It seems like there’s a good reason for that to happen, while there doesn’t seem to be an obvious in-story reason for her to come back as a unicorn’s horn. (Or as a winged unicorn.)
He might also partially transfigure her body (say, the contents of her stomach) to unicorn blood. I don’t think that would work as well as one might think, since transfigured things are detected and treated differently by magic (e.g., goblins detecting transfigured gold), so I doubt the transfigured blood would work for raising the dead. (In magic logic, the ritual probably uses the blood as a symbol for a sacrificed unicorn or something.)
Interestingly, the fact that transfiguration is not permanent is not that bad. If transfigured unicorn blood worked for the duration of the transfiguration, it could still help. (For example, the temporarily revived person could create a horcrux, or get a precise and accurate brain scan for uploading, which might be the same thing in-story.)
You don’t think that saying ‘very clever’ is nicer than saying ‘stupid’?
Yes. One could reach ‘very clever’ from ‘stupid’ either by adding a large amount of niceness or multiplying by a negative. Or, if ‘very clever’ is supposed to convey the meaning ‘stupid’ then one actually has to subtract niceness and add sarcasm or condescension.
Oh wait, I just had a terrible thought: what if Eliezer was initially serious, but didn’t expect anyone to take him seriously, but then n seeing people take him more seriously than expected decided to drop a hint that he was joking without saying so? AARRGGHH!
High confidence prediction, based on the feminism rant. Rot13 because, while Eliezer has not retracted it, he recommended people not read it:
Va uvf enag ba UCZBE naq srzvavfz, Ryvrmre fnvq Urezvbar jbhyq pbzr onpx nf na nyvpbea cevaprff. Gurer jnf fbzr qvfphffvba bs jurgure ur jnf wbxvat va gur ynfg guernq. Gur snpg gung gur zbfg erprag nhgube’f abgr qvq abg rkcynva gung ur jnf wbxvat gb zr engure fgebatyl pbasvezf gung ur jnfa’g.
Makes sense. With slightly less confidence, I predict that:
“nyvpbea cevaprff” → cevaprff sebz Yhzvabfvgl, Nyvpbea’f Gjvyvtug engvbanyvfg sna svpgvba → n inzcver.
I think both your prediction and mine were made in the previous discussion thread as well. (Mine was made by someone else.)
I was actually joking about the Alicorn → vampire thing, and will be somewhat distraught if I turn out to be right.
It seems like there’s a good reason for that to happen, while there doesn’t seem to be an obvious in-story reason for her to come back as a unicorn’s horn. (Or as a winged unicorn.)
Well, Harry might transfigure her body into a unicorn’s horn at some point.
He might also partially transfigure her body (say, the contents of her stomach) to unicorn blood. I don’t think that would work as well as one might think, since transfigured things are detected and treated differently by magic (e.g., goblins detecting transfigured gold), so I doubt the transfigured blood would work for raising the dead. (In magic logic, the ritual probably uses the blood as a symbol for a sacrificed unicorn or something.)
Interestingly, the fact that transfiguration is not permanent is not that bad. If transfigured unicorn blood worked for the duration of the transfiguration, it could still help. (For example, the temporarily revived person could create a horcrux, or get a precise and accurate brain scan for uploading, which might be the same thing in-story.)
Perhaps she’ll be the princess from Goldmage (also by Alicorn).
Thankfully, EY confirmed on facebook that this is a stupid theory, except that he used a nicer wording.
If for a value of ‘nicer’ for which “very clever” means “stupid”.
You don’t think that saying ‘very clever’ is nicer than saying ‘stupid’?
I think it has completely opposing informational content.
Yes. One could reach ‘very clever’ from ‘stupid’ either by adding a large amount of niceness or multiplying by a negative. Or, if ‘very clever’ is supposed to convey the meaning ‘stupid’ then one actually has to subtract niceness and add sarcasm or condescension.
Oh, seeing Eliezer’s Facebook page, I see the entire thing was probably a joke. OK.
Oh wait, I just had a terrible thought: what if Eliezer was initially serious, but didn’t expect anyone to take him seriously, but then n seeing people take him more seriously than expected decided to drop a hint that he was joking without saying so? AARRGGHH!
My model of Eliezer wouldn’t troll us that blatantly.
Then again, this is the guy who wrote Quirinius One-Level-Higher-Than-You Quirrell.
Near certain prediction:
Va gur snasvpgvba “Sevraqfuvc vf Bcgvzny”, juvpu unf orra erpbzzraqrq va Nhgube Abgrf vzcylvat RL unf va snpg ernq vg, nyvpbea cevaprffrf ner gur va-jbeyq ningnef bs genafuhzna fhcrevagryyyvtraprf juvpu nvq gur Negvyrpg NV jub pbagebyf gur havirefr. Xabjvat guvf, cynpvat Uneel va PryrfgNV’f cbfvgvba, Urezvbar jvyy or oebhtug onpx gb freir n fvzvyne ebyr, hfvat uvf gura genafuhzna novyvgl.
My mental model of EY would make exactly this kind of offhand reference. It is the answer to the riddle about the ring you saw once several years ago.
This is relevant information, but I don’t think it seems to fit with the joke hypothesis quite well too.
Really? Gur ynfg pbhcyr pbzzragf sebz Ryvrmre er:UCZBE unir orra sehfgengvba ertneqvat gur jubyr srzvavfz guvat naq eryhpgnapr gb punatr fbzr jbeqvat va srne bs chggvat hc n “GUVF VF N WBXR fvta”.
V’q chg zhpu zber cebonovyvgl vagb: 1) Ryvrmre vf gverq bs qrnyvat jvgu gur srzvavfg pevgvpvfz naq qvqa’g jnag gb pnyy zber nggragvba gb gur enag 2) Vg jnf n wbxr naq zbfg crbcyr tbg vg (frr gur fpberf va gung pbzzrag gerr), fb ur sryg ab arrq gb pynevsl zber wbxrf
.