Trying to beat the rush of the MTF contest! <.< Thanks to Decibelle for feedback.
SCP-2321 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-2321
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-2321.
Dug it quite a bit, +1. I was glad to see that the title of the piece confirmed what I thought the message fragment was trying to say.
Quick question:
Preliminary reports suggest that while restoring the structure of AI 21025, its functionality remains beyond our capacity to replicate.
Are there supposed to be some additional words such as "is considered possible in the long-term" just before the comma? Seems like something's missing.
The future English spelling feels pretty unlikely to me, but it all works for the skip. Seems odd that the guy didn't do more testing to confirm the anomalies, like getting tons of bees near 28989
Well, his primary concern was with testing the equipment, that is confirming the presence or absence of anomalies in subjects. What those anomalies ultimately are is outside his purview.
And as for the future English, as long as it sells "this is from the future", it's done its job. :) But if they gave me control of the English language, I'd standardize the hell out of it I would, I would
I don't understand why this thing is an SCP. If the working item was classified as an Anomalous Item, why would they use a slot for the remains of it? It doesn't seem to have any properties that would require SCP classification.
My biggest gripe though is the fact that it took the researcher too long to realize that the item might be creating the anomalies rather than detecting them, and that they simply ignored it. Seems really stupid to go with the lowest probable cause and ignore the most sensible cause. Mostly here
Machine says she's comprised of 35% fungal rhizomes, mostly in the left leg. How did that get missed during physicals?
Answer, it didn't. At this point I find it really hard to believe they wouldn't think of the possibility. Hell, I assumed it created anomalies myself after the second D-class was tested positive. It's not like the idea is completely out of place really, there are plenty of items that cause anomalies on other things, rather than be anomalous themselves.
Also, this sentence here
I 21025 was destroyed during classification testing (see addenda), but enough information was uncovered to identify it as a Class-2 Temporal Paradox, created approximately ███ years after its discovery on ██/██/20██.
Is it saying that the Paradox was created after the item was destroyed? Or that the item itself was created after its discovery? I'm having some trouble understanding what the sentence is trying to say.
The item is the paradox, because it exists before it was created (ie, it is from the future).
- It was discovered on ██/██/20██.
- It will be created in approximately ███ years from now.
- some event will send it back to some undetermined point in time prior to ██/██/20██.
- It will then be discovered on ██/██/20██.
Paradox.
On the "Does it make them or is it finding them?" question, you can't know for sure. The one who required a large swarm of bees to activate suggests that they could have unknowingly triggered an activation of a dormant anomaly in the fungi d-class at any time since she was last given a physical. Its probably creating anomalies- but it also detects existing ones, like the linguist who presumably turned out to be the child of an anomaly. And you can't prove it isn't just detecting well hidden anomalies. And that way lies madness.
How do they know it was created in the future? I'm rereading it and I can't see anything suggesting it save for that particular sentence.
Actually, you could make several tests to see if it creates anomalies or not. Take several subjects and do a thorough physical test on them, as detailed as possible, then use the machine and compare where the anomaly is to the test results. If it wasn't there in the original tests, then it was created by the item. Obviously, they're gonna need to do this several time until they get something as obvious as the fungi bit, but it's not impossible. It just really kills my suspension of disbelief that A. Everyone supposedly has an anomaly of some sort, and that B. The researcher is too quick on going with that hypothesis rather than do any testing to try to prove it or disprove it.
It's so small, yet so deep. I love the simplicity of this, and the concept you've put across.
+1
Can someone spoil what the last note is trying to say? I can't figure it out.
…that the title TL333s gave it on the list page is meant to be the full inscription.
I am with Dr Solo - except that my word is 'intriguing' instead of 'interesting' ;>.
I like temporal paradoxes. Are we in the middle of a stable loop here? The reverse engineering is going to create the machine in ███ years, it will be sent back in time, is going to fuck up the Foundation and Dr MC, who will destroy the machine (?), allowing people to reverse-engineer it, etc.?
This would be an upvote. But…
DID Dr MC destroy the machine? Why? How? Was it deliberate or accidental?
I cannot wrap my mind around the properties of the anomaly: temporal paradox + er… anomaly detection (did it create or discover anomalies?).
This would be a downvote. What links the two?
Or did it create anomalies that it plucked out of the future? Yeah. That would be a good way to link temporal and anomaly…
This would get an upvote.
And finally.
FOO
UZ IT
How the hell can we figure this out without the title?
OK, UZ IT is fairly clear. But FOO?
Oh wait, Canaryfarmer guessed it before checking the title.
…
Upvote.
The anomaly the machine found/placed in/activated in Dr. Chaudhuri caused him to detonate. So yes, he did destroy the machine. As for what it's doing in the present day, there are any number of reasons it could have been sent back. Or sent itself back. Or gotten time-shifted in the course of doing something else. The Foundation and the world in which it exists are very unpredictable things, after all.
The anomaly the machine found/placed in/activated in Dr. Chaudhuri caused him to detonate.
Yep. Thought so. ;>
But what about the link between temporal paradox and anomaly detection, TL333s? Oh, wait. The future Foundation built a prototype to detect anomalies. It didn't work. But before they could destroy it, it went back into the past… Have I got it right?
ETA oh shit, didn't see this before…
Temporal Divison
(at the very end) should be division!
C'est le francais, hon hon! Thanks for the catch. :B And yeah, you've got the right idea.
Ooooooh, another French speaker! These people are EVERYWHERE! ;>
There are more French speakers in Paraguay than in Lyons.
Maybe. I don't know.
Um, shouldn't this be neutralized? It's all pieces now.
Anyway, I greatly appreciated the settings where you can't be sure whether the device makes anomaly, or the anomalies ARE hidden in everything. Feels somewhat even philosophical. At first I was like "Gosh it's making the anomaly you idiot stop experimenting with it!" but there's no evidence to support it. Nice.
I initially started this as a Neutralized, but then I realized, it's still a demonstrable temporal anomaly, so it needs to be Safe.
/forum/t-1595139/scp-2321#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
