Active Users:323 Time:02/05/2024 02:05:36 AM
Re: Well then you're both wrong I'm afraid DomA Send a noteboard - 19/11/2012 07:42:58 PM
The BWB says straight out that Ishamael was the strongest of the Chosen, and it is WoT canon (up to when it was written).


The whole book is written to reflect the knowledge of fictitious 3rd Age scholars.

It's canon, it's accurate... only so far as the information from the series is, ie: unless assumptions are proven to be misinterpretations or plain wrong.

I'm not saying Ishamael isn't a match in raw strength for LTT, I'm merely saying we can't be sure of this is the right way to interpret the scraps from the AOL that appear to say this, and short of a direct quote stating this from one of the Forsaken or Rand, we'll never be sure.

There's this nagging problem you see that Ishamael stood above the other Chosen and had the same power over the Shadow LTT had.

And there's the problem that Demandred happens to have been second in the Guild to only LTT.

That opens the door wide that the quotes referring to their OP strengths aren't about their strength the way AS scholars interpret them, but about their global power.

The Forsaken almost never refer to their comparative raw strengths, if you noticed. They don't think like Third Age channelers.

I think you're wrong about Aginor. We know he used the OP/TP in his work, it's very clear it's fundamentally OP related work. He refers vaguely to the challenge making the Shadowspawn represented in LOC.

That may be his only true Talent, but it was amazing.

I'm not convinced about Demandred/LTT. Both have not demonstrated any outstanding Talent, nor referred to them. It's especially suspicious in the case of Demandred as you'd hardly expect humility from him in his POV (or for that matter from LTT).

Lanfear is totally biased when she speaks of LTT.





Reply to message
How many standard deviations is Lanfear - 15/11/2012 06:04:39 PM 1961 Views
Well... - 15/11/2012 07:02:45 PM 1027 Views
Hmm... - 15/11/2012 07:25:34 PM 1113 Views
see we CAN agree on stuff - 15/11/2012 07:56:12 PM 971 Views
- 18/11/2012 08:37:22 PM 878 Views
We've always been close with everything except the scale - 18/11/2012 10:29:07 PM 919 Views
Re: - 18/11/2012 11:07:17 PM 1069 Views
Re: - 19/11/2012 05:16:00 AM 916 Views
Re: - 19/11/2012 03:13:01 PM 923 Views
They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5% - 19/11/2012 03:19:19 PM 898 Views
Re: They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5% - 19/11/2012 04:01:43 PM 1128 Views
Re: They only reject 37.5%, not 62.5% - 19/11/2012 09:04:04 PM 866 Views
Hmmm... - 20/11/2012 02:08:40 AM 924 Views
Perhaps, but Egwene is also being a bit dramatic in the scene as she managed - 20/11/2012 04:28:57 AM 893 Views
Nope... - 20/11/2012 03:13:13 PM 925 Views
I believe she is being over dramatic - 20/11/2012 03:26:24 PM 832 Views
Keep believing that... - 20/11/2012 03:30:14 PM 960 Views
*shrugs* - 20/11/2012 03:49:10 PM 914 Views
Tired and forkroot are the same now? - 20/11/2012 03:55:22 PM 836 Views
No it's the literary device - 20/11/2012 04:04:28 PM 948 Views
This is getting ridiculous... - 20/11/2012 04:43:13 PM 828 Views
You are missing my point completely - 20/11/2012 04:50:46 PM 793 Views
Impossible. Daigian is exactly 0.32SD below the mean - 19/11/2012 11:06:04 AM 879 Views
You keep saying that, but it is either a linear or a non-linear distribution - 19/11/2012 09:09:32 PM 937 Views
That's the whole point. Thanks for finally seeing it. - 19/11/2012 09:43:27 PM 891 Views
keep believing that ... but you making up numbers isn't really relevant *NM* - 20/11/2012 04:29:44 AM 614 Views
Please show me a number that is made up. The 0.32SD for Daigian is a rule of statistics. - 20/11/2012 07:15:48 AM 856 Views
Go read Fionwe's post about it *NM* - 20/11/2012 02:33:19 PM 628 Views
Is that before or after she started juicing? - 15/11/2012 11:04:14 PM 871 Views
Wouldn't it be 1 in 105 million? - 21/11/2012 04:56:19 PM 725 Views
Are you sure that it is a normal distribution? - 16/11/2012 04:21:02 PM 957 Views
Ugh. I hate power level discussions. For real world applications, it should be kind of meaningless - 16/11/2012 10:28:49 PM 868 Views
I don't really agree - 18/11/2012 08:40:53 PM 816 Views
Perhaps, but we've seen that a MUCH weaker Channeler can win in a duel - 19/11/2012 09:13:48 PM 874 Views
Re: Perhaps, but we've seen that a MUCH weaker Channeler can win in a duel - 20/11/2012 08:10:01 AM 852 Views
probably ... Lanfear/Cyndane is clearly remarkably skilled - 20/11/2012 02:35:09 PM 875 Views
Since I've proven that it's not a normal distribution in units of absolute strength, SDs don't apply - 17/11/2012 07:48:21 PM 900 Views
You have proven nothing, except that you have an opinion *NM* - 18/11/2012 02:21:35 AM 599 Views
You simply don't get it. It is mathematically a fact. There is no opinion involved. - 18/11/2012 02:19:40 PM 740 Views
Only because you've assigned numeric values. That you created. - 18/11/2012 02:40:51 PM 856 Views
It doesn't matter what figure you use... - 18/11/2012 03:01:56 PM 757 Views
What if Daigian is one third Lanfear's strength? - 18/11/2012 04:37:58 PM 882 Views
We have a limit for Daigian's strength, as you well know. - 18/11/2012 05:41:49 PM 847 Views
Are you kidding me? - 18/11/2012 09:07:38 PM 1006 Views
Sure you can - 18/11/2012 10:09:31 PM 910 Views
Re: Sure you can - 18/11/2012 10:54:50 PM 857 Views
You're right, though its 37.5% - 19/11/2012 12:21:29 AM 829 Views
Oops, typo! - 19/11/2012 02:54:25 AM 897 Views
Again, not possible, due to Daigian being just 0.3SD below the Mean - 19/11/2012 08:37:01 AM 827 Views
Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys... - 19/11/2012 04:05:12 PM 789 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys... - 19/11/2012 05:55:02 PM 720 Views
Egwene is about as strong as Melaine and Amys combined - 19/11/2012 09:19:50 PM 840 Views
Re: Egwene is about as strong as Melaine and Amys combined - 20/11/2012 02:11:26 AM 852 Views
Forkroot in every case - 20/11/2012 04:32:26 AM 835 Views
No! - 20/11/2012 03:15:16 PM 830 Views
I'm not going to go re-read the books to you on this - 20/11/2012 03:39:46 PM 834 Views
You need to read it for yourself, since you're completely confused. - 20/11/2012 03:54:26 PM 802 Views
Not going to argue this with you. - 20/11/2012 04:09:44 PM 779 Views
Your own example disproved your point... - 20/11/2012 04:39:25 PM 853 Views
let's see, she's both asleep and would need hours to regain her strength - 20/11/2012 04:43:17 PM 766 Views
Enough! - 20/11/2012 05:04:06 PM 843 Views
LOL ... whatever. You go on believing that ... no one else sees it this way. *NM* - 20/11/2012 05:20:52 PM 586 Views
What a brilliant argument! - 20/11/2012 05:25:18 PM 875 Views
this is why I refuse to continue this debate - 20/11/2012 05:31:11 PM 810 Views
Re: Your own example disproved your point... - 20/11/2012 05:10:15 PM 896 Views
Barasine + Katerine isn't that much less than - 20/11/2012 05:26:31 PM 894 Views
Re: Barasine + Katerine isn't that much less than - 20/11/2012 05:31:50 PM 821 Views
Re: Barasine + Katerine isn't that much less than - 20/11/2012 05:42:53 PM 828 Views
Excuse me? - 20/11/2012 05:28:48 PM 882 Views
see we can agree on the relative strength of Egwene v. Forsaken - 20/11/2012 05:35:07 PM 831 Views
??? - 20/11/2012 05:37:01 PM 923 Views
2 middling sisters - 20/11/2012 05:45:27 PM 857 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys... - 20/11/2012 02:26:47 AM 769 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys... - 20/11/2012 09:03:40 AM 821 Views
Re: Egwene is definitely not 2x Amys... - 20/11/2012 02:59:08 PM 864 Views
None of this is backed by any evidence... - 20/11/2012 03:24:12 PM 769 Views
who said Cadsuane was 1.5x Moiraine or more? - 20/11/2012 04:03:13 PM 781 Views
Nope... - 20/11/2012 04:41:35 PM 825 Views
wrong - 20/11/2012 04:48:50 PM 756 Views
My bad. Mized up 1/3 and 2/3. - 20/11/2012 05:05:05 PM 842 Views
gotcha *NM* - 20/11/2012 05:46:21 PM 545 Views
Better evidence? LOL! - 20/11/2012 03:18:55 PM 840 Views
Huh? How did you come to that conclusion? - 20/11/2012 04:40:56 PM 827 Views
Exactly *NM* - 20/11/2012 04:55:28 PM 788 Views
BEcause Cadsuane is close on the heels of Egwene? - 20/11/2012 05:10:50 PM 734 Views
I'm not arguing that. I agree that Cadsuane is pretty close to Egwene - 20/11/2012 05:50:34 PM 849 Views
Re: Better evidence? LOL! - 20/11/2012 05:00:47 PM 755 Views
Interesting, but let's go with your figures... - 19/11/2012 06:54:54 AM 885 Views
Indeed - 19/11/2012 08:16:44 AM 922 Views
Rand is sort of a special case - 20/11/2012 04:25:02 AM 744 Views
Regarding Mesaana... - 20/11/2012 08:42:56 AM 828 Views
You continue to mix two things - 20/11/2012 03:24:44 PM 741 Views
No - 20/11/2012 04:54:19 PM 973 Views
You are mistaken - 20/11/2012 05:04:40 PM 818 Views
Yes she did Darius! - 20/11/2012 05:27:36 PM 764 Views
Yet there is no duel - 20/11/2012 06:01:17 PM 749 Views
Explain the .3xSD thing to me... - 19/11/2012 04:58:57 PM 999 Views
Probably, but the AS have no idea what 37.5% means - 19/11/2012 02:59:26 AM 791 Views
It's irrelevant - 19/11/2012 03:46:42 AM 826 Views
Agreed. Daigian is the marker of the absolute bottom of Aes Sedai strength. - 19/11/2012 06:55:41 AM 805 Views
Daigian - 19/11/2012 08:12:19 AM 845 Views
It is a direct marker due to RJ's quote - 19/11/2012 08:50:26 AM 844 Views
You missed my point - 19/11/2012 09:08:42 AM 802 Views
Re: You missed my point - 19/11/2012 02:18:33 PM 850 Views
Asmodean would never have made the comment about 13 weakest AS - 20/11/2012 04:41:11 AM 807 Views
Re: Asmodean would never have made the comment about 13 weakest AS - 20/11/2012 09:07:49 AM 777 Views
Which would make an average AS around a 30 - 20/11/2012 04:58:56 PM 650 Views
Re: Sure you can - 19/11/2012 09:22:09 AM 924 Views
Care to explain this... - 19/11/2012 05:06:28 PM 781 Views
Indeed - 20/11/2012 07:16:37 AM 991 Views
Explained far better than I ever could. Bravo. - 20/11/2012 07:30:29 AM 795 Views
Well duh. - 20/11/2012 02:57:24 PM 910 Views
Incorrect. - 20/11/2012 04:28:07 PM 899 Views
No - 20/11/2012 04:44:16 PM 876 Views
Re: No - 20/11/2012 04:48:36 PM 861 Views
That depends... - 20/11/2012 05:18:46 PM 732 Views
Re: That depends... - 20/11/2012 05:31:03 PM 1149 Views
You're integrating without lower limits... - 20/11/2012 02:55:06 PM 845 Views
Re: You're integrating without lower limits... - 20/11/2012 04:37:57 PM 871 Views
It matters. - 20/11/2012 05:22:40 PM 853 Views
We are not talking about a normal distribution in any case - 20/11/2012 04:44:24 AM 672 Views
Re: We are not talking about a normal distribution in any case - 20/11/2012 07:02:47 AM 865 Views
You must tell me of this special math... - 20/11/2012 03:10:09 PM 772 Views
Re: You must tell me of this special math... - 20/11/2012 04:29:40 PM 805 Views
Morghase is a placeholder... - 20/11/2012 04:45:42 PM 882 Views
Re: Morghase is a placeholder... - 20/11/2012 04:49:54 PM 1062 Views
Why? - 20/11/2012 05:23:29 PM 849 Views
Re: Why? - 20/11/2012 05:36:45 PM 1018 Views
Well... - 18/11/2012 08:43:59 PM 918 Views
Re: Well... - 19/11/2012 03:40:44 PM 886 Views
Wow. - 19/11/2012 03:53:47 PM 927 Views
Re: Wow. - 19/11/2012 04:26:09 PM 946 Views
Some points - 19/11/2012 06:03:00 PM 961 Views
Well then you're both wrong I'm afraid - 19/11/2012 06:09:36 PM 781 Views
Re: Well then you're both wrong I'm afraid - 19/11/2012 07:42:58 PM 691 Views
this is why I think all of the Forsaken are very close in Power - 20/11/2012 04:51:20 AM 878 Views
Agreed - 20/11/2012 08:13:37 AM 906 Views
probably - 20/11/2012 06:18:45 PM 802 Views
Re: this is why I think all of the Forsaken are very close in Power - 20/11/2012 02:45:18 PM 818 Views
I think RJ went out of his way to keep strength a bit of a mystery - 20/11/2012 08:42:44 PM 837 Views
Indeed... - 21/11/2012 05:44:18 PM 797 Views
I agree - 22/11/2012 01:43:02 AM 1058 Views
Math gurus...Is it possible to find the missing variable... - 21/11/2012 05:12:24 PM 818 Views
the problem is that the Mean is not going to tell us much really - 22/11/2012 02:55:03 AM 901 Views
Re: Math gurus...Is it possible to find the missing variable... - 23/11/2012 02:59:12 PM 1130 Views
Disregard this post *NM* - 23/11/2012 03:02:24 PM 801 Views

Reply to Message