anything else...

Edited July 25, 2017 by Cowmanthethird

[8bitBob]

It's not really that anomalous. Technically, many traits are "end negative" under that logic. For instance, if you store strength while in peak physical condition and then tap it while you're a frail husk after surviving disease, you're going to get much less out of it because you need to tap so much more strength to make up for your weakness.

[Spoolofwhool]

8 minutes ago, Cowmanthethird said:

I'm not arguing this, the power that goes in and comes out is balanced, but Atium is the only metal that stores a trait that is itself end-negative. Strength, physical speed, mental speed, and even healing speed are all things that don't change over time, unless an outside force causes them to, whether it be excersices, or illness or whatever. Age is anomalous among the feruchemical traits can be stored, in that age is end-negative.

Are you telling me this is just a coincidence?

Edit: I think its the title that's causing the most confusion, but I couldn't think of anything else...

Yes, the title is certainly misdirecting as it appears you are, in no way, thinking that feruchemy is not end-neutral, but rather than atium stores an attribute that changes quite rapidly by itself.

I would say that this is coincidental. Also, I wouldn't describe the trait as being end-negative, as it's not. It's just accomplishing its nature, and end-negative is not a term which should be applied to attribute, as it deals with the net transfer of investiture during the course of using a manifestation of investiture. Other attributes change on their own. Memories degrade, your strength lessens, your health diminishes. While these are the result of age, it is due to the nature parts of these attributes that these happen. 

[AbsentKeeper]

4 minutes ago, Spoolofwhool said:

Other attributes change on their own. Memories degrade, your strength lessens, your health diminishes

most attributes grow stronger for the first half of the life or so, and the weaken from there, mostly in balance.

I didn't think about memories degrading though, that one does kinda blow a hole in my theory, especially since they only degrade while not in a coppermind.

Well, maybe time to admit I was reading too much into this one.

*sigh*

Edited July 25, 2017 by Cowmanthethird

[Ethan_sedai]

his claim that feruchemy is not completely end-neutral is correct, but his reasons are incorrect.

if you had an object on a spring, it could increase its weight on its way down, and decrease its weight on the way up, it would continue to move farther and farther, which would produce energy, and would therefore be end-positive. the reverse, trying to make it move less and less, by increasing weight on the way up, and decreasing on the way down, would only work for just a short time, because it would stop moving, and would stop consuming energy. the end-positive is more end-positive than the end-negative is end-negative.

(this might be true for other situations, but I'm not sure, though.)

[Spoolofwhool]

5 hours ago, ethan_sedai said:

his claim that feruchemy is not completely end-neutral is correct, but his reasons are incorrect.

if you had an object on a spring, it could increase its weight on its way down, and decrease its weight on the way up, it would continue to move farther and farther, which would produce energy, and would therefore be end-positive. the reverse, trying to make it move less and less, by increasing weight on the way up, and decreasing on the way down, would only work for just a short time, because it would stop moving, and would stop consuming energy. the end-positive is more end-positive than the end-negative is end-negative.

(this might be true for other situations, but I'm not sure, though.)

It's still end-neutral with regards to the term however, as that deals with classifying a manifestation of investiture based on where investiture begins and ends during default usage of it. While yes, in a general scope feruchemy allows for the subversion of natural laws with seemingly no source to that change, that doesn't figure into the selection of the End-X classification.

[Ethan_sedai]

19 hours ago, Spoolofwhool said:

It's still end-neutral with regards to the term however, as that deals with classifying a manifestation of investiture based on where investiture begins and ends during default usage of it. While yes, in a general scope feruchemy allows for the subversion of natural laws with seemingly no source to that change, that doesn't figure into the selection of the End-X classification.

ah, that makes sense.