001 | Text

[milkisgross]

[Edward's been seeing all of these different posts come up. It's obnoxious to him, but he can see the potential of being able to communicate with so many like this, so he decided to give it a try.]

It's come to my attention that there's a few people here who use "magic." From what I've seen, there's nothing like it where I come from and I have a few questions for anyone who's willing to answer.

In science, you've got different laws that everything follows. Is that the same for magic? Does some magic have laws while others don't?

Are there different fields of magic? What are they?

Where does the energy or power come from?

What makes it "magic" and not a field of science?

Comments

[milkisgross]

That's a good point.

Both, if you're open to sharing your research.

[letxequalnull]

I would not have offered otherwise. However, before I begin, I must ask what a heart is, by the definitions of your own world.

[milkisgross]

Scientifically, the heart only refers to the organ that pumps blood throughout the body in my world.

People will also say 'heart' to refer to one's spirit or attitude, usually in phrases like, "You have a stout heart," to say someone is courageous and stuff like that. Other terms are used when talking about those aspects in a scientific setting though. An alchemist talking about a person's spirit or soul will not use the word 'heart' to describe them.

[letxequalnull]

Where I am from it is most commonly used to refer to something more metaphorical. It can certainly be used to refer to the organ itself, of course, but it is... the essence of person. Something as important to the whole of a complete being as the body or soul would be.

[milkisgross]

I've talked to a few other people who described the 'heart' like that. I thought they were just talking about the soul, but they said that they were two separate things.

I'm curious about how you'd even approach any kind of studies into something like that.

[letxequalnull]

I am hardly surprised. There are others from my world present here; as such it is easy to imagine that some of them should choose to offer their insight.

As for the matter of how, that was part of our research. If the heart is an identifiable part of a person's being, then how may it be isolated and identified, much less measured?

[milkisgross]

So what did you find?

[letxequalnull]

First and foremost, that the heart is remarkably fragile - at first our experiments managed nothing so much as to cause the heart to collapse. To, in essence, vanish completely into the darkness, beyond all hope of recovery. But it is not always lost for good. Though one may, indeed, lose one's heart and continue existing, so too does that heart, albeit in a different form. Separate, and bound by darkness, yes. But it yet exists.

As for the relationship between the heart and the self... our research was regrettably cut short before we could learn the full truth of how they are connected. However, it is undeniably true that one cannot truly exist without a heart; as such it is reasonable to assume that is, in some way, the very essence of a being.

[milkisgross]

What happened to the test subjects whose hearts collapsed?

[Ed's not a fan of human experimentation. If it was through people volunteering for it and they knew of the risks, that was one thing. If not, then he and Xemnas weren't going to get along very well. As much as he'd like to comment on the heart and the self being connected, he waits to see what they reply to his question is first.]

[letxequalnull]

It was as if they slept. Their bodies were functional, and continued to breathe, but they would not wake and all attempts to return their hearts from the darkness failed.

[A coma, in essence, although Xemnas doesn't think to actually use that particular terminology.]

[milkisgross]

How exactly did you manage to find these test subjects for this kind of experiment?

[letxequalnull]

They were aware of the risks. And had the chance to choose otherwise.

[This is... not an accurate representation of the situation. But it's a decent approximation, for all that it doesn't really explain where the test subjects came from either.]

[milkisgross]

If you say so.

[If it seems like he doesn't believe Xemnas, it's because he really doesn't.]

[letxequalnull]

I do.

[He is, of course, not going to insist that Ed believe him - there's no way of doing so anyway - but all the same it doesn't matter to him one way or the other if Ed believes him.]