We have been down this road before in 2009.
It’s ǝɹıɟ.
The more I’ve thought about your answer, the more I’ve realized: you’re right.
And it takes an unusual mind to reverse engineer a physical process – well done.
The opposite of fire is…hire.
I remember an old SF paperback with futuristic, computer controlled live action RPG play.* In the mythos that the players had to work with, within their game, fire had been stolen from the gods in ancient times, but the thief had left behind the anti-fire. When they broke into the sacred cave, there was a circular trench, half of which was filled with sticks and larger pieces of wood. A heat and light producing fire burned along the wood, leaving ash behind. A dark and cold anti-fire followed it, turning the ash back into unburned wood.
According to the game script, it was a resource for them to use against zombies, later. Unfortunately, they used it on something else first and had to just hack and slash when the zombies showed.
- This was old enough to be before: LARPing, holodecks on Trek, cell phones, the internet, and VHS machines.
Maybe it was like an angry fire, who was running to go fight in another fire, away from the first fire.
Cold fire?
Leave the Dutch out of this.
Regards,
Shodan
I once wrote a poem that ended with lines on this very subject!
…the hard ways we learn
that the opposite of fire
is not water, not ice,
but not-fire.
And I called the chapbook The Opposite of Fire.
Endothermic reaction.
I recall the novel Dream Park had that; I don’t recall if they had a better name for it than “anti-fire”. IIRC it was stored in a circle of firewood, with real fire and black antifire burning each other’s ashes; the real fire burning the wood to ashes, and the anti-fire turning the ashes back to wood.
<reads thread further>
Oops, Yllaria beat me to it, except they didn’t recall the title.
I don’t know the answer to OP, but am happy to respond with a poem I like.
[QUOTE=Robert Frost]
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
[/QUOTE]
Fire is oxidation; so clearly the opposite of fire is reduction. Maybe that’s the way to reduce this argument to its most basic terms.
Or possibly acidic.
Is fire always an oxidation? If so, would the opposite be a reduction?
I don’t think so. Chlorine and fluorine can also support combustion.
However, that’s still an oxidation reaction. This annoyed me very much when I learned about it, but oxidation is most generally defined as the loss of electrons during a chemical reaction. Doesn’t necessarily have to involve oxygen.
Redox - Wikipedia says:
I was never great with Chemistry, but isn’t the opposite of fire a reduction?
I applaud you for creative thinking and having a great font.
Dream Park. VHSs did exist, but the rest you are dead right about.