There must be a spoon

CodeWorks

if there was no spoon then how did she bend it?

Gattsuru

The potential didn't bend a spoon, but herself.

The real question is that : if there is no spoon, why is there soup?

CodeWorks

bent her self? She thinks she is a spoon?

**zeroone506**

First, it was Spoon Boy and not Spoon Girl ")

Second, neither the spoon nor the soup exist because it's all simulated.

What I don't understand is, why it's portrayed this way: bending himself works on the relation principle - whether the spoon is bent or yourself, the relation between both subjects is bent anyway. However, that would only work for the bender's personal perception: he sees the spoon being bent, in fact it's him, or his perception, being bent. But the spoon bending is visible for the environment, as the knives Neo made fly in his hands were... sensible for the part of the environment that has been slaughtered with them.

Or is it a hint that when Neo or another anomaly manipulates the Matrix, they actually only bend the perceptions (clients) of the programs around? Did the Chateau guards maybe only die from those knives because they imagined them in Neo's hands? And those died from the remaining weapons actually of the weapons? I'm confused..

Gattsuru

I think it makes more sense if you think too much about the "Why not use cows" problem.

If you assume that part of the Matrix is included in every individual's brain (using them, effectively, as RAM), and then read the initial text of the Spoon Boy's script, it pretty much falls together.

SPOON BOY: Your spoon does not bend because it is just that, a spoon. Mine bends because there is no spoon, just my mind. Link yourself to the spoon. Become the spoon and bend yourself.

One of the few things from the initial script that I feel would have been worth saving.

The ability to manipulate the Matrix occurs because the user's mind is the Matrix, or at least a small section of it.

By taking objects (which are only code) into your mind, well, anyone with control of their own mind can alter those objects. Same for physical laws, or events (the more fatalistic ones already existing inside the Matrix, as program a few yards down the script).

**ZippyTheSquirrel**

Ah, yes, be the spoon. Excellent insight, Gattsuru.

If you are the spoon, and the spoon a part of yourself, if you bend the spoon, then you are bending the spoon as if it were another appendage. That's how Neo was able to do all that other jazz. He IS the bullets, therefore, he can make them stop at his will.

Now, the real noodle-cooking part is when Neo did his magic tricks in The Real.

Gattsuru

I dunno if there's a single good explanation for that. The best I can come up with is a bit assumption heavy.

The Sentinels had to be wireless and very simple intellectually - that makes sense, since they seem to take orders from Smith in the first movie (and, noticably, only Smith, the other agents require him to order the strike).

Also, Neo had to be wireless-equipped. That's a big leap of faith, but it does make sense. The Machines don't know that he'd be able to meet with the Architect, or even reach the Matrix when they're busy trying to destroy Zion. Hell, Neo almost didn't make it : if it weren't for a rather religious member of the Council bugging the heck out of Locke, he'd have been facing down a swarm of Sentinels with an unpowered ship, just like the rest of them.

So, either as an aspect of being the One, he's got a wireless connection, or it was intentionally planted in potentials by the Machines. The Oracle refers to this as a link to the Source, which explain why Neo ends up between the Source and the Matrix, along with programs trying to flee the Machine World.

If he could activate that link (and, what better trigger could you think of than "about to be killed by Sentinels" for a way to avoid being killed with the rest of Zion), all he'd have to do is mimic Smith's earlier commands, and then corrupt them. A power surge to the sector, or a nice flood of packets or a few invalid packets from the Matrix would have some interesting results.

**TimeMaker**

CodeWorks wrote:
if there was no spoon then how did she bend it?

You mean that was a chick?!

**10011**

TimeMaker wrote:

CodeWorks wrote:
if there was no spoon then how did she bend it?

You mean that was a chick?!

No, he was referring to SpoonBoy as zeroone pointed out several posts down from there. Somebody didn't read the entire 7 posts in the thread. SMILEY

McShy

Gattsuru wrote:

The real question is that : if there is no spoon, why is there soup?

Rofl! That's what i want to know.:smileyvery-happy:

**TimeMaker**

10011 wrote:

TimeMaker wrote:

CodeWorks wrote:
if there was no spoon then how did she bend it?

You mean that was a chick?!

No, he was referring to SpoonBoy as zeroone pointed out several posts down from there. Somebody didn't read the entire 7 posts in the thread.

Well you guys were screwing with my beliefs. I couldn't read farther like that.

**ZippyTheSquirrel**

There is no spooning.

*fears a NoSpoon coming Monday. Oh well.*