Edgerwater Meltdown and Golden Key Doctor Solar Comics

[ManofTheAtom]

If Phil's subconscious had erased the Doctor Solar comic books from the VH-1 timeline like it did the Magnus and Turok comic books, then VH-1 Phil would have never read them and they would have never inspired him to build the reactor that transformed him into Solar.

That, however, would have not stopped VH-0 Phil from re-entering the timeline.

While erasing those comics would have been the simplest way to avert the disaster that transformed him into Phil and destroyed the world, the downside is that if VH-1 Phil does not create the reactor then VH-O Phil does not have the conversation with Dobson that leads him to have the schizophrenic attack that causes him to unleash Doctor Solar from his psyche.

Without that, and without VH-1 Phil to merge with, VH-0 Phil would have remained a soulless God and would have never regained his humanity.

I think that, subconsciously, he knew that could happen, which is why he allowed the Doctor Solar comics to continue to exist to inspire his counterpart to build the reactor and create the set of events that led to them becoming one.

[magnusr]

I think that, subconsciously, he knew that could happen, which is why he allowed the Doctor Solar comics to continue to exist to inspire his counterpart to build the reactor and create the set of events that led to them becoming one.

Since it's subconscious, there doesn't need to be so much logic. He was simply inspired by the Doctor Solar comics so they remained in his subconscience.

/Magnus

[ManofTheAtom]

I think that, subconsciously, he knew that could happen, which is why he allowed the Doctor Solar comics to continue to exist to inspire his counterpart to build the reactor and create the set of events that led to them becoming one.

Since it's subconscious, there doesn't need to be so much logic. He was simply inspired by the Doctor Solar comics so they remained in his subconscience.

/Magnus

Far as VH-0 Phil went, he would have still had those memories, though. Keeping them was for the benefit of his VH-1 counterpart but came at the risk of repeating the accident.

[ManofTheAtom]

download.jpg

[Chiclo]

Yeah, there was no real magic in Oz, just that one dude who was using basic otherworldly tech to pretend to be a great wizard.

The book was a political allegory about bimetalism anyways.

[Chiclo]

There are witches on every point of the compass.

[ManofTheAtom]

There are witches on every point of the compass.

[ManofTheAtom]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

[Chiclo]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

[ManofTheAtom]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

For that to apply, you'd have to prove the existence of actual magic in the real world, though.

[Chiclo]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

For that to apply, you'd have to prove the existence of actual magic in the real world, though.

For Clarke’s First Law to apply, I would only have to prove that you said that the answer can never be magic.

[ManofTheAtom]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

For that to apply, you'd have to prove the existence of actual magic in the real world, though.

For Clarke’s First Law to apply, I would only have to prove that you said that the answer can never be magic.

Which to do you'd have to prove that it can be

All I'm saying is that, at its root, magic must be an advanced form of technology, no matter its application.

[ManofTheAtom]

For the most part, magic and technology pretty much boil down to the manipulation of energy to achieve the desired result.

The question is, how does magic manipulate energy?

[Chiclo]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

For that to apply, you'd have to prove the existence of actual magic in the real world, though.

For Clarke’s First Law to apply, I would only have to prove that you said that the answer can never be magic.

Which to do you'd have to prove that it can be

All I'm saying is that, at its root, magic must be an advanced form of technology, no matter its application.

Do I, though? The only thing that Clarke’s First Law requires is that a claimant proclaim that something can under no circumstances happen, the way you have claimed that magic cannot explain any happening in VH1. According to Clarke’s First Law, the harder you fight it, the more inevitable magic becomes.

[ManofTheAtom]

Ultimately, since technological advancements will always be more likely than magic in the real world the same MUST be true of VALIANT. That is why, at the end of the day, a scientific explanation must ALWAYS be applied to anything that REMOTELY appears to be magical in nature no matter what it is.

Clarke’s First Law?

For that to apply, you'd have to prove the existence of actual magic in the real world, though.

For Clarke’s First Law to apply, I would only have to prove that you said that the answer can never be magic.

Which to do you'd have to prove that it can be

All I'm saying is that, at its root, magic must be an advanced form of technology, no matter its application.

Do I, though? The only thing that Clarke’s First Law requires is that a claimant proclaim that something can under no circumstances happen, the way you have claimed that magic cannot explain any happening in VH1. According to Clarke’s First Law, the harder you fight it, the more inevitable magic becomes.

But magic as it is presented in fiction is not real in the world outside our window, though.