1
Tamyrlin: 2004-04-24
As we have been discussing on the board, I would accept your "resistor" as the physical Body Soul Interface (BSI), or the gene that leads to the creation of the BSI. We can tell, from Lanfear's partial shield on Asmodean's BSI, and Nynaeve's partial healing to Siuan and Leane's BSI, that the BSI controls the quantity of one power that can be safely channeled. Just some thoughts.
2
udernation: 2004-04-24
It's overly simple, I think, but a think I like the simplicity. With a little effort it could be merged with Tam's theory, and I think that might be the key to it - the similarity between 'burned outs' is also a good point. However, 'burned out' is used in an energetic overloads (if you're exhausted, you can be called 'burned out'), and so it's not exactly foolproof. But i definitely like. I'm thinking that perhaps a tighter application of the analogy is in order; what is voltage applicable as in randland channeling aside from a constant? Power is an overall value given to the channeller, Resistance is the bandwidth of the power, and current is actual power channelled in a given situation, but for it to work, the constant must be given a real time reflection. If you can solve this, I think you might have something.
3
Eelfinn Ty: 2004-04-24
Interesting theory. I have a little something to add. The best conductors are superconducters. They eliminate most if not all resistance, but they have to be extreamly cold. One type of super conducter is called a room temperature superconducter. This type is regarded as the "Holy Grail" of superconductivity.
Another name for "Holy Grail" is San Grael. Ever since I learned about this name I was convinced that this is where RJ derived Sa' angreal, and I think this theory explains it. A channeler would use a "holy grail" to greatly reduce the resistance in the circuit. IMHO it fits too well to be a coincidence, espically with RJ. What do you guys think?
4
Callandor: 2004-04-24
**People who can learn to channel- semi-conductors!(diodes- not normally conductors but can be made into them with assistance.)**
So would you be saying more that people who learn to channel are more "efficent" channelers then ones who are born with the spark? Or that people born with the spark are more powerful?
Good example to explain, is the case of Sharina Melloy, who did not have the spark born in her, but is assumed to be as strong as it is possible to be (Lanfear strength).
5
charliec: 2004-04-25
I'm not sure there's much mileage in the analogy... but I quite like the key point- that all chanellers are linked to the same power source, but are mor or less capable of dealing with it... seems plausible!
a couple of problems with the analogy-
once someone learns to channel they are just like someone with the spark... their 'circuitry' has adapted to using the power permanently, unlike a semiconductor.
b) Pretty much anything will conduct electricity if there's a high enough voltage across it... even a vacuum will permit electrons to flow through... in fact I can't think of a counter-example... But the spectrum of non-chanellers to chanellers is not continuous- it is not that Perrin can only channel a tiny tiny bit, he cannot channel at all.
c) If too many of us physicists get hold of this terminology and start arguing over it in earnest it's just going to get silly! ;-)
6
Davian93: 2004-04-25
****Good example to explain, is the case of Sharina Melloy, who did not have the spark born in her, but is assumed to be as strong as it is possible to be (Lanfear strength).****
One problem with that: Rand, the strongest male channeler we know of was born with the spark. Many of the strongest channelers we know of besides Sharina were born with the spark: Alivia, Nyneave, etc.
7
Daekyras: 2004-04-26
Thank you Eelfinn Ty! While I was posting this theory I did it as an off the cuff one and couldn't for the life of me remember my link to Sa'Angreal.
I haven't got the time tween classes( us lecturers have 5 hours a week you know!) to read the message board though I'll try and do it from now on. Body soul Interface- Brilliant!
8
dragonsceptor: 2004-04-26
Thank you for the compliment Daekyras.
I really like this idea, especially combined with Body Soul Interface.
With regards to non-channellers: The fact that they are non-channellers implies an open circuit (ie infinite resistance). The distance between the conductors is sufficient that it cannot arc between then.
With regards to those who can learn to channel: Perhaps they are born with an open circuit where the distance between the conductors is small enough that it can eventually arc and once the arc is established, a permanent circuit is built.
Any ways, great theory.
9
Anubis: 2004-04-26
interesting. i always just thought of everyone who could channel as having a conduit and strength being determined by the size of the tube so to speak. i like this theory, gives me a new way to think of things. nice work.
10
Callandor: 2004-04-26
**One problem with that: Rand, the strongest male channeler we know of was born with the spark. Many of the strongest channelers we know of besides Sharina were born with the spark: Alivia, Nyneave, etc.**
Yes, I was not saying that people who are taught are stronger, wilders are generally a lot stronger then learners; I wanted Sharina's position to be explained by that, to fit the analogy.
Thing is, we know Rand was born with the spark, yet was Ishamael born with the spark? Or Lanfear? Or Demandred? Being them of the AoL, I would lean more towards not having the spark and actually being taught, but again, we don't know.
11
Rand alThor15: 2004-04-27
Well, i always thought people had some talents in the Power while other dudes had different ones is kind of what goes on in real life :
People are fast thinkers; People think as slowly as snails move
People are good in mathematics; people are good in litterature.. but that's just me...
12
charliec: 2004-04-27
Tamyrlin must be laughing his socks off at us science types... ;)
**conductors is small enough that it can eventually arc and once the arc is established, a permanent circuit is built. **
I suppose that could go as an analogy, but it doesn't mesh all that well with the gradual development of female learners...
13
dragonsceptor: 2004-04-28
reading this made me think of something. How does this theory deal with the affinity different people have with certain elements? Most men are strong in Fire and Earth and weaker in Air, Water, and Spirit while women are the opposite. I don't see how this can be explained. Any ideas?
14
Anubis: 2004-04-28
callandor, having the spark and being taught are not mutually exclusive. The spark just means that the person WILL channel eventually whether they learn how or not. The ability to channel can be detected (and probably was in the AOL) before the spark manifests and the learning can begin.
15
Brendan Reborn: 2004-04-28
Dragonsceptor, I don't think the analogy was meant to explain the relationship with the channeler and the five powers, but merely more to describe how the channeller links to the trues source, and how much of the source will flow in them. I think a seperate theory would be needed to explain the five powers in relationship to this one. But again, like I said, the analogy is applying to the person ability to link with the source.
16
dragonsceptor: 2004-04-28
**Dragonsceptor, I don't think the analogy was meant to explain the relationship with the channeler and the five powers...But again, like I said, the analogy is applying to the person ability to link with the source.**
I know this theory was not meant to deal with this when it was written. What I am asking is how it can be applied. If we are going to accept that the strength in the power is determined by the person's "resistance", then it seems like we need to explain how the affinities for various elements come to be. A simple resistor would not be able to do this. I'm just curious if anyone has any thoughts on how this theory could be expanded to address that.
17
anudhra sedai: 2004-04-28
This may sound silly, but I work with x-rays. Voltage is applied to a tungsten filament, which burns off electrons. These electrons are accelerated across the x-ray tube, strike a target and create xrays. The x-rays are then aimed at a phospor plate which glows. Depending on the type of phospor in the plate you get a not only different amounts of light produced, but also different colors. Some are brighter than others, some glow green, some blue. Maybe this can be used to explain strength in the power altogether and strength in each seperate power. Maybe there is a different trait in each person that allows a better or worse conversion of the one power into something useful.
18
Callandor: 2004-04-28
**callandor, having the spark and being taught are not mutually exclusive. The spark just means that the person WILL channel eventually whether they learn how or not. The ability to channel can be detected (and probably was in the AOL) before the spark manifests and the learning can begin.**
Yes, I know that. But the analogy implies, along with other evidence from the books, that people born with the spark become the more powerful of the people. Going off this, we know Rand is one of the most powerful channelers ever, if not THE most powerful ever. Ishamael and Lanfear are almost equal in their standings compared to Rand (as per the BWB and the books), yet in the AoL, we know more people were taught then now. So would Ishamael being born with the spark in this analogy, due to his strength? Or was Lanfear? Or all the Forsaken? Or were they taught?
Another important example is Sharina Molloy. She does not have the spark, since she aged as much as she did, yet she is stronger then Nynaeve, and is implied to be as strong as Lanfear.
19
Daekyras: 2004-04-29
Good question dragonscepter. I was considering this problem myself. If we are to accept the power power wielders as conductors my(at the minute) theory would be that the different powers have different wavelengths. In some conductors the resistance depends on the wavelength of the energy going through it. Thats very basic I know, but if you think it makes a (very)basic sense. Fire has a wavelength that rand "channels"(conducts) well. Spirit has a different wavelength and he therefor can't conduct this as well.
20
Brendan Reborn: 2004-04-29
Sorry dragonsceptor, my impression was that you were trying to disprove the theory.
I think the "wavelength/five powers" thing works except that the conductor theory is only used to explain holding the power and grabbing the source. Wouldn't the energy just pass through the conductor and you'd have to start weaving the different powers once it was held? Sorry i'm no physics major or anything.
21
Anubis: 2004-04-29
i would say that sharina is an outlier. (outside of two standard deviations of the mean... i think thats the def :P)
i would say that the rule of thumb is that the strongest channelers are the ones born with the spark, but all rules have exceptions. And about lanfear and ishmael and the other forsaken. I would assume that they had the spark, but i would not cling to that idea.
bah, what im saying is that if you took the strongest... i donnow 5% of channelers, then the majority of them, probably by a lot, would have the spark. But thats just my opinion.
22
Callandor: 2004-04-29
**i would say that the rule of thumb is that the strongest channelers are the ones born with the spark, but all rules have exceptions. And about lanfear and ishmael and the other forsaken. I would assume that they had the spark, but i would not cling to that idea.**
Yes, and that is the general rule of thumb in the WoT, but not in the analogy.
23
Nevyn: 2004-04-29
I think the analogy is fairly good, but there is another aspect to it I think. The current model describes how a channeler is able to channel the power, but in the books there is also the element of "holding" the One Power as well as in- draw in and hold as much as you can. This idea would have to be accounted for in the model of a "conductor"as channeler. Perhaps some kind of storage...perhaps a capacitor. The channeler can only maintain charge when in contact with the source, that quality fits better with a capacitor than other electric storage media I can think of.
24
charliec: 2004-04-30
Oops, another analogy starts to go too far...
(in my humble opinion :p)
25
dragonsceptor: 2004-04-30
First off, I'm an Electical Engineering major so this subject is very fascinating to me.
I like the idea of a capacitor instead of a resistor and here is why. When you transfer a circuit into a different domain (sorry I can't remember what term is used), we look at impedences instead of resistance, capacitance, and inductance. The idea of impedance could account for the strength as well as the affinity for different elements. The impedance of an inductor is out of phase with the impedance of a resistor or capacitor. Perhaps those who have an affinity for water, spirit, etc could be looked at as inductors and those with earth and fire could be looked at as capacitors. Different wavelenghts ( I like that idea) could be handled differently by inductors and capacitors. Anyway, just a thought. Maybe I'm taking the analogy too far.
26
Daekyras: 2004-05-01
No dragonscepter, I like where this is going. I didn't consider capacitors, inductors and impedence in the analogy as for science folk it can get very confusing so is probably unintelligible for non-science people.
The ideas on capacitance help, big time, with the wavelength idea and definately with the "holding" onto the power bit. Excellent, we may be onto something.
And to think Charliec, i'm always vocal about analogies going too far...
27
a dragonburned fool: 2004-05-14
Daekyras, Your analogy deals with channelling as with simple condocting current, and the conditions You proposed for better channelling are the conditions for conducting more current to somewhere. But maybe channellers are better to be regarded not as conductors, but rather as devices utilizing electricity. Actually they utilize the Power, they do things with it, they transform the energy of the Source into local effects in the world. But while for conductors it's good to have less resistance, for utilizing devices is better to have more resistance. So a bulb with more resistance can issue more light. Would this correction help with Your good analogy?
28
Daekyras: 2004-05-17
Why do I feel like I've just been chastised?
Your idea and Mine are not, I think, dealing with the same thing. My idea was on the ability of the person to channel huge amounts of the power. Yours is that the effect of the power is due to the inefficiency in allowing power to flow? By Your "definition" a light bulb is more powerful than say a proton accelerator because it shines brighter.
I am sorry if My last post came across as condescending but as charliec put it the analogy was getting out of hand and I was just suggesting we moved on to something else and stop boring people with physics. Two of My friends who also post here, pointed out that, as in real life, i came across as a "pompous fool". Sorry!
