OOTS #1119 - The Discussion Thread

[Shining Wrath]

No, we just don't know. "Don't know" doesn't mean "both are true until we know." It means "one is true, one is false, and we don't know which is which."

I am become Peelee, destroyer of common internet sayings.

Only if you think the Giant has made a final, irrevocable decision regarding the status of said halfling rogue. If, as I suspect, the Giant makes a lot of the details of this story up as he goes along, then Serini may appear as a living creature if he needs her; or, she may appear as a dead creature if he needs that. And he may not discover that he needs a live / dead Serini until much later in the story. It's not necessarily true that the Giant has decided what Serini's status is, but hasn't told us (status is determined but unknown).

Therefore, her status must be treated as indeterminate until observed, exactly and precisely like Schrodinger's cat, and like the quantum particles which were the underlying basis for said fictional feline.

Adjusts pedantic mortarboard to rakish angle

[Fyraltari]

No, we just don't know. "Don't know" doesn't mean "both are true until we know." It means "one is true, one is false, and we don't know which is which.

Yes. The Giant has, hopefully, made his mind about Serini's survival long ago and his is the only knowledge that counts in this case.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Only if you think the Giant has made a final, irrevocable decision regarding the status of said halfling rogue. If, as I suspect, the Giant makes a lot of the details of this story up as he goes along, then Serini may appear as a living creature if he needs her; or, she may appear as a dead creature if he needs that. And he may not discover that he needs a live / dead Serini until much later in the story. It's not necessarily true that the Giant has decided what Serini's status is, but hasn't told us (status is determined but unknown).

Therefore, her status must be treated as indeterminate until observed, exactly and precisely like Schrodinger's cat, and like the quantum particles which were the underlying basis for said fictional feline.

Given that the status of Girard was established a book in advance, if not more, outside of our knowledge, I suspect that the status of Serini is equally already established. The fate of the Scribblers is unlikely to be a side detail that Rich has pushed back to when needed - they are too crucial to the plot at large to be unestablished.

Now, there are cases (see: Rowling) where a character that was planned to be dead or alive must have their status reversed as the actual writing takes place, but that's just a status change, not a indeterminate status.

Grey Wolf

[Peelee]

Only if you think the Giant has made a final, irrevocable decision regarding the status of said halfling rogue. If, as I suspect, the Giant makes a lot of the details of this story up as he goes along, then Serini may appear as a living creature if he needs her; or, she may appear as a dead creature if he needs that. And he may not discover that he needs a live / dead Serini until much later in the story. It's not necessarily true that the Giant has decided what Serini's status is, but hasn't told us (status is determined but unknown).

Therefore, her status must be treated as indeterminate until observed, exactly and precisely like Schrodinger's cat, and like the quantum particles which were the underlying basis for said fictional feline.

Adjusts pedantic mortarboard to rakish angle

You know the Schrodinger's Cat argument ended with "both dead and alive at the same time, which is clearly ridiculous and why we should reject the interpretation," right?

Her status is unknown. If the author doesn't know it, it's still unknown. It's not both at the same time.

Pedantic-off! Copenhagen interpretation aside, the entire reason quantum mechanics exists is because things react differently at the quantum level than at the macro level. So even if Copenhagen is correct for quantum particles, it's still wrong for the cat, which Schrodinger famously showed

[b_jonas]

See, Hilgya, you only need to cover one of Kudzu's eyes. That way, he can have a neat eyepatch and still be able to see.

Or she doesn't need to cover any of Kudzu's eyes at all, according to the thread “Is camera flash actually harmful to infants or newborns?” on Photography Stack Exchange.

[The MunchKING]

Or she doesn't need to cover any of Kudzu's eyes at all, according to the thread “Is camera flash actually harmful to infants or newborns?” on Photography Stack Exchange.

I think it's more to keep him from seeing the horrific violence of people being melted by Divine Fire than the light itself.

Or at least that's the standard parenting trope.

[GreatWyrmGold]

...Which suggests that Oona is there to slow down/mislead Xykon?

1. Any != All
2. Even if she's on Serini's payroll, she might have decided to help Redcloak anyways. Her loyalty to goblinkind might be stronger than her loyalty to Serini, or she might not realize the danger Xykon puts the gate in. (#1 is more convincing, but #2 is still worth mentioning.)