elementals

I think lightning is more plausible as the fifth element than metal. Metal is technically a derivative of Earth, while lightning doesn't originate from any of the other four

Xeno-the-Hedgehog wrote:

I think lightning is more plausible as the fifth element than metal. Metal is technically a derivative of Earth, while lightning doesn't originate from any of the other four

Please read this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning

It has been proved lightening can be generated by atmospheric perturbations (wind, humidity, and atmospheric pressure)

That's why it often say lightening and wind beyond to the same element they call air

perhaps "electricity" would be more appropriate?

Xeno-the-Hedgehog wrote:

perhaps "electricity" would be more appropriate?

The problem is the fact you can create electricity from any kind of elements

true, but isn't it also true that every substance known to man is composed of the same (positive and negative charged) subatomic particles, regardless of its physical or chemical properties?

Xeno-the-Hedgehog wrote:

true, but isn't it also true that every substance known to man is composed of the same (positive and negative charged) subatomic particles, regardless of its physical or chemical properties?

That's why I say it's a question of point of view.

All the law of element are not peferct because it doesn't explain everything.

In the first version of the element used by the alchemist the fifth element is the most difficult to define.

All this thing are just theory but the problem its theory doesn't reflect the reality. Because there is always an unknown factor.

It explain many points but not everything, by example we don't know why we are not using 100% of our brain, our own body is riddle for ourselves