Evidence is apparently a concept that escapes your little head. Or does it occur to you that for such a sword to be able to stick in a pillar it would have to be shoved in perfectly horizontal (from the side to side, the point can still point downwards from the hilt), without any unevenness in the force used?Smiling Bandit wrote:Irrelevcant; once the edge has been severed, without friction there's nothing but gravity that would hold it together. So the sword can cut through any matter like butter.Incorrect. Can you see microscopic fractures? You know why we have electron microscopes? You won't be able to see a slit that's only an atom in width. And you still expect us to believe that it's Planck-Width on your say-so.
And how is it irrevalent that we can't see the hole if it were an atom in width? Saying that we can see it shows ignorance on multiple levels.
Physics : The wavelengths of visible light are far larger than a single atom. That's why we have to electron microscopes to resolve very small objects - electrons can be made to have a smaller wavelength. And it's still not enough to resolve individual atoms, which we have to use scanning tunneling microscopes to do so.
Geometry : On top of that, it would disappear at any off-angle, such as the one that's automatically dictated by the distance between one's eyes.
Biology : The rods and the cones in the eye detect light, with a threshold of at least ten photons to trigger it. If nothing else, they are relatively macroscopic. A single atom's width would not contribute even light to make a difference in anything above pitch black.
Psychology : A hole that's on the threshold of visibility would not be noticed by most people. It would be, if noticed, probably mistaken as the trick of the eyes, then next level would be labeled mentally as a crack, then a slit. It would be nearly impossible for someone to comment on how smooth it is because the irregularities in the stone pillar itself would in all probability be greater than the width of the hole.
Not trying to impress anyone? Most people, for something really, really sharp, would limit it as monomolecular. It wouldn't get smaller than this because normal stuff is still made of atoms. If you're trying to say that it's Story-sharp it would be fine with me, but Planck-Length has actual objective implications that you are blissfully unaware of. Heck, the effects don't match that of a monomolecular blade either. Take a fucking carrot and make a clean break in it. You can then carefully put the pieces back together so you can't see any break. The only damn reason to put in Planck Length is to lend your claim a false sense of legimaticity.Now, quit simply saying that it's a Planck-Length blade and provide evidence. Or for that matter, STFU about Planck Lengths if you have no idea of it's implications. Who the hell are you trying to impress?I'm not trying to impress anyone. The sword does what the Rightful King needs it to; it cuts things. It doesn't need magic, because it has a Story, too. And its story is all about cutting things. Soft things, hard things, whatever it needs to to fulfill Carrot's Story.
