Talk:Electromagnetism

Name

Would anyone object to calling this power "Electromagnetism"? This covers both throwing lightning and levitation (repelling himself via the Earth's electromagnetic field). It's also a bit easier to say. --Ted C 09:42, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

• I don't like the name "Electrical manipulation". I thought "Electrokinesis " was better. Any idea why it was changed? --Norman 09:44, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
  • I personally don't like "electrokinesis" either; it's not even commonly used in the comic book industry. "Electrical manipulation" is just a huge mouthful, though. --Ted C 09:52, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
    • I guess you're right. It should be called "Electromagnetic Manipulation" or something like that. Electricity and magnetism are two faces of the same coin. --Densus 10:07, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
      • That's part of what I wanted to get at with "Electromagnetism", but I was hoping to keep it to one word. --Ted C 10:08, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
        • A lot of powers here have 2 words. Why this should be any different? --Densus 10:22, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
          • Because "Electromagnetic manipulation" is at least as much of a mouthful as "Electrical manipulation". I'd like something that rolls of the tongue better, is all. --Ted C 10:29, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
            • Then, just like you've suggested, use just "Electromagnetism". --Densus 10:45, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
              • But "Electromagnetism" doesn't describe a power, just a property of rocks. Heroe!(talk) (contribs) ^{Random Page!} 10:47, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                • Why can't it serve as a description? To me, it indicates the ability to generate and/or control electromagnetic forces. --Ted C 11:53, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                • "Electromagnetic induction"?? --Densus 10:55, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                  • I like electrokinesis best, cause that's what it is clearly supposed to be. It's not altering the flow of electricity already in the environment. Jets of electricity are clearly emitted only from his hands. Those jets can also be used to propel him upwards in a kind of flight, just like with Brenan of MutantX. That said, if electrokinesis isn't wanted, I'd go for induced electromagnetism. It is a form of electric manipulation, so that's fine too.--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:20, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                    • What you just said is exactly why it isn't "electrokinesis". Electrokinesis would be the ability to move or control electricity. It says nothing about the ability to generate it.--Hardvice (talk) 15:06, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                      • I disagree cause he's not an electricity man. It would be electricity generation if it was supposed to encompass his whole body. But that only happens after he's been disabled by Niki. Also, note that for Sylar's freezing power we are using cryokinesis, but the Sylar/Peter fight in FYG implies that Sylar can make ice jets/beams with this power (no external water required).--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                        • "Cryokinesis" is an established (if slightly misleading) term. "Electrokinesis" isn't, and literally just means "electricity movement". The point is that he creates electricity; he doesn't merely control it. Think Pyro from the X-Men comics: he could control fire, but needed a flamethrower to produce it. Generation and control can be two separate powers, and a name that only speaks to control is misleading.--Hardvice (talk) 16:29, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                    • Ted, you're right, "electromagnetism" is the best I've heard yet. It includes not only the dude's ability to manipulate electricity but to propel himself through the air. There's nothing wrong with having one word as a power (have you seen our list of powers?), especially one that is a good description: "The scary guy has the power of electromagnetism." — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
                      • Electromagnetism is fine, though the reason I suggested induced/enhanced prefix is cause we all have that ability, though to a very small degree. ie. the electricity bolts in a plasma ball follow the static electricity in your hand; rub a balloon on your hair and it might stick to the wall; get close to an old tv and you might cause static noise in the reception, etc.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
• I'm probably alone here, but I still don't like this name. To me, it doesn't really describe a power, just a natural force. If he can create electricity, maybe something like "electrical generation"? --Heroe!(talk) (contribs) 15:04, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Well, I'm with you there Heroe. I wanted to put induced or enhanced in front of the term, but the decision was not to.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
    • Electromagnetic generation? --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 15:33, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Well, I did see one somewhere else -- not sure if it was wikipedia or some other site -- that I find quite acceptable: "Bioelectricity". --Ted C 15:39, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
    • Oh, I like that. This is what I got from Wikipedia: "Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity) refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields produced by living cells, tissues or organisms." That sounds pretty precise, imo. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 15:41, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
      • Adding a bio prefix or generation suffix doesn't change the fact that each of us has this power to a very small degree, but we can't control it. That's why I think it should add enhanced/induced prefix.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:50, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
        • I hate to use those prefixes unless they're essential. "Induced radioactivity" requires it simply because that's the label in Chandra's file cabinet. "Enhanced strength" requires it because just "Strength" doesn't imply anything special when used in reference to human beings. "Bioelectricity" or "Electromagnetism" implies an unusual ability, because humans generally don't have any special bioelectric or electromagnetic properties. Best to avoid "enhancing" or "inducing" things until there's no other option, I think. --Ted C 15:58, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
      • I still fixate on an "aesthetic" name: something that will sound good if you say it out loud. I find "bioelectricity" to be superior to "bioelectromagnetism" (and just "electromagnetism", too, actually) in that regard. I suspect that "bioelectricity" will also be a more familiar term to readers, as it's a term that has real-life uses (with respect to electric eels and such). I dare say it can cover all the same phenomena as "bioelectromagnetism" and have a nicer ring to it. --Ted C 15:51, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
      • What does everyone else think of "bioelectricity"? --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 16:43, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
        • I prefer electromagnetism. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
          • I also prefer electromagnetism over bioelectricity. Already stated what I think the name should be.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

Re: Ted's power

Shouldn't we list Ted's power of induced radioactivity as a form of electromagnetism? I mean he did create an EMP using it...EMP = electromagnetic pulse.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:44, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

• Bump--MiamiVolts (talk) 14:57, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Perhaps a See Also, but we want to be careful about implying that there's a definite connection between the two powers. Ted can generate radiation, and that radiation includes energy in the electromagnetic spectrum. Personally, the name of this power is beginning to bug me. While I think "electromagnetism" is a good name for the Agent's power, I'm beginning to doubt how well it fits with Peter's or the patient's ability. All they've ever displayed is the ability to generate electricity, and both Peter and the crew have referred to the effect of his ability as "lightning" on multiple occasions, which makes me think that "electromagnetism" is too broad. I really think, from what we've seen, that both Peter and the patient are limited to projecting arcs or blasts or balls of electricity (something Ted didn't do, though he may have been able to) and not, for example, hovering around like the Agent.--Hardvice (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
    • On electromagnetism: I concur. We haven't seen any magnetic effects from Peter, just the sparkies. -- FissionChips 18:09, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
    • On Ted's EMP: I'm about to show, not only my age, but my nerdly roots. In TSR's Marvel RPG terms, Ted pulled off a "Power Stunt" with his induced radioactivity. It's using a power in a way it hasn't been used before. The first thing I thought of in the scene with Bennet walking Ted through causing an EMP was "Well, that was 100 Karma points well spent." I know the show is not Marvel or the RPG, but that may provide some vocabulary for the talking. -- FissionChips 18:09, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
      • LOL. That's exactly the first thing I thought of, too!--Hardvice (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Nice! I may just have to brush the dust off my books and throw some more old school TSR lingo around here. FEATS! Talents! Power Ranks! The beloved Universal Table! -- FissionChips 19:08, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
          • I've been tempted to turn to the Ultimate Powers Book for ideas from time to time during these naming debates.--Hardvice (talk) 23:49, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Heh. Karma is still used on many RPG's, it's old but definately not outdated. But the EMP scene reminded me of MutantX and how each of the character's powers evolved to a higher level over time, potentially collapsing their DNA if it got too far (the virus?). ie. Brennan developed the ability to fly using electromagnetism, Emma got the ability to do mental blasting that could knock people out, etc.
          Ted could control the spectrum of the "electromagnetic" particles he emitted, which is why he could do an EMP. I'm hoping Peter gets to do some other forms of Ted's power to confirm my theory. Maybe ultraviolet or infrared?
          My opinion is that if we change the name for Peter's power to just lightning, then we should change the name of Au Co's power to just plant growth. We are keeping it broader than exhibited just in case a new aspect of the power emerges. I would rather do the reverse, but that's not what Help:Naming conventions, which Hardvice wrote, suggests for us to do.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
          • The thing is, the EMP aspect of Ted's power is totally consistent (because nuclear explosions do cause EMPs), so I don't think it's necessarily the case that Ted has full access to the whole EM spectrum. The fact is that he could use his radioactive powers to produce an effect which is actually produced by radioactive explosions. I doubt Ted could shoot lightning--that seems well outside the boundaries of his abilities. At best, these two powers overlap somewhat.--Hardvice (talk) 23:53, 12 October 2007 (EDT)