Chaos

I don't really care. Parentheses>Multiplication>Addition. From there, just group things with parentheses until you're done. I was actually thinking of this when I wrote the rant.

Okay, it's stupid for me to get worked up about math questions on FACEBOOK, of all places, but this is just ridiculous. http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=question&id=1967593674538&qa_ref=qd The question is 6/2(1+2)=? Is it 1, or is it 9? I have a couple of responses for everyone. Because apparently people have very strong opinions on the order of operations, I guess, but there sure as heck aren't 400,000 math majors currently, so I'm going to rant. The simple solution is to put another friggin' set of parentheses. (6/2)(1+2) or 6/(2(1+2)). Ambiguity solved. It's almost as if parentheses help clarify the order of operations or something! Madness! Everyone who is screaming about this on Facebook need to realize that math is all about created unambiguity. Writing down a trick question like this does not make you clever, it makes you a jerk. Poorly worded questions are beneficial to no one. This is essentially math trolling. Really, when you come right down to it, math is not about creating understanding. For people learning math, this sucks, but sorry. Math is about being impossible to misunderstand, and the writer of this question clearly never took that clue. (My TI-89 and WolframAlpha agree it is 9. I myself don't care that much about PEMBAS, or whatever people are screaming about. Just write an extra set of parentheses)

That... is immensely interesting. This warrants discussion.

Okay guys. Do remember this song, from way back? I literally got chills from listening to that song again. Pikachu vs. Magmar anyone? That fight was awesome.

I'm getting to these posts, soon. Both are acceptable, actually. I typically prefer foci, but they can both work.

Yeah, we'll make a big deal about it. You know, when we actually get started on the thing. I'm almost done with classes, though, so it'll be soon.

I think you misunderstood me; I meant that some people have more Preservation than others, and that some people have less Preservation than that, but they still have more Preservation than Ruin. Sorry, that wasn't entirely clear from my statement. My bad. Ahhh, I think the problem is that we lack good terminology. Those Divine Breaths are Splinters, which I believe you're referring to as a "piece" of a Shard's power. And on that note, I completely agree; Breath aren't Splinters. But they are certainly of Endowment. We're pretty much in agreement on that. However, I think we're not understanding each other with the Returned as net gain sort of thing. (Though, even if it is net gain, you are still endowing power to people; it just came directly from the Shard. I see no contradiction) Brandon said that Ruin or Preservation can fuel any of the Metallic Arts, even Feruchemy. So what I'm suggesting is that Divine Breath aren't a function of people and their own Breath. We both agree that Endowment is giving the Divine Breath to them, right? Well, that's similar to how Ruin or Preservation can fuel the Arts. Just because they could fuel Feruchemy doesn't mean that Feruchemy inherently has "net gain" to it. The Shard sort of messed it up by directly fueling the magics. So, Endowment grants Splinters to the Returned, and they sort of break the normal rules of Breath and Awakening. But you could still use that Breath to Awaken, if you really wanted to. So, the Divine Breath fit easily into the Principle of Intent that way. At some point we're just going to argue about semantics endlessly, but perhaps it would be more useful to discuss why the Divine Breath requires eating other Breaths to work. I still don't think it matters whether it's net gain or net loss. They are Splinters, not normal Breath, and therefore are quite different from normal rules of Awakening. It's all Endowment's fault there. Yeah, we're definitely not being clear about this here. Let me think for a moment and try to explain. I think our problem is lack of clarity in the mechanism. So, here goes. Metals are a conduit to accessing Preservation's body; that's how Allomancy works. In order to burn metals, you must have enough Preservation in you. But, the amount of Preservation in you (that amount which makes her an Allomancer) isn't the stuff that is used up when you utilize Allomancy, it comes from Preservation's energy instead. That is to say, Preservation itself, not the bits of Preservation inside someone. Naturally, if I was an Allomancer and burning metals actually took away the Preservation inside of me, I should get weaker at Allomancy. But it doesn't. So when Vin is fueling Elend's Allomancy, she is emphatically not adding Preservation to himself. She is letting him use that divine fuel immediately, without the intermediary of burning metals. This is really getting nitty-gritty with terminology, and kind of dumb, but I think it's important to be clear about this. If more Preservation was added to me when Preservation fuels my Allomancy, well, then as you said about lerasium, I'd actually get more Preservation in me, and I'd be a more effective Allomancer. But, we don't see that that is the case. When Vin burned the mists in Book One, she didn't get noticeably better at Allomancy. Therefore, the Preservation inside of her--that amount which let her use Allomancy--was essentially the same. What the mists did wasn't adding Preservation, they replaced the conduit for the power of Preservation, thus removing the need for metals. So it didn't really add to a person's Preservation. Fueling Allomancy doesn't add Preservation to the person, it lets the person use that Preservation for Allomancy. Okay, I really like this explanation to how BioChroma is so new. I just would like to point that out. XD Awesome. So, you say that the "net gain" is a fundamental effect of Endowment, as evidenced by the act of gaining Divine Breath. I... guess? But as I said above, the gaining of Divine Breath is an active effect on Endowment's part, not a standard function of the magic system. More akin to super fuel than anything else. Plus, I think it's important to not take the Principle to refer to anything other than the magic systems. It does not inherently predict how the Shard's can decide to use stuff. Nowhere in the Principle could I have ever predicted that Preservation can use his essence as a super fuel. The Principle relates to how humans use magic, and why the magic operates the way it does. Could we agree that the Divine Breaths are given by an act of Endowment? (Well, you sort of said the same thing, so I'm assuming you'd agree on that point ) Well, if it is given by a direct of Endowment, then it is not a function of Awakening. Awakening is what happens once Endowment is done, and Awakening is what the Principle would refer to. Specifically, that Awakening operates in line with Endowment's Intent, in that it endows energy to other things. That's all I'm really saying here. (In fact, I think Awakening is the clearest example of the Principle in action) So, to sum up, I don't think the "net gain" of giving Splinters to Returned invalidates the Principle on any level. Endowment can plenty of things that Awakening can't, just as Vin's power to stop a tsunami or move a planet has absolutely nothing to do with the mechanics of Allomancy. I should probably state the Principle more precisely... So really, this is my fault, since I'm not being entirely clear either. I believe I've already covered how I don't believe there is any inconsistency here. Of course you need to post theories! ...You do know that Odium/Rayse and Bavadin are separate people, right? Just making sure

Interesting way to think about it, Zas. I'm not sure I go for it yet, but it's given me something to toss around in my mind.

Holy crap! Dissenting viewpoints! Excellent, I’ve been waiting for this. I’d like to first say, welcome to the 17th Shard theory club. I’m glad someone is giving me some crap. If I come off as a little harsh, it’s because I’m tired. I don’t think I was harsh in this post, but uh, if so, I’m warning you now! Really, thank you for critiquing me. Critique keeps us all honest. I’m going to go through your comments, though I don’t talk about a couple because I don’t have anything to say about them. Okay, granted, we don’t know that Endowment or the Selian Shards created life. This is a valid argument, and brings up an interesting question. But, I think it’s reasonable to assume that they did. If their worlds’ respective Shards did not create life, that would imply one of two things: 1. a different Shard(s) created life there, 2. life existed there, pre-Shattering. I don’t think those cases are likely. In the first case, Brandon would’ve mentioned that we’ve seen the influence of over Shards on those planets, and I believe we’ve successfully deciphered Brandon’s cryptic words about four Shards other than Ruin and Preservation. I guess it’s possible for there to have existed life on those planets previously, but there’s no evidence supporting this theory. If it makes you feel better, maybe Endowment could just “endow” things with life? Therefore, it would be perfectly possible for Endowment to create. I think our disagreement on this fundamental idea influences most of your arguments, so I’m just going to leave it here, rather than beat it with a dead horse. Like I said, this is a very interesting question to be asking. What I mean by the fragments of Ruin and Preservation is just the spiritual aspects that those Shards gave to things. Some people have lots of Preservation in them, some people have less so, but they exist and they are real. It’s a power separate from the Metallic Arts. Just because you aren’t an Allomancer doesn’t mean you don’t have some amount of Preservation in you (wow, that was a lot of negatives). I said “fragment of Preservation” because people don’t hold all of Preservation Just a part of it. Awakening doesn’t require a piece of a Shard? I will have to vehemently disagree with that. Breath are required for Awakening, and we only see Breath in relation to things with Endowment. I hardly think it’s a stretch to say Breath are of Endowment. Meaning they are a “piece” of Endowment. Does that make sense? Magic relates to a Shard. We don’t see people on Scadrial Awakening, because it requires Endowment to work in the first place. Regardless of whether Breaths come from an ambient process of Endowment influencing the people, that still means you needed Endowment’s power to get the Breath in the first place. Therefore, Breath are of Endowment. Certainly the Divine Breath are of Endowment, too, but from a different effect. Splitting this next one into two parts. I don’t understand this statement. Well, from a stupidly easy standpoint, to that cloth you just Awakened, it “gained” energy. But I see your point. You’re just moving energy around that already existed. I could phrase that better for sure. I don’t think we should say that the Divine Breath inherently created a net gain. It’s not really the magic system’s fault, it’s a function of Endowment. As for the bold part, I don’t understand what you are saying well enough to discuss it But that’s okay, it’s not like we’re going anywhere. I’d need to see some evidence that Preservation did, in fact, weaken himself due to his fueling of Allomancy. I’m reading the epigraphs to see if there was an explicit mention of this. Okay, finished reading the epigraphs, and there is no mention--explicit or implied--that Allomancy contributed to Preservation being weaker than Ruin. There’s precious little on the subject. Just a few quotes for you But Hemalurgy doesn’t do anything to the person who performed the spiking. That’s what I was referring to. Whoa, there are a lot of claims here. Let me try and dissect some. Firstly, not all Shards need another Shard to balance or cancel it out. Also, I don’t understand what you mean with “My problem with this, in relation to the principle overall, is it's very similar to Awakening, which is not the principle of Endowment.” (Maybe Awakening just works because it follows this Principle ) As for more Preservation than Ruin in people, yeah, the Feruchemy explanation doesn’t quite hold. If this was how it worked, you couldn’t be both an Allomancer and a Feruchemist, when obviously you can. You’ve got me. This is a flaw I’ve identified a bit ago, and I don’t know how to reconcile it. I disagree about the evolution of abilities, so I’ll have that later stuff alone. However, Feruchemy didn’t evolve over time; in fact, it was the oldest of the Metallic Arts. Or, at least the oldest of them. Well, I think you misunderstand a little. The Principle applies to how the magic operates, as in, the inner mechanics of it. We shouldn’t use it to predict individual powers of Allomancy or Feruchemy, because we can’t. I consider the ten aspects of Surgebinding to be like Allomancy in that regard. So, there wouldn’t need to be ten different pieces of ten different Shards, because, naturally, there are not ten Shards on Roshar.

I've thought about this for a while, and I now completely agree with this sentiment. Hi Brucelet! Glad you could join us in our humble abode. I really like that quote, that's great you've found it. Seems like a clear representation of the Principle of Intent. I like you already, haha.

Finished I Don't Want to Kill You, by Dan Wells. Holy crap, that was amazing.

This thrills me to no end!

Of course, the climaxes always felt forced in Inheritance. "Hey, it's near the end of the book HEY LOOK A BATTLE HOW CONVENIENT." It's the worst in Brisingr, for sure.

Here's the deal with Dragonsteel: it's one of Brandon's huge epics he's been planning since forever. That shouldn't be too surprising, since Brandon's company is Dragonsteel Entertainment. It was his honors thesis at BYU, and apparently the first book where Peter really knew Brandon could do this whole writing thing. Dragonsteel was the first of a five book arc. However, Brandon wasn't satisfied, because he was biting off too much that he couldn't chew. So--from what I understand--Brandon had changed Dragonsteel around a bit. What was originally "Dragonsteel" would be the third book, something like "Dragonsteel: The Eternal War". The first book would now be "Dragonsteel: The Liar of Partinel" I guess with the "Dragonsteel" part removed similar to how "Mistborn: The Well of Ascension" was. I believe the second one was to be "The Lightweaver of Rens". Whatever, not totally important. The important part is that Liar is the first book, chronologically, on Yolen (the name of the Dragonsteel planet). The "main" Dragonsteel book--the one which is in BYU, albeit in a very old form--is book three. Liar was the book Brandon worked on when the Wheel of Time hit him. He completed a draft, but it was a pretty bad, uneven draft, which he had to pull out of his writing group. If I recall correctly, this was because Brandon was trying to do a lot of discovery writing in it, and didn't work. He doesn't let Liar out. It, apparently, "spoils too much". But, he did get a draft done, and he posted sample chapters online. They were interesting, to say the least. It opens with Midius's master, Hoid, dying. Now, this strongly suggests that Liar is Hoid's origin story, so to speak. (Brandon, after all, said Stormlight Archive isn't about Hoid. Well, Dragonsteel deals with it more directly.) Combine this with the fact that Brandon said, "Hoid was there when Adonalsium was Shattered"... Well, put two and two together. "Liar spoils too much". Gee, maybe because Adonalsium is Shattered in that? That's what I strongly believe. Note that there were no Dragonsteel spoilers in this whole spiel. This is all public knowledge. Anyways, nowadays judging from Brandon's long post on books that he did recently, Dragonsteel is seven books. Two books, Liar and its sequel, are first, followed by the "main" Dragonsteel sequence, five books in length. Does that clear things up? Except for my rampant theorizing, however.

It's kind of hard for me to confirm it for you when they aren't in the file Plus, I can't open SVGs. Maybe include .jpg's as well as .svg's in the .zip for those of us who can't do vector artwork. But, the symbols on the old Table of Allomantic Metals are correct. However, on that image that's floating around, lerasium was spelled--incorrectly--as "larasium". That is not the right spelling. The correct spellings are "lerasium", "atium", and "malatium". The atium and malatium symbols are the same as in MB3. (I have the final version of the Table of Allomantic Metals, so I can just look at it. Though malatium isn't included in it)

I don't know which book that is, but I have guesses.

Nope. I don't know anyone here who has Pokemon. I tend to keep the games as a solitary experience...

Well, people wanted this cage match first, so we sort of have to do it first.

Yeah, like we don't start the other one until the first is done.

Have fun juggling them. Or, rejuggling them (Firefox says it isn't a word. So there.)

Also, Eero, I'm the worst Scrabble player in history. Naturally, this means that my moves take forever.

Eerongal slaughtered me with "Rejuggled" on a triple word score. 98 points...

I concur with this. Yeah, let's do that, and have them offset a little, so they don't conflict which each other.