• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


chridd last won the day on October 30 2016

chridd had the most liked content!

About chridd

  • Rank
    Amazing Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Greg is definitely either dreaming or awakened—remember, dreaming is anyone who has magic without having awakened, not just people with magic marks. (We don't know which; but then again, anyone on the "Dreaming" list could potentially have awakened since we last saw them, so Greg could go there as well.) Given that definition, Grace (and her siblings and any other uryuom/seyunolu) would also technically be dreaming, though I don't think there's been any official answer to whether the term actually applies there (also come to think of it wouldn't that also include people using wands?). Noah being awakened has been hinted at, but I don't think it's ever been confirmed. Carol seems like too much of a stretch; it took a while to even see what you were suggesting was evidence... I don't think we know about any special magic potential for Ashley—what Pandora was detecting was related to yearning and personality, not anything specific to magic. While we don't know if Mrs. Kitsune is a wizard, we do know that she has some potential, so she could still go on that list. I don't think anything's been confirmed about Akiko, though—it's likely given everything else, but nothing's been said explicitly. Mr. Raven is (presumably) awakened and doesn't have a job involving magic. Edit to add: Oh! And Tedd should definitely be on the "Dreaming" list—not only does she have seer powers, but she also has a magic mark.
  2. I guessed last year that Tedd resisted the wand (among many other guesses)! Do I get a cookie?
  3. story

    Does it say anywhere that the glove has any electronics? It probably has some material with magical properties, or has been enchanted, or something, which could easily have been known about before electronics came into existence. Didn't the term "smartphone" used to include flip phones (as opposed to, say, those that only could call and maybe store a few numbers), or am I misremembering?
  4. It was in Squirrel Prophet.
  5. Mutations are random when the mutation happens. I was saying that it's possible that Nanase inherited magic power from her parents (not random), but that if you go back far enough to where the genes for high magic power originated it could be a mutation rather than an immortal. (...although the point about Noriko probably being a wizard suggests that the descended-from-immortals idea could be right.)
  6. It doesn't have to be random, though; it could have some other explanation. E.g., perhaps some mutation way back causes higher magic power and that's been passed on through the generations, or perhaps the griffins were seeing royalty because Nanase is descended from royalty in the griffins' world. I think Jerry couldn't detect Sarah's affinity because Sarah didn't have enough power, not because the affinity is weak. (Although we don't know whether people with affinities can get non-affinity-related spells, or how easy/difficult it is for them.)
  7. I don't think that's true (unless everyone is descended from immortals), because as far as we know, almost everyone has some magic potential. E.g., I don't think Justin or Dex or Catalina have any particular inherited magic ability. I'm not sure about Nanase, though. As far as we know, she doesn't have any particular affinity and she isn't a wizard or seer. She just seems to have an overall higher magic potential (which wasn't one of the things Heka listed)—basically higher magic stats, as opposed to specific abilities. It's not clear whether those are related, or whether people like Nanase are descended from immortals; it does seem that having a magic affinity without having generally high magic potential is possible (Sarah).
  8. Also didn't Pandora say she caught him? She might have prevented Magus from going to the intended destination (or maybe the intent was for him to continually fall between universes or something, or be stuck in between universes forever).
  9. Biologists have a weird definition of fitness. (...well, at least different from the ordinary everyday definition, and of course the same applies to other scientific/mathematical/etc. terms as well)
  10. If the fruit is bred and grown by humans, then from a genetic/biological fitness perspective, humans eating the fruit is good for the plant, because it gives money to the farmers who will then plant the plant's offspring and water, fertilize, etc. them. I've seen plenty of people who seem to believe things like this, and have never seen any actual evidence. Unless I hear from some actual neuroscientist or quantum physicist that the brain uses quantum effects (beyond the fact that technically everything is a quantum effect), or see actual evidence or an actual explanation of how specifically brains use quantum mechanics, I'm going to assume that brains just use classical mechanics, and that people are just bad at understanding determinism and its implications (or, rather, lack thereof) on free will (or are trying to hold onto vitalism/dualism in spite of evidence to the contrary). (I don't mean that I think people are stupid or uneducated or anything; I suspect our brains just aren't set up to deal with these philosophical issues well.) Regarding the complexity of sexual orientation and gender identity: if you cover all possibilities, then it's super complicated. I don't actually know how many of those possibilities occur in practice; I don't know what the actual dimensions are in terms of how it actually works (e.g., are there dimensions "sexual attraction to males", "sexual attraction to females", "romantic attraction to males", "romantic attraction to females"; or are there dimensions "attraction to males", "attraction to females", "attraction manifests as sexual", "attraction manifests as romantic"? are cis-genderless people high on the dimensions "okay being female" and "okay being male", or are they low on the dimensions "tendency to experience physical dysphoria" and "tendency to experience social dysphoria" with a gender identity that ends up not really doing anything?), and of course people can have preferences that don't come from sexual orientation or gender identity, and might not know which preferences come from where. ...and it's not like other things are simpler; if you consider things people are interested in, there are lots of potential interests (and each person can be interested in any combination of things to any amount), lots of potential sub-interests, lots of reasons to be interested in things, and effectively new dimensions are added over time (the dimensions "interest in computer programming" and "interest in video games" didn't exist a couple hundred years ago).
  11. Physics is simple. There's one set of laws of physics, which apply everywhere; there are a relatively small number of particle types, and all particles of a given type behave the same. Whereas with humans, each human has slightly different genetic code, which is then influenced by slightly different hormone levels etc. and also different experiences etc. If we were dealing with a multiverse of universes with slightly different laws of physics, but there was only one universe with each set of laws; or if each electron had slightly different behavior, physics would be much more complicated. Also, humans can lie (to others, to themselves), and humans can change their behavior based on their understanding of human behavior. Physics doesn't care what we know about it. Oh, and there are ethical concerns in studying humans, too.
  12. I think "pansexual" is the established term for this. This is at least similar to "demisexual" (at least if the person isn't normally attracted to others). Also, from other threads, I think "gender-meh" ≈ "cis-genderless". If being hetero/homosexual separate from being andro/pansexual is actually a thing, then at least in theory we'd need to distinguish people who were, e.g., always attracted to females and always attracted to the opposite sex (like a hetero male with the transformation gun) from those who are only attracted to people if they're female and also the opposite sex (so, asexual when female) (both could be described as "both gynesexual and heterosexual").
  13. Hasn't this already been done (at least up to a year ago... coincidentally almost exactly a year)?
  14. I had a similar idea, and just didn't post it. Do I get Oreos too? (...it's been way too long since I've had Oreos...) About Elliot's gender identity: many people consider things like jobs, interests, nationality, religion, etc. to be important even though someone can't have an instinctive sense e.g. that one is supposed to be Christian or a programmer (at least not specifically, since those are culturally dependent and haven't always existed). Couldn't someone who doesn't have a gender identity (in the sense trans people do) still consider their gender (or in Elliot's case, the ability to transform between male and female) important anyways, similar to jobs etc.?
  15. I don't remember that being the case (though the time limits have always been changeable, though perhaps not arbitrarily so). Originally (before she gained any new forms), she could get pregnant in human but not part-squirrel form. I don't think we know about any other form, or whether being zapped by the transformation gun for the first time (which changed how she transformed) changed that fact.