Arthur Petrelli is probably not dead dead, but will most likely stay Claire dead unitl the bullet comes out. I mean, did Kring or the other writers state that he's perma-dead? Or is this just fan speculation. Because Adam has the same healing factor as claire, and since both have died many, many times, don'tcha think that Artie Petrelli can also? But once again this is under the speculation that the Word of God didn't say it to the Contrary.

Considering he took a bullet to the skull and we watched his stolen powers leave his body... he's dead-dead. (Peter retained his powers even when he was temporarily dead)

You sure that wasn't The Light? In that case, does that mean that Hiro got his powers back, or Maya, or even Adam (his ashes :P). That could open up a whole bunch of possibilities, of returning heroes.

Yes.
1: He already put The Light into the formula.
2: The "mist" was identical to what you saw when he stole powers.


Considering the fact that Peter was right there and didn't get his powers back? No.

1: No, he already used the light on the formula. He still had it. After all, if he could only use it once it would be pretty useless really, and Ishi would have most likely already used it.

2: I don't think it was. It was kinda similar, but then again both the catalyst and his power drain thing involved glowing so that's to be expected.

Even ignoring that, I doubt it was his powers. None of the other characters have ever "let go" of their powers upon death. Why would Arthur? It was definitely the catalyst.

As far as I can tell, the reason Arthur is dead dead while, say, Sylar is Claire dead is because they wanted one dead permently and not the other.

They hid it in Ishi. They were looking for someone to give it to. She hadn't already used it.



What other character has died as opposed to temporarily dying who had stolen powers that we've seen on the show? None.

More importantly, we saw the effect when Ishi handed the Light to Hiro, and when Arthur put it in the vat. Neither more than vaguely resemble what we saw.
On the other hand, the light shown when he stole powers was almost identical.

Where did they say that? More importantly, if she hadn't used it, how did Nathan and Tracy get their abilities? They've been pretty adamant about their being only one source of the catalyst.


That's true, but plenty have held powers and died, none of them had that happen when dead. I don't see why someone having multiple powers would be any different. In fact, Peter died in the future so it seems like there's no difference at all.


I disagree. Yeah, they looked similar but they weren't the same.

They decided not to use the formula anymore- Nathan and Tracy already had been born and given powers. (At best, Hiro is not quite 30. Nathan's in his 40s. Tracy is in her mid-30s.)

When did they tell us...what? That the catalyst was the missing part of the formula? How about back when Arthur first started looking for it.


1: Nobody who has died has held stolen powers. They all had the power that was their birthright.
2: Yes, Peter died. But we didn't see it happen. He went down, and our Peter ran.

...Umm, I think you've missed the point. The catalyst would've had to been used on the formula that gave them their powers, so it would've already been used. Since we know its already been used, we know that it's reuseable.


Actually, I was talking about them hiding it in Ishi. I know that the catalyst is the missing part.

In fact I'm not sure where you got that from, considering that we weren't talking about what the catalyst does.


You're ignoring one of my points, which is that there wouldn't be any difference, or at least that we have no reason to beleive there would be any, between stolen abilities and non-stolen ones, at least in regard to whether they would glow when they die or not.

Not ignoring your point. Finding your point to be completely pointless. There's a difference.

The ability is shown to be acquired in a completely new manner- a glow as he leaches it.

And you want to argue that because we've never seen a glow when someone died, it can't be the powers that glowed when he stole them?

What? I never said anything to do with what happens when he steals powers. I'm talking about what happened when he died. Personally I just think the glow we see when he's stealing powers is a visual effect the writers use so it's obvious that he's actually stealing someone's powers(and not just hugging them really tightly or something) and I don't really put much more thought into the process beyond that. It could be the powers themselves or the process he uses to take them but it's really irrelevant to me. He's got the powers either way.

My arguement is that if other people with powers don't glow when they're dead, then I find it unreasonable to assume that powers were the cause of Arthurs glowing when he died. Even if there's a glow when he takes them, that doesn't really affect how his body reacts when he's dead.

Exactly. There's two questions here really:

1. To be consistent with Claire's healing ability, should Arthur Petrelli be dead?
2. Is he dead (aka gone from the show)?

To the first one, I personally don't think it makes much sense for him to be permanently dead. Why couldn't the bullet be removed from his brain, and then he could regenerate? Same with Claire's stick and Peter's piece of glass? Furthermore, Sylar should be dead dead---not because of the piece of glass (which as we've seen is probably not an issue), but because you'd think they'd have the brains to do a more effective method of killing. Like chop his head off.


But the first question doesn't really matter, does it? It doesn't matter whether we think it mythologically or biologically makes sense for Arthur to be dead dead vs. Claire dead. It only matters whether the writers think his character has outlived its usefulness. And in my opinion they probably do think that Arthur's story arc is over. Now that Nathan is the new villian, he isn't needed anymore as a baddie. And all the Petrellis had a nice oppurtunity to explore family issues this volume, so he's sorta done with that too. Besides, he got a send off where he was killed by both Peter and Sylar. You can't beat that! In general, I feel like the more attention given to a death (and the better send off it was) the more likely it is to be permanent. For example, spoilers seem to indicate that Meredith (who had that dramatic death with the whole HRG wrestling with shooting her thing, Claire crying, self-sacrifice etc.) is dead dead. While Doyle, whose death was short and not particularly meaningful (Sylar didn't even take his power) appears to NOT be permanently dead. So, I'm thinking Arthur's really gone for good, even if it doesn't seem to make sense with the whole healing thing.

Absolutely.
A bullet does far more damage to the brain tissue, in particular the "magic spot", then any kind of sharp object would.

But wouldn't a train do more than a bullet, if it ran over someone's head? And Claire was ready to jump in front of a train. And wouldn't a nuclear explosion do more than either? And if Claire can regrow a toe, why can't Arthur regrow some brain tissue? I'm not saying necessarily that the writers are being inconsistent about the rules, I'm just saying the rules don't make much sense.

And besides, you do have to admit that which characters are permanently dead and which aren't isn't just related to the injuries sustained (how the hell is Nathan alive after those shots if, according to them, he just got lucky vs. Peter healed him)? It depends on whether there's more to be done with the character. So that's why arthur's dead IMO.

It would... assuming it actually hit her. It didn't.


Sure. Assuming the Regen was in the middle of it.
Since Daphne got the edge of the blast, it's only reasonable to assume she was dragging a couple others with her.
And, in S1, they made it clear that the Source of the blast is uninjured by the blast. That means S1 Peter and IABD Sylar are safe.


Seriously?
That has to be the weakest argument yet.
The source of the power, or at least the controlling element, is in the brain. It's the reason the Haitian can be argued (successfully) to have 1 ability.
Destroy that element, and nothing's gonna happen.


To you. I would argue that not only have they been consistent, but the rules, which are fairly standard throughout the genre, make sense within the universe.

Yeesh. Did you know it's possible to argue with people without belittling them, Synch? It's even possible to point out where they're wrong without acting as if they are idiots. I think you know a lot about Heroes and probably understand the way the universe works better than a lot of us (and yes, I'll go ahead and put myself in that category). But I have noticed that you tend to annoy and patronize people much more than is necessary to get your point across in your responses. And I have to say, this rubs me the wrong way and makes me less likely to agree with what you are saying, even if you are right. Basically, all I'm saying is that if you want people to listen to you, you have to do more than just be right...you have to explain well, and that means somewhat respectfully.

Anyway, I suppose most of your explanations make sense, but about the train thing. I know the train didn't hit her, but it seemed implied that she would have healed if it had. Is this wrong? If the train ran over her head and crushed her skull, would she have died? I feel like that would cause more damage than a bullet. Maybe Claire overestimates her abilities?

Also, you think that healers would die in a nuclear explosion if they are not the source? I am not saying I disagree with you, just looking for clarification.

I would hardly say it's reasonable to assume that this happened, considering that they didn't mention it happening, and that she just barely reached her husband before dying in his arms. Saying that she took a detour to drop her friend off
doesn't really make much sense if she's trying to get back to her husband before she dies.

In fact, if she did take Claire with her then why on earth didn't she get some blood somehow before running off to her husband?



But even if it's a shard in the brain as opposed to a bullet, the brain is still damaged. I don't really see how she can repair one and not the other, if she can do it despite the part of the brain being necessary for the healing being damaged. And considering how fragile the brain is I wouldn't think it'd need much damage before RCR would stop working.



Well, yes. It's quite obvious it's his opinion.



I would argue that they, at the very least, aren't being that clear in regards to what people with RCR can regenerate from. Regardless of how it actually works, it seems to me like it mostly works based on how the plot needs it to.

The one difference between every other regen's death and Arthur's is the Haitian. We must assume that if he is present when a regen dies it's game over for them (happened to FPete too). Decapitation also sounds (from Adam) the end of it for regens too. Something lodged in the brain, when removed, in all cases except when the Haitian is around, is recoverable.




And regarding the glow from Arthur's body when he died, I'm pretty sure that was the light. To me the visual effect was the same, orangey tint, where as Arthur's power stealing was more blue. Plus, the writers confirmed the light/catalyst went when Arthur died, rather than when he used it on the incomplete formula. It would be rather absurd to have a catalyst you can only use once, and wouldn't make sense given Nathan/Tracy got powers.



Which other character has died whilst having the light? None.

I'm not saying it couldn't be the powers returning, but GreayMoomba's point holds a lot of merit.

Either way, Synch you are rather stubborn and rude, and whilst a lot of your points are valid, so are other peoples, theres no need to call their suggestions pointless, especially considering they might actually be closer to the truth than you. I'm not trying to dig at you, but seriously, lighten up and open your mind a bit more

Peace

Who said anything about "dropping her friend off"?
If she had been running solo, there's no rational explanation for how even the edge of the blast caught her.
Having her burdened by hauling 2 people out of the immediate blast zone answers that question.
They probably didn't say it happened because they assumed people would figure it out on their own. Should they have at least mentioned it? Probably.


Because a shard seperates tissue, damaging very little of it as it goes in. When you remove it, the two sides press together.
A bullet doesn't do that- it obliterates tissue. (Take a look at a bullet scar as opposed to a knife scar someday. Notice the severity of damage in a bullet scar.)
The sides aren't going to reconnect once a bullet has smashed and torn it's way through.


No.
Because the same people who told us that Decapitation works also told us that a bullet to the "sweet spot" works permanently.
If you believe one, you have to believe the other.


It was part of the formula.
It was hidden inside a person.
Once it was put back into the formula, it no longer makes sense to argue that it still resides inside the person.
And the writers didn't say when the catalyst was dead. Just that it was dead.


I didn't say it was powers returning. I was pointing out that it made more sense for it to be him releasing his stolen powers than it did for it to be that catalyst- especially as we'd already seen him release the catalyst into the formula.


Stubborn? Sure.
Rude? Not so much. Hell, I even edited before I posted to make it sound less rude.

Thats a complete fabrication! They assumed people would work it out on their own? Daphne decided to run around saving Peter and Claire from an A-bomb, but forgets about Knox (her partner), but in heat of the moment (pun intended) she was slowed down and got burnt in the back? The only reason she even got back is because the writers wanted to make it more dramatic and give Matt the task of placing Daphne on the good guy path.

Granted, we are led to believe Daphne's powers are so fast that, if she can move when Hiro stops time, she could out run an explosion (although I have no clue how fast an explosion might be). Having said that, Hiro stopped time before he stabbed Ando and Daphne was frozen. Contradictory, no? Perhaps it was not the actual explosion, but given the fact it was a nuclear blast, maybe she could not out run the bombardment of radiation and that caused her death? (just trying to find a mid-way point here!)



No.
Yes she mentioned the back of the head, but that was with the Haitian around. Claire mentions the back of the head "deactivates/shuts me down" or whatever, not kill. Whether a bullet does more damage than a sharp or blunt weapon is a moot point, if the area of the brain that gives powers is destroyed, why does a bullet kill instead? The only explanation is that the glass only partially damages the brain, where as the bullet makes the entire thing mush. Definitely plausible, but the writers really need to make it clear on that.

Also, the bullet was fired by telekinesis rather than a gun, much like the glass shard that got Peter, which I'm sure reduced its actual power somewhat, especially given the short distance at which it had to gain velocity. (F=M*A)




It's a catalyst, it is not part of the formula. A catalyst, by definition, is something that speeds up or induces a reaction between two chemicals, molecules, atoms etc. And what happens when they run out of that batch of formula? The catalyst just appears magically again in someone? And Tracy/Nathan both were given powers from the formula, therefore, the catalyst MUST have been used before, and by your logic would have left Ichi/whoever.



Why does it make more sense that it was the stolen powers being released? It seems far more logical to be the light, given it was the center of the previous episode and current, AND had the same effect/coloring of leaving Arthur's body as it did leave Ichi/enter Hiro.

Regardless, it makes absolutely no difference to anything and seems like a rather pointless thing to be having a heated discussion about!

peace

So you'd rather believe, despite clear evidence otherwise, that she couldn't outrun the explosion if she was by herself?


No. Because she can only move in the frozen moment if she's using her ability. (Don't forget, she was frozen, while running, until Hiro came up to her.)


No..Angela simply said back of the head. (I'm not even discussing anything S3 related here.) She never made any hint that there was an extra requirement.


The writers shouldn't need to. It's common sense. A bullet does more damage than a blade or a shard. It's the nature of the element.


And yet we were repeatedly told that the catalyst was the missing element of the formula. Thus, it was part of the formula.


No. You're missing the point entirely.
The catalyst was removed from the formula and hidden in Hiro's mother. This was all done well after the formula was used on Nathan and the triplets.


Because we've been given less than no indication that the Light is a multi-use, single-donor, thing. In fact, everything we've seen says that once you release it, it's gone.
But we have seen an ethereal glow when he steals powers.

*sigh*

Well I try one more time to explain why I think you aren't 100% correct, then I give up and will leave you to it.

Could Daphne outrun an explosion? Probably! did she? No. Was it because she carting Peter and Claire about, neglecting Knox, despite there being not even the slgihtest bit of hint from the script, acting or visually? No. She either was to slow (shock!) or was caught off-guard by Sylar. I would rather believe Daphne died a hero by saving Claire and Peter, but theres just no hint at that at all.

Angela KNEW the Haitian would be there with Peter against Arthur, hell, it was the only way he would be able to even pull the trigger against his father. did she NEED to mention, O by the way, make sure the Haitian is around? No, because Peter would have been in the ****er if he wasn't with him. (Future Peter even got shot in the chest and not the head and died when the Haitian was about! And he definately had Claire's power because he had come into contact with present Claire.)

As for the bullet, you complete ignored what I said about it not being fired from the gun, but from TK, same as the glass shard. The writers NEED to explain why a bullet that goes straight through the head can kill but not a sharp object. Surely if they both damage the "sweet spot" it doesnt matter how pointy, metallic, or fast an object is! I'm not saying a bullet wouldn't do more damage, I'm saying surely being stabbed in the same spot would have the exact same effect if it destroyed/damaged the same section?

And if I have to explain what a catalyst is again I will pull my hair out! The catalyst is not PART of the serum, it is the catalyst for it! It gets the reactions going and is not altered in any way itself. That is what a catalyst is by defintion, something that enhances a reaction but does not undergo a reaction itself.

At the end of the day the light/formula don't mean **** now so there is no point arguing over it.

No hint at all?
Sure...there was nothing explicitly stated, but there shouldn't have needed to be.
Daphne: Runs nearly the speed of light. (As evidenced by the fact that she can move normally in Hiro's nearly-frozen moment.)
Daphne: Injured by an explosion that moves considerably slower than that speed.
Peter&Claire: Alive

I would say it was more than hinted at by those facts.


1: As I've stated, at least twice now, the comment about the bullet to the "sweet spot" being death is not something they mentioned only this season. It's been stated repeatedly throughout the series, by the same people (specifically Angela) who said that decap would also work as a permanent death. This was first mentioned in S1 when the Haitian was nowhere around and completely uninvolved in the specific events.

2: Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. I'm sorry, but you are. Do you know what happens to something soft when you pull a sharp object out? The edges (all the way down) sort of join back together. When you take a bullet to the same material, the edges can't meet. A bladed object separates tissue. A bullet destroys it. Thus, a bullet is death where a blade is interruption.



I really don't care how many times you explain it. The show says you are wrong. At least twice they mentioned that the catalyst was the missing part of the formula.

I have four things to say:

1. I seriously doubt that the writers intended us to infer that Daphne was carting other people around when she was running, much less particular regens like Peter and Claire. It seems like an enormous leap to make just from the fact that she wasn't fast enough. They would have put some indication on the show or at least in a graphic novel if they wanted everyone to pick up on that. Maybe Daphne was taken by surprise and the explosion got her back before she started running. And if you disagree with this opinion, I'd like to hear the reason why. Not involving the words "weakest argument yet".

2. When am I going to have the oppurtunity to view a bullet scar as opposed to a knife scar?

3. I agree with Sayonara on the catalyst. It is necessary for the person carrying the catalyst to expose the catalyst to the formula, and it will then change it. In chemistry, a catalyst is not involved in the chemical equation. For example, in photosynthesis, carbon dioxide and water are transformed into glucose and oxygen. Every carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen molecule that was in the carbon dioxide and water goes into the glucose and oxygen. This reaction will not happen without sunlight. Sunlight is the catalyst. But sunlight does not contribute any atoms; it is not chemically part of the formula. Furthermore, once the sunlight has acted on the plant doing the photosynthesis, there isn't any less sunlight. It isn't "taken" by the chemical reaction. All catalysts work in this way, that was just the example I could think of off the top of my head. So, I believe that the catalyst in Heroes, "The Light", also works in this way. In other words, you must expose the formula to the light, and then the proper reaction will take place. But the light does not "go into" the formula. Furthermore, practically speaking the Light would work much better this way, because you don't have to keep taking it in and out of formulas. It needs to reside in a person, but that person could use it on several different batches on formula.

We can put a question in the drop box if you really care. I have to say though, the story of the catalyst is over, so I don't really give a damn how it works anymore.

4. Rudeness is in the ear of listener. What is considered rude depends on the context and the opinion of society (eg staring at strangers is rude in the US and not in France). Since we are on an online forum here, the "society" is the other posters. So, if we are offended by your manner, that means you were rude, whether that was your intention or not. And I have noticed that several people, not just me, have commented that your replies are condescending or rude. It's good that you edit your posts (I shudder at the thought of what you originally wrote), but maybe you need to edit them more. Or maybe you should just try to be in a better mood when you are on 9th wonders.

Considering they have repeatedly shown her dragging people along with her...I'd say that's exactly what they wanted us to infer.


Google it. I'm not linking because the images tend to be a bit disgusting.


And yet the show itself has repeatedly said the catalyst was part of it- not just an "additive" but the missing piece of the formula.

Well, look at what happened. Most of us did NOT infer that she was dragging people with her. If they really wanted us to think that, they would have made it clearer. Like showed her running with other people, at least for a couple seconds. They can't expect everyone to jump to the same conclusion if they make it vague. If they thought we'd all get it, they were wrong. And I have faith they know what they're doing.

Well, when they said the catalyst was the "missing piece", I think they meant it more figuratively. A missing piece as in the expression, meaning that it was something important in making the formula work that they had forgotten. And a catalyst is part of the process, so it's a missing piece in terms of the process. It's just not chemically part of the formula meaning it can be reused. I think calling it a missing piece is not inconsistent with it being a catalyst. It would be more inconsistent if they called it a catalyst and it didn't work the way catalysts do. They should have given it a different name if they meant it to work the way you think it does, ie not the way a catalyst does.

That post was not rude, though, or at least much much better. So thank you! And I am being sincere when I say this. I really appreciate it.

1. You know the speed of a nuclear explosion? Gamma radiation from a nuke travels at the speed of light, or there abouts, it's perfectly feasable she was injured from being bombarded by that.

2. As I stated before, Daphne's top speed/acceleration is never made clear. Hiro froze time, Daphne could move. Hiro froze time agian, Daphne could move. You can argue she didn't "activate" her power, but it must surely be active all the time, as when the eclipse came, she could not use her legs.



Exaclty. Considering they have repeatedly SHOWN Daphne dragging people along with her. They SHOW the audience when she does it. Film and TV writers never expect the audience to fill in those sort of details without showing/dropping a hint. I have studied TV and Films academically and this is a golden rule, assume the audience does not know what happens off screen, and thus refer to it in some form (unless obviously it's meant to be a mystery!).



Firstly, when was this mentioned in season 1? I'm not saying it hasn't been said, I'm just curious because I don't remember it and I'm interested.

If the bladed launched by TK object can seperate the tissue and cause it to stop working, why does it heal itself if the bladed object is removed? Because the tissue starts touching itself again? Whilst feasable, it seems silly that a bullet launched from TK would inherently turn the brain to mush which prevents it from regenerating. I would be willing to accept your arguement if it werent for:

The fact fPeter was killed by a shot to the chest and died only whilst the Haitian was around. Don't ignore this point please like you have in your previous posts! And he definately had regen as he had contact with present Claire. No bullet in the head. No sharp object in the head. The only constant in both deaths : Haitian. Unless Claire has a magic bullet that bounced around Peter's body and into his brain.





Science says your wrong. Heaven forbid it!b

Allow my friend wikipedia to explain:

"Catalysis is the process in which the rate of a chemical reaction is increased by means of a chemical substance known as a catalyst. Unlike other reagents that participate in the chemical reaction, a catalyst is not consumed. Thus, the catalyst may participate in multiple chemical transformations, although in practice catalysts are secondary processes"

Whats this? A catalyst may participate in MULTIPLE chemcial transformations?!?!?!
A catalyst is not consumed?!?!

Obviously science got it wrong. What were those crazy scientists thinking when they came up with this?!

Or was it the writers? Those silly writers who use (vaguely) scientific words but don't understand the true meaning of them?

Or perhaps you got it wrong? No, thats just plain ridiculous...

Pardon my sarcasm.

So...when they don't show it, it's not possible?

Interesting.


Peter said it to Claire. And then, in S2, Angela said it to Matt. I'm sure it's been mentioned more, but those are the most obvious.


Considering that the bullet launched by TK still managed to smash through the skull and tear through the head in such a way as to leave Arthur on the floor & bleeding from the back of the skull... I'd say the bullet did exactly what I described.


I haven't ignored it. As I stated before, I found it irrelevant.
Especially since the show has made it crystal clear, repeatedly, that a bullet to the brain is a guaranteed kill.


And this show cares about science when exactly? The show didn't say that the Light was an additive, a little something extra. The show said it was part of the formula.

Y'know what...I'm done.
I've been accused of being rude, condescending, even insulting. Nothing I've said in here even approaches the art form of your post.
Don't reply, you won't see me in here again.

I have a point that's actually on the topic of Arthur being permanently dead. If he's bleeding from the back of the head, then obviously the bullet has left his skull. Meaning it's not in his brain anymore. Which means that there's nothing inside his brain obstructing the healing process. And still Arthur didn't heal.

I don't want to comment in depth on whether the bullet managed to hit the "magic spot" from the front of the head. Obviously it did. Sometimes it doesn't. Noah healed from a shot to the eye in s2. (And none of that BS about he got the magic blood later, the magic blood should have the same limitations, or more, than the healing ability within the host).

EVEN THOUGH Angela, Victoria, Adam, and whoever have stated that a shot to the back of the head is the kill shot, st apparently doesn't matter if someone gets shot from the front or the back if: 1) the bullet hits the right spot, or 2) the bullet does enough damage that the brain is unable to repair itself. *Notice that's an "or" statement. I don't know which is true, but one of them must be.

Just wanted to state that the light we saw leaving Arthur was "The Light" and not the other powers. This was confirmed by the writers. And Arthur only used "The Light" on the formula. He did not put it in the formula.

As for him being dead dead. Yes he is dead dead. Because the writers want him dead dead.

How about a rough broken branch that was in Claire's head? Did you forget about that one? and don't say that when you pull it out that the edges are nice and smooth cause that's crap. Arthur will not be returning but going by the show he should not be dead if the bullet passed through.

Didn't forget it at all. Again, it was irrelevant.

1: The stick that went into her brain wasn't very rough from the looks of it. Remarkably smooth actually.
2: It didn't go into the "sweet" spot at all. In fact, it entered the brain close to the ear. Based on this I would be hard pressed to suggest it impacted any element of the brain that would control involuntary reactions. (Her healing is entirely involuntary as she has no control over it.) Once the stick was removed, life was restored to the rest of the body.

it's been stated several times that a bullet to the head takes out someone who can regenerate. adam monroe has even been quoted as saying " there is no coming back from that one" in reference to a bullet to the head. that's how arthur petrelli can be dead dead.

Actually Adam was referring to a shotgun hit to the head which would decimate the entire head.




And of course the stick hit the sweet spot or it would not have killed her. The only way to kill her is to hit the sweet spot. Once the stick was removed from the sweet spot then she was able to heal. Also the stick went in pretty far. So by the same logic when the bullet is removed he should be alive. But he wont be only because the writers do not want him to be.

Oh and it does not matter how smooth the stick was. It was pretty good size in diameter and so when it went in it would have pushed and torn everything in its path destroying the sweet spot until it was removed.

No. The only way to keep them dead is to hit the sweet spot. They can obviously be killed, at least temporarily, in other ways. (Peter has died at least twice now without even having the brain hit. As has Claire.)

when have they died without hitting the sweet spot when they had their powers? During the eclipse and when the Haitian is around does not count.

All of their powers come from the same spot in the brain no matter what power they have. That has already been explained by Mohinder.

Peter jumped off a building.
Claire repeatedly suicided.
Claire getting stabbed by the stick.
Peter getting stabbed by the glass. (In both cases, it was toward the base of the skull, and along one side. Never where the "sweet spot" was indicated to be.)
Adam getting murdered in Japan.


And your point would be...what, precisely?
I'm not getting what you're trying to say here. It's never been argued that the powers don't come from the same spot in the brain. The argument is simply that said "sweet" spot has never been impacted before.

So what makes more sense, Synch? That the catalyst is dead because it was used, or that it's dead because the host is dead?

All i needed to know. I actually never liked him anyway. Killing not only Adam and Utusu (Both were in my "Living Favorite's list) but also taking away hiro's powers. I'm glad he's kaputskis.

I think I agree with this. I believe that Adam's molecules are still crawling across the floor. He will regenerate. And hell, Arthur's only been dead a few episodes. In the Heroes-verse, that's like a catnap.

How is that relevant? The answer to the question is the same whether it's dead because Arthur's dead or because the serum's destroyed.

The person asked if it was because Arthur is dead, and they answered promptly. The serum wasn't brought up.

The answer says nothing about the host body. The answer is "Catalyst is dead." That's it. No more, no less.

It's answering the "Is the catalyst alive" question, nothing else. Notice that they don't touch any of the rest of the question.

I have a general question that specifically applies here: do you believe whatever the people connected to the show featured in BTE or similar outlets says becomes instant, un-alterable canon as soon as it emits from their mouths? What is the measuring standard for 9th Wonders disciple acceptance?

Generally if they don't show it = it doesn't happen, unless stated by dialog/or GN (if you take them as canon)






The shard of glass was launched by TK and entered the back of Peter's skull and left him bleeding (admittedly not gushing) from the back of his head.



It is relevant, because the two regen deaths happened with the Haitian around. And neither recovered. I am prepared to accept that you are right on this but too me it does seem a little silly that a sharp object that penetrates the skull and brain has some innane inability to destory the "sweet spot" where as a smaller object like a bullet is certain destruction.



Of course this isn't a show that is trying to defend everything with science, but the word catalyst has a very particular meaning, whether you use it in science or not.



Yes, I will admit I was rude, and I do apologize. It saddens me that whilst I was frustrtaed I resorted to using a big spoon of sarcasm :( Despite how heated this debate has got, I really have enjoyed being able to discuss our very different views. And I think it is important, to me at least, to hear what and how other people have interpreted the show and particular events. I believe that the show (whether intentionally or not!) leaves alot of unanswered questions and possible plot holes, and it's really great to have someone thinking differently to me so we can all reach our own conclusion of some sort

Again, many apologies, I was out of line (plus I used sarcasm, the lowest form of wit!)

Peace

But they have shown that Daphne carries people with her.
They've also told us that destroying the sweet spot, up to and including removal of the head, is certain death for a regen.
Further, it can only be assumed that an explosion destroying an entire city is more than enough to, at the least, destroy the "sweet spot".

All else being equal, the simplest answer is usually the correct one. In this case, the simplest answer is that Daphne hauled Peter & Claire out of the explosion, which was the reason she wasn't quite fast enough.


Again, it is not relevant because it has nothing to do with the argument. I'm pointing out that it has been repeatedly stated, when no assumption of the Haitian's presence can even be considered, that a bullet to the sweet spot is certain death.
That means, the Haitian has nothing to do with the deaths.


Really? Is it that hard to to understand? Do me a favor... take a piece of clay and form it into a ball. Holding lightly to the sides, jab a sharp knife in and pull it out. Watch the edges press back together.
Now, on the same piece of clay, use a power drill. The edges don't come back together even with slight pressure.

More importantly, each injury we have seen completely missed the area that has been indicated as the important point. The stick went in much nearer the left ear, and the glass seems to have entered roughly the same spot. In both cases, clearly not the important location.


My point, however, is that the show implies nothing about it being an additive. They make it quite clear that they intend it to be considered part of the formula- twice they pointed out that it was the missing piece, the hidden piece, of the formula.

When peter fell off the building he did not die. And Claire was attempting suicide, she never actually died. Claire has only died 2 times. And peter 1 time. Claire died during the eclipse and when the stick went into her sweet spot. And Peter has only died when the glass went into his sweet spot. Oh and Adam did not die in Japan. He was unconscious. People with the power of regeneration cannot die unless you separate them from their "sweet spot" or as we have seen have something jammed into it.


As for the location of the sweet spot. The only thing we know is it is in the back of the head and you pulling out a real brain chart means nothing as the sweet spot is not a real thing so that chart is totally irrelevant.

This is total speculation. How do you know it was not because the Haitian was there? Assumptions are best left unsaid unless you state them in a manner where it is your opinion. Though you state everything as fact.



Brain matter and clay are quite different things.


They entered in the area of the sweet spot from what we have been told.





The very definition of the word "catalyst" says that is not used up in the formula only that is it needed for the reaction to work. Unless you don't know what a catalyst is then there is no need to explain it further.

Rewatch S1 and S2. Every single time they talk about a permanent kill, the Haitian is not only not around, but not even hinted at.


Not in general consistency.


And yet we've been told nothing regarding it. I was pointing out what was clearly seen on the screen, not something some fans have suggested.


I fully understand what a catalyst is, in real life.
However, you still haven't dealt with the fact that on the show we are told that it is a part of the formula.
Arthur didn't suggest it was an addition to the formula. He called it the missing part of the formula.