Recommended Posts

On 22/07/2017 at 9:37 PM, The Evil Overlord said:

There's one useless and pointless scene I felt needed cutting, purely because it just felt like a scene made specifically for a cameo.

Just sterile, and had little value to the story, I felt.

agreed, oh and there just HAD to be a song in it for him. ugh i cringed.

 

i dont mind him, but wtf man, it cheapened the series imo.

I wouldnt have minded if he was just a foot-soldier or something, but a song noooo, surprised he didnt whip out a lute and start a concert, MY North fans are the best! how y`all doing out there! This one goes out to my brothers! 

 

Ive forgiven them though due to 

Spoiler

this weeks ep omfg the dragon! :D awesome CGI

 

  • Like 2
42 minutes ago, John. said:

I was! I was also yelling at Sam to shut up and listen!

Spoiler

 

Sam doesn't know R+L=J. He might know who Rhaegar Targaryen was. No, he probably does. But he doesn't care that Rhaegar had his marriage annulled. He probably thought, "who bloody cares about the Mad King's eldest son?". That line was strictly for the fans.

 

In the books, Lyanna Stark swore her brother Ned to secrecy. We (book readers who support the R+L=J theory that HBO legitimized last year) assumed Jon's parentage was the secret, but her being married to Rhaegar was just as dangerous a secret. Maybe Ned died protecting both. So now we, the fans, know that Jon Snow is a legitimate Targaryen. Daenerys is his full aunt. Jon + Daenerys is a perfect match. It's the song of ice and fire. Targaryens were into incest, and, well, there you go. I was actually hoping Dracarys burned him alive on a whim, and we learned he too is immune to fire, only I don't think he is. But imagine if he were and Daenerys witnessed it firsthand. She'd be asking all the right questions, and she'd probably have a good idea as to how to get them answered, and/or Jorah Mormont would. But here's the thing. Happy endings aren't a thing in Westeros. I do not expect a happy ending for this show, or for any of the good guys. But I secretly want Daenerys and Jon to wed, his parentage to be revealed, Sansa to be Lady of the North, the Lannisters save Tyrion all killed and IDGAF about anyone else. They can all take the Black for all I care. Including Gendry. None of the Baratheons were any good except maybe Shireen, and you saw what happened to her. Good Baratheons got it worse than good Lannisters (namely Myrcella and Tommen). Sigh.

 

Anyone else lose a little faith in Daenerys after she pulled an Aerys Targaryen (Mad King) early on in the episode? Also, I thought she was born in Westeros, but that was called into question. She was born at Dragonstone during the storm, right? In the books, she remembered King's Landing and the Red Keep. Book 1 is pretty clear on that. But Daenerys could have stayed on her side of the Narrow Sea. She was doing quite well for herself. The Dothraki had never sailed before. They're land warriors. She could have stayed where she was and left the Lannisters alone and not really been 'out' anything. So my support for her is waning. I'm actually starting to like Cersei as queen. She's wicked as hell, but she's turning into Tywin, and Tywin was a bastard too, but Tywin was arguably the smartest player in the game, except he underestimated Tyrion. Cersei won't make that mistake. If you read the books, there's a bit more to her. I don't like her as a person, but I like her character. I'm not gonna lie, I'm rooting for her, to an extent.

 

I'm also hoping Arya gets to cut her throat. As for Arya — she's gone full darkside. Is there a happy ending for her? Will she settle down with a guy (or a girl — she was interested in a boy in the first book/season, but no one since) and start a family, or will she die crossing names off her list? Or will she live and just always be angry and moody? I don't think she ever really had a chance. Taking the Black isn't even an option because she's female. Nah, I'm expecting her to eat it and the show to make me swear off it for six days.

 

Predictions... I'm not the first to say it, but I didn't see anyone say it before I thought it, I think Cersei will die at the end of this season. We only have 2 episodes left, and with Arya tied up in Littlefinger's intrigue it's less likely now, but a few episodes back, I was saying the season would end how it began, with Arya cutting throats, namely Cersei's. I'm a little less sure now. The story isn't leaning that way now. Arya's conflict now is with Sansa, and the Stark bannermen. I bet she runs her mouth and gets in a fight, and wins, with repercussions that harm Jon and/or Sansa. As before, Arya really has no place. Speaking of Jon, if we can only get Bran and Jon and Sam in a room together, Jon can stake a claim to the Iron Throne and propose alliance/marriage to Daenerys, though they're both just a little too proud. Besides, no one but Bran and Sam and possibly Daenerys will accept Jon Snow as Rhaegar Targaryen's legitimate son. No one cares about Rhaegar Targaryen anymore but some of the book fans. Then again, the show is bringing Gendry back, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who forgot about him. For anyone to try to claim he's Robert Baratheon's bastard... who cares at this point? He's not going to dethrone Cersei. That would be stupid as hell. He's best as Jon's smith.

 

 

7 minutes ago, PsYcHoKiLLa said:

Question:

If Jon Snow has returned from the dead, does that mean he's immune to the white walkers?

we don't know that either way. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing ends with the night king killing jon then bringing jon back only for jon to kill him anyway.

18 minutes ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Last episode? That was real?? 

season 7 episode 6 is available. that only leaves episode 7 left of this season. Then we have to wait for the 6 episodes of season 8, next year.

22 hours ago, Draconian Guppy said:

So Jon can receive ravens, but he can't send one back saying "i'm doing such and such".

yer, theres no raven return signal up north obviously...tsk tsk! :p 

 

Its grim up north (obscure KLF reference :P)

  • Like 1
1 hour ago, anthdci said:

season 7 episode 6 is available. that only leaves episode 7 left of this season. Then we have to wait for the 6 episodes of season 8, next year.

Aw man, you have no idea how much this irritates me, I've collected the whole thing on blue ray, the mis matching box sizes annoyed me already, but now they're not even bothering to make 10 episodes per season anymore? SMH

1 hour ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Aw man, you have no idea how much this irritates me, I've collected the whole thing on blue ray, the mis matching box sizes annoyed me already, but now they're not even bothering to make 10 episodes per season anymore? SMH

tbh due to the lower episode count, it feels a bit more rushed this season, not a bad thing ofc :) 

Just now, The Evil Overlord said:

Personally, I think it is, they've managed to get the previous 6 seasons out on time....

the wait for S8 is gonna be painful.

 

Ive avoided the leaked episodes tbh. I like watching them at the best quality and on Sky :)

2 minutes ago, Mando said:

the wait for S8 is gonna be painful.

 

Ive avoided the leaked episodes tbh. I like watching them at the best quality and on Sky :)

Depends on the size of the .mkv :shiftyninja:

 

Also missed your post on the deleted thread....

  • Like 2
1 hour ago, The Evil Overlord said:

Depends on the size of the .mkv :shiftyninja:

 

Also missed your post on the deleted thread....

nah GoT is one series i refuse to steal :) infact i dont do it with any movie or Tv show these days :)

 

huh what deleted thread?

8 minutes ago, Mando said:

nah GoT is one series i refuse to steal :) infact i dont do it with any movie or Tv show these days :)

 

huh what deleted thread?

I would like to legally watch GoT. But I'm living in Canada the place Bell asks you to buy an expensive cable package you don't really need to watch GoT.

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!