Talk:Alchemy

There is an article about transmutation circles here, and the section here, both have a considerable amount of information. Should we make the separate article a main article and link to it or merge the TC article with this one? Kiadony 08:21, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I think it'd be best to merge the TC article into the alchemy article and just have Transmutation Circle redirect to this section. I just wonder if we can add more pictures to the TC section of this article without making it look cluttered or if the section needs more than one picture.CorbeauKarasu 12:36, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if the section is long enough (if we include as much info as we can) it won't look too bad with several images. And we can make smaller thumbnails. Kiadony 15:42, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

The pages used to be separate until they were merged. Though there may admittedly be a case for separating out the Human Transmutation section into its own page (though I also feel it would be best included here) The concept of Transmutation Circles is far too central (pun?) to Alchemy as to be separated into its own thing. CorbeauKarasu 10:34, November 16, 2010 (UTC)

Reversal Alchemy?
I was wondering, since Ed gave up his "gate" to give Al his body back, is it possible to reverse it to get his gate back?

In other words, can someone reverse the process to get back there gate if they lost it.? 24.211.167.146 22:17, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

No, it's permament. The only reason Ed was able to come back to the mortal plane was because he and Al were interlinked and he used Al's Gate. Mustang even says that he couldn't do it, since if he destroyed his Gate (only one), he'd never be able to get back. Tommy-Vercetti 23:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it. Since each person's Gate can be thought of as part of them (the part that allows them to use alchemy), creating one could likely be considered a form of human transmutation. At least, that's my opinion. Of course, there is probably no canon answer, since it has no part in the story. Even if Arakawa has an answer, it's not canon unless she releases it to the public.--Fullmetal Fan 23:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Since the box was limited
The 2003 anime establishes that the power to use alchemy comes from dead humans in "our" world, so, since humans repopulate like crazy (just like in real life) technically there is no limit to the surplus of available energy, so thus, it originally negates the manga in which "concentrated human souls power alchemy".

The manga knew what it was doing, and the 2003 series copied it until it diverged and then just pulled some stupid plot point out which negated the entire concept itself, that the alchemic energy is never ending.

In the manga, even the non-stone alchemy came from Father (who was essentially a stone) so I think we should keep that the 2003 series negates the Exchange rule entirely. Remember in the manga, the only kind of alchemy that isn't Philosopher Stone related is Alkahestry, which isn't the same thing. Tommy-Vercetti 19:09, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

Red vs Blue
I get the concept entirely, but in the manga, in reality, Amestrian "Alchemy" is a total ploy set up by Father and the Homunculi, using Father for its energy source. Well, if that's the case, as a living stone himself, then technically shouldn't ALL Amestrian Alchemy then be red as well?

Only Alkahestry, which actually uses Earth's energy should be blue I thought. Tommy-Vercetti 18:44, July 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * Still, there *is* such difference in the anime, I mean, they do use those colours and we should note that. Of course, technically all of Amestrian alchemy is stone-powered, but they still made the lightnings blue, to avoid spoilers maybe? --kiadony 06:17, July 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure the blue is to avoid spoilers, if I had seen red lightning without knowing the reason I wouldn't think "the lightning is red because of the philosopher's stone", I'd think "red is just the colour they chose". Maybe someone else would look deeper into it and think about the reason for the colour, but I for one wouldn't. Fullmetal Fan 06:52, July 24, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, or maybe they simply didn't know about Father powering the alchemy of Amestris. I don't know whether Arakawa revealed it to them in advance or not. Also, I believe that the colour scheme was reused from the 2003 anime, where it actually worked. In the 2009 anime however, it could be considered a plot hole. --kiadony 07:06, July 24, 2011 (UTC)

I still can't call it a plothole. If you think about it another way, even though all the Alchemy is coming from Father, essentially a living Stone, regular alchemists are still bound by Equivelant Exchange, which would make no sense if they were using a stone. So maybe Father filters his power down so it's just a collection of available energy, rather than each alchemist literally using a stone themselves. Like, when you have a literal stone in-hand, you're using its power directly. But with Father, it's just a like a reservoir of energy that collected from him and it's not particularly directly from the Stone. So then it makes sense that it would be blue in that regard. That's just what I think. Tommy-Vercetti 17:46, July 24, 2011 (UTC)

In the end of FMA: Brotherhood. When Ed sacrifices his gate. Does Ed only lose the ability of the use of Alchemy. Or does everyone in the world of FMA lose the ability of the use of Alchemy? I'm confused ^ ~ ^

It's only Edward who loses his ability because he sacrificed it personally. Everyone else who could use it before still can. Also, please remember to sign your talk page entries with four tildes (~). CorbeauKarasu 02:01, August 30, 2011 (UTC)