How are Artifacts made?

[DemosCat]

How are artifacts made? Entirely by accident.

There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or rhythm to why a given object handled by, say, Mahatma Gandhi, becomes an artifact, and not another does not.

What about Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel? Shouldn't that be an artifact? I would have thought his spinning wheel to be a more likely artifact than a piece of cloth made from the wheel.

[Gatefan1976]

How are artifacts made? Entirely by accident.

There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or rhythm to why a given object handled by, say, Mahatma Gandhi, becomes an artifact, and not another does not.

What about Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel? Shouldn't that be an artifact? I would have thought his spinning wheel to be a more likely artifact than a piece of cloth made from the wheel.

Err, I always found there there was a reasonable explanation why "X object" became an artifact any Y did not, especially if they are using Akashic field theory to "explain" thier creation. Artifacts seem to be a physical representation of a particular thought/ability/ or information and as such act as a focal point for said Thought/Ability or information.

[DemosCat]

Artifacts seem to be a physical representation of a particular thought/ability/ or information and as such act as a focal point for said Thought/Ability or information.

But it's not really consistent, is it? If I understand you correctly (no bets there), then a tool, which is a means to an end, might not become an artifact, but the end-product could. So Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel is a tool, and cloth the end-product which gets the special artifact powers.

But that wouldn't explain Edgar Allan Poe's pen becoming an artifact (or part of one). One might assume Poe's passion was for his work, not the tool used to record is work.

I suppose it comes down to how the imbuer of artifact power feels about the things in his/her life. If Gandhi only saw his spinning wheel as a means to an end, then it doesn't become an artifact. If Poe perceived his pen as having a life of its own - that the stories practically wrote themselves when he picked it up - then it can become an artifact.

I wonder what that says about Mark Twain and his typewriter? I'm waiting for that to be an artifact.

[Gatefan1976]

But it's not really consistent, is it? If I understand you correctly (no bets there), then a tool, which is a means to an end, might not become an artifact, but the end-product could. So Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel is a tool, and cloth the end-product which gets the special artifact powers.

Weelllllll
I doubt Ghandi's spinning wheel or anything he made on it would become an artifact, if anything, perhaps his prayer mat might become an artifact.

But that wouldn't explain Edgar Allan Poe's pen becoming an artifact (or part of one). One might assume Poe's passion was for his work, not the tool used to record is work.

This is where it gets a bit more odd. *sometimes* arfifacts seem to be made on the "belief" of the original creator, *sometimes* they seem to be "imbued" for want of a better term by the "belief" of others.

I suppose it comes down to how the imbuer of artifact power feels about the things in his/her life. If Gandhi only saw his spinning wheel as a means to an end, then it doesn't become an artifact. If Poe perceived his pen as having a life of its own - that the stories practically wrote themselves when he picked it up - then it can become an artifact.

A fair enough observation, but there also seems to be some corrolation between the object in question, and what a person achieves with said object as well.

[aretood2]

As far as I know, Artifacts aren't really "real" either.

In-universe?

If you wanted to use the Akashic field idea, the goo would be more like removing a physical representation of a thought/idea from the Akashic field, with the same results.

The thing about the goo is that it blocks the artifact's "magic" it does not remove it. As soon as it is free from the goo, the artifact becomes dangerous again. I am not sure how that would work with thought/idea thing.

I thought we were talking about how arifacts got made, not weather or not W13 was Scifi or not.

Not my fault, you were pushing me with the Akashic field thing. This was just a logical progression of the discussion.

But it's not really consistent, is it? If I understand you correctly (no bets there), then a tool, which is a means to an end, might not become an artifact, but the end-product could. So Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel is a tool, and cloth the end-product which gets the special artifact powers.

But that wouldn't explain Edgar Allan Poe's pen becoming an artifact (or part of one). One might assume Poe's passion was for his work, not the tool used to record is work.

I suppose it comes down to how the imbuer of artifact power feels about the things in his/her life. If Gandhi only saw his spinning wheel as a means to an end, then it doesn't become an artifact. If Poe perceived his pen as having a life of its own - that the stories practically wrote themselves when he picked it up - then it can become an artifact.

I wonder what that says about Mark Twain and his typewriter? I'm waiting for that to be an artifact.

I think there are several types of artifacts.

2. Self Made Artifacts
   These artifacts get affected by exotic particles or what have you and end up causing the (in)famous event or helps the (in)famous individual do what he or she did.
   
   
   
3. History made Artifacts
   The well known or not so well unknown event has such an impact that it creates an artifact related to it. Like the jar from that episode where people started to act like Zombies.
   
   
   
4. People Made Artifacts (not to be confused with Artificial Artifacts)
   Edgar Allen Poe's pen, Gandhi's cloth, etc... Individuals, highly influential, are affected by the exotic particles or what have you and this allows them to embed odd properties into there everyday objects/tools/products thus making an artifact.
   
   
   
5. Artificial Artifacts
   Related to people made artifacts but a little bit different. These artifacts are technological in some capacity. The creators at some point were affected by the exotic particles or magical fields or whatever and one or more of their creations become Artifacty.
   
   

[Gatefan1976]

In-universe?

"In Universe", yes, they exist.

The thing about the goo is that it blocks the artifact's "magic" it does not remove it. As soon as it is free from the goo, the artifact becomes dangerous again. I am not sure how that would work with thought/idea thing.

In Akashic feild theory, all things are interconnected and artifacts would be a physical representation and locus point for a particular thought/idea. By giving something a "goo bath" you would remove it from the field, therefore removing it from this source of "power", rendering it inert. Once it is un-gooed however, it reconnects with the akashic field and has power once more. In essence, you goo something, you pull its batteries.

Not my fault, you were pushing me with the Akashic field thing. This was just a logical progression of the discussion.

How was I pushing you??

[aretood2]

"In Universe", yes, they exist.

Okay, for a second there I thought you were going to propose some weird "It's all in their minds" explanation for the existence of Artifacts.

In Akashic feild theory, all things are interconnected and artifacts would be a physical representation and locus point for a particular thought/idea. By giving something a "goo bath" you would remove it from the field, therefore removing it from this source of "power", rendering it inert. Once it is un-gooed however, it reconnects with the akashic field and has power once more. In essence, you goo something, you pull its batteries.

I think I like the "Force did it" idea better. That would then make it more appropriate to say that, for example, McPherson and Wells got seduced by the dark side of the Force

[Gatefan1976]

Okay, for a second there I thought you were going to propose some weird "It's all in their minds" explanation for the existence of Artifacts.

Nah dude, I was just running with your initial post and excerpt from TV tropes

I think I like the "Force did it" idea better. That would then make it more appropriate to say that, for example, McPherson and Wells got seduced by the dark side of the Force

Dunno if you need "the force" to explain human failing but sure
Another thought if you don't like the "oggity boogity" of Akashic field theory is the more "scientificly rooted" idea of Chaos theory, specifically "the butterfly effect"

[DemosCat]

Why don't we just call it the Oggity Boogity Field Theory? I'd like to know what happens when Oggity Boogity interacts with metallic Unobtainium.

[Gatefan1976]

Why don't we just call it the Oggity Boogity Field Theory? I'd like to know what happens when Oggity Boogity interacts with metallic Unobtainium.

Dunno, what happens when you inject a matter/antimatter stream through a heisenburg compensator?
Will the warp feild destablize or will your Earl Gray come out hotter?

[Gatefan1976]

How sadly amusing.

[tomstone]

I think I like the Akashic field theory the best. Though I wonder about the name of that field. Isnt the Akashic record a record of our past, present and future? Then why is a magic field called Akashic?

[DemosCat]

Will the warp feild destablize or will your Earl Gray come out hotter?

Only if you reverse the polarity.



(I had forgotten how far back "reverse the polarity" goes until recently, when I was watching an old Star Trek TOS episode. Mr. Spock gives the order "Reverse the polarity" and I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.)

[Gatefan1976]

I think I like the Akashic field theory the best. Though I wonder about the name of that field. Isnt the Akashic record a record of our past, present and future? Then why is a magic field called Akashic?

Ahhh, sorry for the delay.
*In essence* the akashic records are indeed a record of "all time and space", yet it is defined as something that can be "tapped into" by those capable of doing so. It's not so much a "written peice of work" that can be understood and evaluated on that level, but more a "living peice of work" that constantly evolves as knowlege changes. To put it in "sci-fi" terms it would be sorta like a "warp field" in as much as it exists on a level that exists "parallel" to ours and via training or technology it can be accessed.
The "problem" here is that when you use the term "magic" 99.95% of the population are thinking "oggity-boogity" and think that saying "ah-la peanut butter sandwitches" makes a fireball that blows your enemy apart.

[jelgate]

Last nights episode pretty much answered this question