Recommended Posts

Yeah I have watched that scene so many times now... and honestly I don't see what is wrong with it, the only thing that I would nit pick at would be the camera angle but apart from that, the dragon and flying looks pretty damn good to me.

 

 

Talking of which, is there any idea how many are left? Didn't she only have 8,000?

I imagine that she has only lost a few hundred unsullied at most

  • Like 1

Didn't she say she wasn't going to do anymore nude scenes? The walk of shame is coming for Lena Headey apparently.

 

Anyway, I thought the last episode was awesome. The attack of the White Walkers came a bit unexpected and fast too after moving so slowly these past seasons.

 

Yeah she did, only body doubles from now on... Dumbass double standards... "bare all in first season, then after it gets popular imma do a body double..." that logic :laugh:

White walkers have only appeared in the novels twice. Once in the very prologue of the series, and the second time at the Fist of the First Men.

 

The show has quite a few differences now, so its not the biggest deal, but I'm confident that The Winds of Winter will go to press before April of 2016. Now, obviously he's not writing A Dream of Spring in under a year, so S7 will be years before B7, but we can worry about that next year.

ah, Someone also replied that george gave "guidelines" to where they were heading so I imagine S7 will be the most non-book related season (eg made up? )

I found the Arena scene a bit annoying because the harpies somehow just disappeared after they managed to chase Drogon away with spears so that the rest of Dany's party would have time to stare after the dragon.

 

Old man Jorah fighting was a pleasant surprise though.

  • Like 1

Yeah she did, only body doubles from now on... Dumbass double standards... "bare all in first season, then after it gets popular imma do a body double..." that logic :laugh:

 

Tyene sand's boobs >>>>> Khaleesi's boobs :shifty:

 

MPsQfys.gif

Oh boy, how did I not notice this sooner.. So, I was retelling the Hardhome event to a friend, including Jon Snow ending on the north side of The Wall, after leaving by ship, when he returns to Castle Black just so they can have that scene with Alliser Thorne starring down on them. This one is on the same level of stupidity as Yara Greyjoy attacking the Dreadfort somehow in S4, which is on the other side of the continent, and running away with her men afraid of 3 dogs. Well done you muppets!

Oh boy, how did I not notice this sooner.. So, I was retelling the Hardhome event to a friend, including Jon Snow ending on the north side of The Wall, after leaving by ship, when he returns to Castle Black just so they can have that scene with Alliser Thorne starring down on them. This one is on the same level of stupidity as Yara Greyjoy attacking the Dreadfort somehow in S4, which is on the other side of the continent, and running away with her men afraid of 3 dogs. Well done you muppets!

 

There are several ways this can be explained logically, but what's wrong with just having some dramatic effect?

  • Like 1

There are several ways this can be explained logically, but what's wrong with just having some dramatic effect?

Gimme your best shot on explaining this logically because there's no way this makes sense to me unless you pull some extremely awkward mental gymnastics. Dramatic effect is well and good, but it breaks immersion when it doesn't respect in-universe rules.

  • Like 1

Gimme your best shot on explaining this logically because there's no way this makes sense to me unless you pull some extremely awkward mental gymnastics. Dramatic effect is well and good, but it breaks immersion when it doesn't respect in-universe rules.

-Stannis requested the ships be returned as fast as possible, so they dropped off their cargo on the first stop, which would be on that side of the wall.

-They needed to be organized before entering south, to ensure no one moves on their own, so they traveled north of the wall to minimize some wildlings going rogue.

-The wildlings know their way around north better, so to cut time traveling, they went north of the wall to Castle Black.

-Jon Snow knows nothing.

Any of these is plausible, but again, nothing wrong with just having it that way for dramatic effect.

  • Like 1

-Stannis requested the ships be returned as fast as possible, so they dropped off their cargo on the first stop, which would be on that side of the wall.

-They needed to be organized before entering south, to ensure no one moves on their own, so they traveled north of the wall to minimize some wildlings going rogue.

-The wildlings know their way around north better, so to cut time traveling, they went north of the wall to Castle Black.

-Jon Snow knows nothing.

Any of these is plausible, but again, nothing wrong with just having it that way for dramatic effect.

1. How and why? Last I checked Winterfell can't be reached by ship.

2. I don't follow what you mean with organized? A big chunk of what was left were refugees (children, old people etc.) while the army part was Night's Watch or wildlings following Jon. Also, army of tireless White Walkers and thousands of undead.

3. The "shortest" road to Castle Black puts them on a nice path to be intercepted by the previously mentioned White Walkers and army of undead. Makes perfect sense.

4. Ok.

 

No, they're not, and again, no dramatic effect could make up for that level of bad writing (maybe in a self-aware comedy). If you'd like to try again, here's relevant chunk of the map.

 

6zdoC72tmD2rapq4BLG4Z1ABNbH7w.jpg

...

 

They put considerable distance between themselves and the White Walkers and their army by the time they reached the northside of Eastwatch. Admittedly, it's shaky excuse, but still, I think you're being way too harsh. It's really not that big of a problem, and you know what? I just did a quick google to help my memory, and t seems the plan in the books is even worse: he plans to go to Hardhome through the other side of the wall. So I presume the road back is the same.

  • Like 1

They put considerable distance between themselves and the White Walkers and their army by the time they reached the northside of Eastwatch. Admittedly, it's shaky excuse, but still, I think you're being way too harsh. It's really not that big of a problem, and you know what? I just did a quick google to help my memory, and t seems the plan in the books is even worse: he plans to go to Hardhome through the other side of the wall. So I presume the road back is the same.

Again, one group is made of mythical creatures and tireless undead while the other is made of humans including old people and children. Even if the sea was a huge risk like in the book, the second best plan would be go on foot along the coast after clearing Hardhome and cross to the south at Eastwatch and then go to Castle Black. Personally, I'd stick with the ships, better dead at the bottom of the sea than a mindless undead that might harm others.

 

The problem you're having with the book plan is that you're looking at it from a show perspective. Unlike the show, there's no thousands strong undead army there that we or the characters know of (there probably will eventually). It is the best they had at their disposal considering the information they knew.

 

As for being too harsh, maybe, but that is because I like the show (until they butchered Tyrion at any rate) and that level of bad writing is extremely disappointing.

One thing I don't understand, if the white walkers can turn the dead into walkers, why not just go crazy when winter comes and go to all the cementaries, war sites and undig the dead, presto! Biggest army EVAR!

That's probably what's going to happen in the show. In the books, there are no walking skeletons so it wouldn't work to the same degree, although I'm sure the old kill people, raise them, kill more people will work nicely once they cross the Wall.

That's probably what's going to happen in the show. In the books, there are no walking skeletons so it wouldn't work to the same degree, although I'm sure the old kill people, raise them, kill more people will work nicely once they cross the Wall.

In the book skeletons aren't raised at all?

In the book skeletons aren't raised at all?

If the Others can raise skeletons, then it hasn't happened in the books in recent or in ancient times. You can read about them here (the Recent Events section contains minor book spoilers, but nothing for the show).

  • Like 1

If the Others can raise skeletons, then it hasn't happened in the books in recent or in ancient times. You can read about them here (the Recent Events section contains minor book spoilers, but nothing for the show).

interesting! I need to read me those books!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!