How can Newt cast Accio on a Niffler when it is only supposed to work on inanimate objects? [duplicate] The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCan this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How can they see Harry's invisibility cloak when they are not wearing it?How can electricity not work at Hogwarts?Can Harry Potter's Invisibility Cloak hide inanimate objects/Non-sentient beings?What would happen when you cast spells meant for objects on humans?If no spell can reawaken the dead, how did the resurrection stone work?How does the Accio spell work?If Magical Curses in Harry Potter only work on humans and other tangible objects, how did Voldemort curse the DADA position, if it was intangible?Can you transfigure animate objects into inanimate objects?Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How quickly do objects summoned by Accio fly?
Are there any limitations on attacking while grappling?
Received an invoice from my ex-employer billing me for training; how to handle?
Bold, vivid family
Is there an analogue of projective spaces for proper schemes?
If a black hole is created from light, can this black hole then move at speed of light?
How did people program for Consoles with multiple CPUs?
Why do professional authors make "consistency" mistakes? And how to avoid them?
Rotate a column
Why am I allowed to create multiple unique pointers from a single object?
Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?
How did the Bene Gesserit know how to make a Kwisatz Haderach?
Why do airplanes bank sharply to the right after air-to-air refueling?
Is it possible to search for a directory/file combination?
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
Elegant way to replace substring in a regex with optional groups in Python?
Why do we use the plural of movies in this phrase "We went to the movies last night."?
How does the mv command work with external drives?
What happened in Rome, when the western empire "fell"?
Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis
Why didn't Khan get resurrected in the Genesis Explosion?
Can I run my washing machine drain line into a condensate pump so it drains better?
Which tube will fit a -(700 x 25c) wheel?
Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?
How do I transpose the 1st and -1th levels of an arbitrarily nested array?
How can Newt cast Accio on a Niffler when it is only supposed to work on inanimate objects? [duplicate]
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCan this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How can they see Harry's invisibility cloak when they are not wearing it?How can electricity not work at Hogwarts?Can Harry Potter's Invisibility Cloak hide inanimate objects/Non-sentient beings?What would happen when you cast spells meant for objects on humans?If no spell can reawaken the dead, how did the resurrection stone work?How does the Accio spell work?If Magical Curses in Harry Potter only work on humans and other tangible objects, how did Voldemort curse the DADA position, if it was intangible?Can you transfigure animate objects into inanimate objects?Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?How quickly do objects summoned by Accio fly?
This question already has an answer here:
Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
1 answer
Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:
Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?
‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.
JK Rowling’s New Website
Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.
Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?
harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
|
show 2 more comments
This question already has an answer here:
Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
1 answer
Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:
Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?
‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.
JK Rowling’s New Website
Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.
Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?
harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
3
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
5
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
1
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50
|
show 2 more comments
This question already has an answer here:
Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
1 answer
Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:
Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?
‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.
JK Rowling’s New Website
Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.
Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?
harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
This question already has an answer here:
Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
1 answer
Accio is not supposed to work on people or creatures as per this source:
Why couldn’t Newt use ‘Accio’ to retrieve all his beasts?
‘Accio’ only works on inanimate objects. While people or creatures may be indirectly moved by ‘Accio-ing’ objects that they are wearing or holding, this carries all kinds of risks because of the likelihood of injury to the person or beast attached to an object travelling at close to the speed of light.
JK Rowling’s New Website
Yet in the new film Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Newt casts 'Accio' on a Niffler to get it back to him. He specifically says 'Accio Niffler'.
Doesn’t this break the rules set by JK?
This question already has an answer here:
Can this inconsistency in the ability of the Summoning Charm (Accio) to summon animals be explained?
1 answer
harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald
harry-potter spells fantastic-beasts magical-theory the-crimes-of-grindelwald
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
edited Mar 19 at 21:20
Bellatrix
77.7k15332387
77.7k15332387
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
asked Mar 18 at 16:13
GamerGyppsGamerGypps
275110
275110
marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by Alex harry-potter
Users with the harry-potter badge can single-handedly close harry-potter questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.
StackExchange.ready(function()
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;
$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function()
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');
$hover.hover(
function()
$hover.showInfoMessage('',
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 ,
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
);
,
function()
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
);
);
);
Mar 18 at 22:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
3
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
5
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
1
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50
|
show 2 more comments
14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
3
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
5
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
1
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50
14
14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
3
3
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
5
5
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
1
1
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50
|
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Accio has been used on creatures before.
In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.
“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’
Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)
Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.
“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’
There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)
Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
add a comment |
I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.
Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.
Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Accio has been used on creatures before.
In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.
“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’
Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)
Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.
“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’
There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)
Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
add a comment |
Accio has been used on creatures before.
In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.
“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’
Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)
Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.
“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’
There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)
Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
add a comment |
Accio has been used on creatures before.
In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.
“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’
Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)
Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.
“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’
There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)
Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
Accio has been used on creatures before.
In the Harry Potter series, creatures have been successfully summoned by using Accio before, and aren’t harmed by it. Harry successfully Summoned Neville’s toad Trevor.
“I’m almost certain of it,’ said Hermione grimly. ‘Watch your frog, it’s escaping.’
Harry pointed his wand at the bullfrog that had been hopping hopefully towards the other side of the table – ‘Accio!’ – and it zoomed gloomily back into his hand.”
- Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Chapter 18 (Dumbledore’s Army)
Also, Ted Tonks successfully Summons salmon out of a river.
“There ought to be a few salmon in here, or d’you reckon it’s too early in the season? Accio salmon!’
There were several distinct splashes and then the slapping sounds of fish against flesh.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)
Therefore, the answer by JKR contradicts the book.
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
edited Mar 18 at 22:37
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
answered Mar 18 at 16:42
BellatrixBellatrix
77.7k15332387
77.7k15332387
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
add a comment |
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
2
2
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
It's worth mentioning that book canon is separate from movie canon, and both are separate from Rowling's "word of God". Questions and answers should be more specific about which canon they're talking about.
– only_pro
Mar 18 at 21:26
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
Also don't forget about the fly that Harry accio'ed in Divination class while practicing the spell for the challenge. We still don't whether Harry managed to do it , or the fly was stupid to fly to his hand :)
– atayenel
Mar 18 at 21:29
2
2
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
I guess creatures like frogs and fish are more likely to fail their spell saves.
– Sycorax
Mar 18 at 22:14
add a comment |
I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.
Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.
Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
add a comment |
I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.
Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.
Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
add a comment |
I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.
Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.
Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
I'd argue that though JKR said that objects travel close to the speed of light on that website, that all of her writings in the books seem to contradict this. She seems to describe objects as appearing to fly through the air, rather than instantaneously teleporting, which is how traveling near the speed of light a very short distance would appear to a person.
Additionally, there are examples in the books of people using Accio on living things, such as Harry Accio'ing the toad he was practicing the silencing charm on. As late as book 7, "Accio salmon" is successfully used, however, as the intent was to eat the salmon, there was no concern about killing the salmon with sudden g-forces. See the wiki page for the Summoning Charm for more info on this.
Therefore, I see that blog post as the contradiction, rather than the Accio'ing of the Niffler.
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
edited Mar 20 at 15:04
TheLethalCarrot
49.2k19267311
49.2k19267311
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
answered Mar 18 at 16:34
KaiKai
5,3972030
5,3972030
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
add a comment |
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
Not to mention that having macro objects travel near the speed of light is very unhealthy: what-if.xkcd.com/1
– Paul Johnson
Mar 20 at 21:24
add a comment |
14
JKR breaks the rules set by JKR...
– TheLethalCarrot
Mar 18 at 16:14
3
@TheLethalCarrot While this is true, it still a glaring mistake.
– GamerGypps
Mar 18 at 16:23
5
Glaring mistakes and broken ret-cons seemed to be par for the course with JKR. So I believe the answer to your question is yes, it breaks her own rules.
– Virusbomb
Mar 18 at 16:30
1
This seems like a duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/q/207433/100430 but I can’t close it since it has no answer.
– Alex
Mar 18 at 16:36
Notably this is not her new (new) website but her old (new) website. It has since been superceded
– Valorum
Mar 18 at 16:50