Speculation: Bad Idea is doing Solar Man of the Atom

[Chiclo]

There has been very little Sliders discussion on this thread on slidersfans.com.

Sent from my Pixel Fold using Tapatalk

The Kromagg Dynasty was, at the same time, poorly underused and artlessly over-cited and over-blamed.

Oberon Geiger was right.

[The Harbinger]

I'll try to grab this one on ebay as well since it is inspired by Valiant Solar.

There are some misplaced comparisons between Bad Idea and Gucci brand, since many see the Bad Idea marketing strategy as more an attempt at FOMO for the niche audience than actually demonstrating a value. The stories aren't across the board Gucci quality (Eniac was decent), so we're left with the exclusivity you can show off to others in a greying hobby. Some reacted poorly to that since it's just another way of chasing speculators like the 90s.

When I wear a rolex, it tells time like any other watch, but I can talk about the way certain dials catch the light, the fitted bezel, etc. I've never seen a conversation about Bad Idea online that didn't involve the sales gimmick. I feel like they need to be pitching to Netflix more than the terrible brands at some of these other companies (IDW, Vault). The gimmick might really take off if there was a movie or series that made hardcore fans, and then the only way to consume more desired media is to participate how Bad Idea wants you too.

[Chiclo]

You and Dan Nitzani should start a He-Man-Bad-Idea-Hater's Club. I'm sure the domain is available. Your club of two people is definitely going to do big things in the comic industry with whining. Just make sure it's on the right domain. This isn't it.

I tried to reason with Nitzani over on the Facebook page for either Bad Idea or VALIANT, I forget which. It was impossible.

I'd have better luck convincing Chiclo that Armstrong's satchel is a tesseract from the 41st Century Ivar gifted him on his birthday in the distant past.

https://youtu.be/tt4cR9szMS8?si=1CuwVOUztXvKo7uk

[ManofTheAtom]

You and Dan Nitzani should start a He-Man-Bad-Idea-Hater's Club. I'm sure the domain is available. Your club of two people is definitely going to do big things in the comic industry with whining. Just make sure it's on the right domain. This isn't it.

I tried to reason with Nitzani over on the Facebook page for either Bad Idea or VALIANT, I forget which. It was impossible.

I'd have better luck convincing Chiclo that Armstrong's satchel is a tesseract from the 41st Century Ivar gifted him on his birthday in the distant past.

https://youtu.be/tt4cR9szMS8?si=1CuwVOUztXvKo7uk

Clarke's third law still applies, heh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoCnnWHsH1c

This explains it well.

[Chiclo]

Clarke's third law still applies, heh.

Citation needed.

If there are scientific explanations and descriptions for these phenomena, for the satchel and necromantic energy and the Bagh Nakh, does that require a technological origin of the ability to harness and control these phenomena and preclude some sort of magical harnessing of these otherwise natural aspects of an orderly and predictable universe?

I would suggest that the creators of the stories, especially the writers, of the satchel and the Bagh Nakh, intended these artifacts to have been of magical origin, not of a technological origin. The editors let these ideas into the wider scope of the Valiant universe. There might be scientific words used to describe these phenomena, a tessaract (which would not lay flat in a satchel) or some other higher dimensional manifold, but that description could still apply to a natural phenomenon of supernatural manipulation.

[possumgrease]

Sorry to have derailed the conversation about the Solar-inspired book, but let's talk about a book that may have inspired Solar. I'm sure this has come up before, but I just saw this pulp for the first time today:

Astounding Science Fiction (September 1952):

[greg]

Sorry to have derailed the conversation about the Solar-inspired book, but let's talk about a book that may have inspired Solar. I'm sure this has come up before, but I just saw this pulp for the first time today:

Astounding Science Fiction (September 1952):

I love this book! I bought a couple when I first heard about it. I don't remember if I ever read the story inside (if there is one) that should go with the cover image.

[ManofTheAtom]

Clarke's third law still applies, heh.

Citation needed.

If there are scientific explanations and descriptions for these phenomena, for the satchel and necromantic energy and the Bagh Nakh, does that require a technological origin of the ability to harness and control these phenomena and preclude some sort of magical harnessing of these otherwise natural aspects of an orderly and predictable universe?

I would suggest that the creators of the stories, especially the writers, of the satchel and the Bagh Nakh, intended these artifacts to have been of magical origin, not of a technological origin. The editors let these ideas into the wider scope of the Valiant universe. There might be scientific words used to describe these phenomena, a tessaract (which would not lay flat in a satchel) or some other higher dimensional manifold, but that description could still apply to a natural phenomenon of supernatural manipulation.

What makes the satchel and Bagh Nakh magic, but the time arcs a natural phenomenon? Why aren't they magic?

Might Ivar himself not at first believed that the arcs were magic doorways the first time he stepped through one? Issue #0 doesn't address that, but it makes sense that he might. What the issue does show, in narration at least, is that Ivar believed a steam locomotive was a monster.

Yes, the creators certainly intended for this to be magical artifacts, but nothing prevents them from being reconceptualized as machines from the future.

Nuclear reactors allow for the control of atoms. Why can't the dagger do the same for necromantic energy?

Now, could whatever exist inside the satchel be a natural phenomenon akin to a time arc that the satchel, a piece of technology from the future, holds inside?

Let us divide Aram's satchel into two components; the satchel itself and what is inside it.

The satchel COULD be a container from the future that is able to hold a natural phenomenon that performs the function attributed to the satchel which is identified as magical properties.

The satchel would be like a nuclear reactor that contains the radiation, with the theoretical phenomena being akin to the radiation, and even a time arc.

[ManofTheAtom]

Sorry to have derailed the conversation about the Solar-inspired book, but let's talk about a book that may have inspired Solar. I'm sure this has come up before, but I just saw this pulp for the first time today:

Astounding Science Fiction (September 1952):

Nice.

[Chiclo]

Clarke's third law still applies, heh.

Citation needed.

If there are scientific explanations and descriptions for these phenomena, for the satchel and necromantic energy and the Bagh Nakh, does that require a technological origin of the ability to harness and control these phenomena and preclude some sort of magical harnessing of these otherwise natural aspects of an orderly and predictable universe?

I would suggest that the creators of the stories, especially the writers, of the satchel and the Bagh Nakh, intended these artifacts to have been of magical origin, not of a technological origin. The editors let these ideas into the wider scope of the Valiant universe. There might be scientific words used to describe these phenomena, a tessaract (which would not lay flat in a satchel) or some other higher dimensional manifold, but that description could still apply to a natural phenomenon of supernatural manipulation.

What makes the satchel and Bagh Nakh magic, but the time arcs a natural phenomenon? Why aren't they magic?

Might Ivar himself not at first believed that the arcs were magic doorways the first time he stepped through one? Issue #0 doesn't address that, but it makes sense that he might. What the issue does show, in narration at least, is that Ivar believed a steam locomotive was a monster.

Yes, the creators certainly intended for this to be magical artifacts, but nothing prevents them from being reconceptualized as machines from the future.

Nuclear reactors allow for the control of atoms. Why can't the dagger do the same for necromantic energy?

Now, could whatever exist inside the satchel be a natural phenomenon akin to a time arc that the satchel, a piece of technology from the future, holds inside?

Let us divide Aram's satchel into two components; the satchel itself and what is inside it.

The satchel COULD be a container from the future that is able to hold a natural phenomenon that performs the function attributed to the satchel which is identified as magical properties.

The satchel would be like a nuclear reactor that contains the radiation, with the theoretical phenomena being akin to the radiation, and even a time arc.

The difference is volition, will. If magic just kind of happens, without some mind instigating it, then the phenomenon is merely a natural occurrence. Time arcs would be a natural phenomenon, unless they are technologically induced and possibly controlled by a mind somewhen else. An “Anywhen Fold” one might say. Maybe the mind could be unfocused, perhaps by an otherwise common barnyard animal?

The satchel could contain some kind of future technology. That is possible. It seems more likely that the original intent of the author was for it to be some sort of magical, unnatural artifact. Claiming some kind of futuristic, portal tech carried within the satchel is a more skillful retcon than just explaining the Bagh Nakh as “microcircuitry.”

[Chiclo]

I would think that it would be a greater willful suspension of disbelief to accept naturally occurring timearcs than to completely dismiss magic, especially in a continuity with several characters of such supernatural dispositions.

[ManofTheAtom]

Clarke's third law still applies, heh.

Citation needed.

If there are scientific explanations and descriptions for these phenomena, for the satchel and necromantic energy and the Bagh Nakh, does that require a technological origin of the ability to harness and control these phenomena and preclude some sort of magical harnessing of these otherwise natural aspects of an orderly and predictable universe?

I would suggest that the creators of the stories, especially the writers, of the satchel and the Bagh Nakh, intended these artifacts to have been of magical origin, not of a technological origin. The editors let these ideas into the wider scope of the Valiant universe. There might be scientific words used to describe these phenomena, a tessaract (which would not lay flat in a satchel) or some other higher dimensional manifold, but that description could still apply to a natural phenomenon of supernatural manipulation.

What makes the satchel and Bagh Nakh magic, but the time arcs a natural phenomenon? Why aren't they magic?

Might Ivar himself not at first believed that the arcs were magic doorways the first time he stepped through one? Issue #0 doesn't address that, but it makes sense that he might. What the issue does show, in narration at least, is that Ivar believed a steam locomotive was a monster.

Yes, the creators certainly intended for this to be magical artifacts, but nothing prevents them from being reconceptualized as machines from the future.

Nuclear reactors allow for the control of atoms. Why can't the dagger do the same for necromantic energy?

Now, could whatever exist inside the satchel be a natural phenomenon akin to a time arc that the satchel, a piece of technology from the future, holds inside?

Let us divide Aram's satchel into two components; the satchel itself and what is inside it.

The satchel COULD be a container from the future that is able to hold a natural phenomenon that performs the function attributed to the satchel which is identified as magical properties.

The satchel would be like a nuclear reactor that contains the radiation, with the theoretical phenomena being akin to the radiation, and even a time arc.

The difference is volition, will. If magic just kind of happens, without some mind instigating it, then the phenomenon is merely a natural occurrence. Time arcs would be a natural phenomenon, unless they are technologically induced and possibly controlled by a mind somewhen else. An “Anywhen Fold” one might say. Maybe the mind could be unfocused, perhaps by an otherwise common barnyard animal?

The satchel could contain some kind of future technology. That is possible. It seems more likely that the original intent of the author was for it to be some sort of magical, unnatural artifact. Claiming some kind of futuristic, portal tech carried within the satchel is a more skillful retcon than just explaining the Bagh Nakh as “microcircuitry.”

It need not be microcircuitry or the like, though. As long as it's sufficiently advanced 40th Century technology, that is all that matters.

Last year, AMC+ streamed a series called "Moonhaven" in which futuristic technology was truly indistinguishable from magic.

[ManofTheAtom]

I would think that it would be a greater willful suspension of disbelief to accept naturally occurring timearcs than to completely dismiss magic, especially in a continuity with several characters of such supernatural dispositions.

But if magic can be explained scientifically, it's worth trying.

As for the dagger, souls are a way to refer to necromantic energy, no?

Metal, like that on the dagger, is a conductor. The only question is, in what way does the dagger store the necromantic energy?

A Google search shows that metal can store energy.