scientificmotif

The way *I* use the adjective "wet" is using it to refer to a macroscopic solid that has absorbed a liquid, and that the wetness is evident upon interacting with said object, since it causes the toucher to experience a sensation of "wetness". Therefore, no liquid can be wet, since the object that is wet is the solid that has absorbed it (or the object that is the combination of the two). That being said, the argument is entirely subjective, owing to the fact that there is no single correct definition of "wet". If you think wetness is the attribute of touching or being saturated with a liquid, water is wet. If you think wetness is the attribute of being able to cause someone/something to feel the sensation of "wetness", water is wet. If you think a wet object is a solid that has absorbed water and can cause the sensation of "wetness", then water is not wet. Although, if you think of a body of water as one object, then water is not by default wet because since you have decided it is one object it cannot touch itself. If you think one object can't touch itself, that is... I don't feel like arguing a point even more subjective than "Is Water Wet?" I feel like you don't get the entire point of my post. I wasn't really "arguing" either point. For me, neither "water is wet" or "water is not wet" are "opposing arguments". I was merely providing my perspective and how I define wet. I'd also like to note that dictionaries aren't the end-all be-all of how a word is used. Dictionaries don't by necessity define or create words on a societal level; it was society that gave the word meaning. Again, dictionaries do not create the definitions of the word, neither do dictionaries hold the exact definition of a word. The definition of a word depends on how it is used. Just because there is a precedent of using dictionary definitions doesn't mean I have to. The question wasn't "is water wet by the definition provided in dictionaries". Since some people didn't get it the first time, I will repeat myself. I am saying that the argument is subjective and pointless. As for many definitions mentioning "consisting of water": Wet has many uses. I'll admit that I didn't cover it in the first post, although it doesn't really matter for the point of my post. Some people don't use wet in the same way as others. People don't always use the dictionary definition of words when they use them. Please stop hounding me about this. Wet can be used in several different ways, and they aren't all the same. Case in point (From oxford dictionary, since you believe in dictionaries so much) verb cover or touch with liquid; moisten. noun liquid that makes something damp adjective covered or saturated with water or another liquid. Now that I think about it, "wet paint" implies that a liquid can be wet, but since it's an adjective modifying paint, I think it would imply that a liquid saturated in another liquid is "wet". I no longer want to argue whether "water" in this argument refers to one H20 molecule or a whole body of said molecules in a liquid state, and whether objects are always touching themselves if you consider it as a whole object and not the atoms it is composed of, to infinity and beyond of arguing about what such-and-such word means. Sorry for replying so slowly

Yeah. I know. I was just finding how powerful the feat of creating Scadrial was, and therefore the bare minimum amount of Investiture (In terms of how much energy or mass it could be converted to, since we don't know how much a BEU is yet) Vessels can access.

Ik, I was just looking at quantifiable feats that could be found in the books

EXACTLY. I wasn't really looking for answers for the questions. I was just pointing out that full Shard mechanics are not fully understood. I don't particularly want the Dor to have a vessel. It's just that the power of not one but two godlike beings that can fling around planets like ping-pong balls and potentially create them is just a little concerning and potentially exploitable. It just has implications for the Cosmere at large, that's all. And about Ati... I'm like 99% sure that somewhere in Secret History Leras just straight up stated that Ati wasn't a good match for Ruin. I should get my own copies of the books... :<

1. If Ati wanted to channel the Shard less destructively, then he's rather against the Shard's Intent. I meant "bad vessel" as someone who would have lots of trouble picking the Shard up. 2. Just because the power isn't seeking a Vessel doesn't mean it can't be picked up? I mean, Kell was definitely not sought out by Preservation. How would the Dor being in the Cognitive Realm stop them? 3. Why not? You can use Lerasium (Preservation's essence) to increase your Connection to Preservation's Investiture. Why couldn't the Dor increase your Connection to the Dor?

Not just "Dor" but the Dor. As in the whole thing.

I was wondering, "How much energy do the Shards really have? What's the upper limit?" And I thought of a Shardic feat more impressive than moving Scadrial around like a ping-pong ball or Ati's implied destruction of Scadrial if he won. Creating Scadrial. The earth's mass is around 5.97*10^24 kilograms. The earth's gravitational binding energy is ~ 2.49*10^32 Joules (249 Nonillion) The energy if you were to convert 100% of the Earth's mass into energy would be ~5.36*10^41 Joules. (536 Duodecillion) Obviously, nobody knows what that really means. I'll put it like this: The gravitational binding energy of the Sun is about 6.9*10^41 joules. (690 Duodecillion) So creating the Earth is a feat nearly equivalent in energy to destroying the sun. (In Alternatively, that amount of energy could destroy ~ 2237500000 or 2.2375 billion Earths. Scadrial is kind of an earth stand-in, so this should be a rather good estimation for the energy required creation of Scadrial as well. Since the Investiture required to create Scadrial is, y'know, bound up in Scadrial, this Investiture shouldn't return to the two Shards unless they destroyed Scadrial. Yet Odium is still scared of At minimum their combined power is in the same ball-park as Odium's power. Obviously, Odium invested into the Rosharan system, but it should be a drop in the ocean compared to his power. So the Preservation and Ruin Shards should be at bare minimum half power after Investing Scadrial, meaning the full Investiture of a Shard should be estimated at ~1.94*10^25 kg if converted to mass and ~1.38*10^42 joules. At least. (1.38 Tredecillion) Note that they couldn't have taken matter from somewhere instead of creating it from scratch , since Sazed states that as opposed to Adonalsium, who would create worlds presumably with equal amounts of Investiture of each Intent, or something. Do with this useless information what you will.

I was just pointing out one of many examples of how we don't have a solid understanding of Ascension and Shards. I wasn't trying to present it as a silver bullet proving anyone can take up any Shard. I can provide another few examples: What's stopping world hoppers from using a connection sphere thing and taking up the Dor? Why are Cognitive Shadows so poorly equipped to control Shards? Why are you able to take up a Shard from the previous Vessel's corpse in the first place? Etc. (BTW, I wonder if someone was there where Leras's corpse appeared whether or not they could have taken up Preservation in the same way that Sazed took up Preservation and Ruin. I assume so...)

I think you mistake how Allomancy works... Harmony doesn't have "lines" that he Connects to people during Allomancy. (Also, we know for a fact that there's more and weaker Allomancers.) So when someone uses Allomancy, they aren't using Preservation the Shard's power. Therefore, normal Allomancers shouldn't have a direct Connection to Preservation the Shard that fuels their Allomancy. It's more like they draw on Investiture with Preservation's Intent. So when they "tap into the powers of creation", they tap into the ability to manipulate Investiture. Besides, Preservation shouldn't have a set number of Connections it can make, or a set amount of Connection "units" it can use. Yes, there's a difference between a Shard and Investiture aligned with a Shard. Here's an excerpt from a WoB: The reason I have so much trouble answering these questions (and you'll see me struggling to get an answer in the 10-15 seconds I have when someone asks me in a signing line) is because this isn't an either or. Is this computer I'm using matter associated with Earth, the Big Bang, or such-and-such star that went supernova long ago? Well, it's probably all three. When people ask, "What Shard is this Investiture associated with" it gets very complicated. Shards influence and tweak certain Investiture, giving it a kind of spin or magnetism, but all Investiture ever predates the Shattering--and in the cosmere matter, energy, and Investiture are one thing. I always imagine Investiture having certain states, certain magnetisms if you will, associated with certain aspects of Adonalsium. So it's all "assigned" to a Shard--because it's always been associated with that Shard. To Investiture, Adonalsium's Shattering meant everything and nothing at the same time. 1. More pressure feels like it would make Snapping harder on someone, not better. Harmony just changed how it works in some way. Maybe it happens over a long time period, or something. 2. Harmony has never been referred to has "her" as far as I remember. Harmony is referred to as "they", because Sazed doesn't really have a gender, and Harmony can be referred to as "he/him" because Sazed mostly identifies as a male. 2. Here's my hypothesis: Harmony is becoming Discord because the entity composed of two Shards Sazed holds is by default not Harmony, but Discord. Yes, it's an entity composed of two Shards, not one Shard. And it's an "entity composed of two shards", and not just "two shards", because they've been intermingled to some extent: Harmony is what people call the combination of Sazed, the Vessel, and the two shards, Ruin and Preservation. So Sazed kind of forces Ruin and Preservation to cooperate and is sort of "in harmony". But the Shard all along was really Discord. If you want some evidence, look at Harmonium: it is so in conflict with itself it explodes really easily. It's not in Harmony; it's in Discord. Hmm? Oh yes, of course. The reason why Harmony is trending towards Discord must be because Sazed is changing, because if anything the Shards should be trending to be in balance as they combine further. Why would Sazed be changing? By holding Discord, Sazed trends towards Discord's Intent. Therefore, the entity as a whole currently known as Harmony trends towards Discord because Sazed trends towards Discord. (MY HYPOTHESIS ENDS HERE) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well... it's like... In order to use Feruchemy, you need to tap nicrosil, but in order to tap nicrosil, you have to have Feruchemy. That's why just a metalmind with no Identity, a nicrosilmind, and another metalmind doesn't work. So the Excisor must somehow work around that. I don't feel like storing Connection would change that, with our current knowledge of Feruchemy. Connection to Scadrial shouldn't be involved; Feruchemy seems to work on any planet like Allomancy. Besides, even if Feruchemy required Connection, wouldn't a metalmind that has no Connection to Scadrial (and therefore the whole magic system) immediately stop working? So I don't think your idea would work. If anything, I think the Connection involved should involve Connecting to the user of the metalmind.

Mostly agree. In theory, T's other emotions increase with his Odium-associated emotions, so he shouldn't really be an especially good vessel for Odium (In the sense that he isn't as compatible). Obviously, reading the book, T is pretty obviously the perfect Vessel for Odium, so my logic must be wrong, and it describes how Odium "loves" his passion. I know that Rayse described Odium as Passion, but when T picks up the Shard, he is immediately influenced to destroy and hate, so it just feels strange to me. I also want to point out that Ati was a terrible match for the Shard Ruin, and yet he was able to pick it up. We just don't understand Ascension enough yet.

Time to throw my hat in the ring. Summary of argument: A long complaint about how vague the statement is and applying linguistic philosophy to the question to try to solve the vagueness, and answering some possible meanings of the question. WARNING Inside the text box is a really, really, really, really long answer to such a simple question. It doesn't spoil any stories, but it does spoil your brain, or something, probably. (For those who don't know, "Linguistic philosophy is a philosophical approach that aims to solve or resolve philosophical problems through a closer attention to language and its usage." (Source: Wikipedia page on linguistic philosophy. Yes, I checked it against other sources. As long as this post is, it's still on an internet forum debating a question entirely based on semantics. Sue me.) Yes, I don't have a degree in language philosophy, or have even taken any classes on it, but I can still apply it. Doesn't mean I'm claiming to be an expert.)

YKYASFW when someone says something like "mmmmmm" and you instantly think "they must be a cryptic, where's the lie"

To add to the conversation.. The Radiant bond seems to be replicable with any Cognitive Shadow... and probably that's the case with Singer bonds as well. I mean, the Fused are pretty blatantly Cognitive Shadows, so unless something special is going on it should be possible with any Cognitive Shadow. Could pure Investiture do similar things? I don't know, but I'm leaning towards "no".

Devotion already exists as a shard... and is now 1/2 of the Dor. Devotion doesn't really have any Odium in it, and is only tangentially related to Honor. I feel like for a real combo (Not a pseudo combo like Harmony, going to explain that a bit more later in the post) the resulting shard would be named something like Retribution, Retaliation, or Vengeance. I feel like Judgement and Justice don't have enough of the connotations behind wrath behind Odium to work well. I looked down the "war" route, but didn't find anything there. English doesn't really have a word for "honorable war." "Crusade" or "Crusader" just don't sound right. Considering my three options, I choose to drop Retaliation as not having enough oomph behind it in terms of rage or anger. Finally, between Vengeance and Retribution, I feel like either could work, but I'm going after some consideration with Vengeance. Vengeance has more Odium to it, and Retribution has more Honor to it, but I feel like the words already lean too much towards Honor as it is, and it just kind of sounds better for me. A Shard's name doesn't have to be all of what a Shard represents and its Intent, but it should represent its Shard as well as possible with what words English has. So while I'd suggest Vengeance or Retribution, if it was my job I'd name it Vengeance. (I'm assuming when you say "what would it be", you mean "what would it be named.") And who would combine the Shards anyways? Odium wouldn't... Odium combining with another shard would mean that Odium as a Shard would cease to exist. Because Rayse has held the shard for countless millennia, he's just blatantly unable to act against its Intent in such a big way like that Like how Nomad held the Dawnshard for some amount of time, and as a result has trouble acting against its Intent. And how Preservation couldn't attack Ruin.) So even though he in theory could combine with Shards, he wouldn't. Note that Rayse isn't fully aligned with the Shard, (Maybe since he was well aligned with Odium in the first place, somehow he isn't completely warped to the Shard's Intent like Ati was) and he sees himself as "Passion" and that kind of stuff. (Yet Odium is shown to pretty much purely compel Tarvanigan to hate hate destroy destroy destroy) So in theory Rayse should have been able to act against Odium's Intent in some kind of way. Rodium (And any Vessel+Shard combo except maybe long-term Vessels of Honor) can break deals, though. I can't the WoB (Or odium's dialogue about the matter), but breaking deals makes Shards weaker against other Shards, and there's another WoB I can't find about how Preservation is weak against other Shards too because he broke a deal with Ruin, and "how that will never be a problem ever everything's fine Harmony is fine" (Paraphrased). Basically, Odium won't break deals because it would give him problems with Splintering other Shards. I just wanted to clarify that acting against a Shard's Intent is not the same as breaking deals, and how Rayse can do one but not the other. But now Rodium is Todium, and Tarvanigan hasn't held the shard for any significant amount of time at all, so in theory he could take up Honor. In practice, he can't. Think there was either a WoB or something in the book about how the power needs to be "convinced" to be taken up? Ascension isn't fully understood, so it's a bit unclear what it would involve. Especially putting together Honor. However... So it's like, "taking up the power" might reassemble Splinters? Maybe? In order to help my understanding of Ascension, I'd have to reread Vin's and Sazed's ascensions from Kelsier's POV, and also Kelsier's ascension. It seems like you need to be Connected to some degree to take up Shards, but obviously circumstances matter, and again we don't fully understand. Like how Ruin and Preservation's power manifested in the PR after their Vessels died, but when Leras died (Indicated in the same way, his body drops into the PR where his mind was focused) no such power manifested. And Vin had to be Super-Duper Connected and the mists "chose her" and stuff, and Kelsier had to use the Connection hack sphere, and Sazed was just like "Yoink!" And how the Dor being in the Cognitive Realm instead of the Spiritual prevents is from becoming sentient, and how Rayse technically could have merged with the Shards he Splintered while being essentially completely aligned with Odium (Where Sazed had about equal Connections to Preservation and Ruin), etc, etc. So I suppose it's possible that Todium would want to combine with Honor to get more power so he could "save them all", or to help resist Odium's Intent, or a combination of the two and/or another motivation. However, there's no evidence to say whether Todium does want to, and whether he can at all, and if he would succeed if the aforementioned conditions are true. And even less evidence that he'd be forced to do so. Obviously, there's other possibilities of the combination of the two Shards, like someone reassembling and taking up Honor and then taking up Odium somehow, or both Honor and Odium dying and someone taking up both at once, and more, but there's just too many possibilities to consider. As a final note, there wouldn't be just one possible Shard combination. Brandon doesn't even count Harmony as a combined shard. It's simply an entity that consists of two Shards that are tangled enough to stay in one piece. So different combinations can result from whether the Shards are really actually combined or simply shoved in one Vessel. (Side note, I theorize that the entity that consists of two Shards known as Harmony has been Discord all along. The combination of Preservation, Ruin, and Sazed is what is known as "Harmony'. Think about it like the distinction between Todium and Odium. When Sazed is no longer able to wrangle Ruin and Preservation and act (and people notice and therefore change the name), the Shards+Vessel combo will become known as Discord. The Shard combo was always Discord. Sazed just gets affected by the Shard combo's Intent.) Tldr: 1.. Who would be the Vessel? Vessel: No way to know who would hold it, it depends, pretty much anyone in the Cosmere could take up the shard given the right circumstances. 2. Nature of the shard: Its nature depends on whether it gets actually, fully combined, or whether they just get shoved in one Vessel, left there for a few hundred years, and get tangled enough to be counted as one entity. 3. Naming: Retribution or Vengeance (I lean heavily towards Vengeance).