Equivalent exchange.

A theory brought up in Full Metal Alchemist and a motif of the show. I thought it was interesting and realized it is 100% true. Equivalent exchnge is the theory that in order to gain something, something of equal value must be given. When you excercise, whatever your goal is, you build faster if you work harder.
Do not mistake this with karma. Karma says if you do something good, you will recieve something good. Equivalent exchange says in order to get something, you must give something of equal value.

[Scott]

This seems vague and without enough context

There is a law in physics that says energy/matter cannot be destroyed at but only converted from one form to another (with matter being a form of energy according to E = MC²). In that way, this idea of "equivalent exchange" might be somewhat grounded in reality. But it is hard to see how that applies in any way to 'giving' and 'getting' even considering how vague those words are. In a practical sense, even energy is always lost as a result of the inefficiency of machines. For instance, you have to give a lot more energy in calories and peddling when riding a bike than is outputted in the movement of you and the bike to your destination. In other senses, such laws of physics seem even more irrelevant and the speculation of "equivalent exchange" seems even more clearly false. For instance, the economy is full of instances where someone gets scammed out of losses and profits and people getting way or more or way less than what they bargained for.

Though the previous poster has a point, the point at which its is destroyed is not the basis of the law. It is stating that if you were to use a certain amount of one element, you can only transform it into something of equal value, and this point was laid out several times, and even more often questioned. that is why they brought in something like "the philosophers stone". This stone was originally said to turn stone to gold, but they twisted it into a breaking point of the equivalent exchange, bringing Scott's point to light. for it could create anything out of thin air without want or need of anything in exchange of creating it. And eventually, it turned back on itself in the end, and sometimes in the middle stating that nothing can be worth the sacrifice of human lives, though all around them was war and hatred and bloodshed. So the law isn't really what it is, more of a guideline for people to realize that with great power can come great pride, from pride can come great greed, from greed can come great gluttony, from gluttony can come great lust, from lust can come great wrath, and so on.

It sounds like "reap what you sow" whatever you put in you'll get out.

Simply put, does this law govern every single event? It is a bit like Newton's theory that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

A good question is what's the difference between Newton's law and equivalent exchange?

A good question is what's the difference between Newton's law and equivalent exchange?

Newton's law applies to instant events. Meaning, if I push you, you will immediatley start to fall, I might break my hands, something very fast. But, say you lose a loved one. Thus is very tragic, and you have lost. But there are many things that you gain from this. It could be as deep as gaining the knkwledge of how to handle death, or something as shallow as having more room in your house. That's equivalent exchange.

Simply put, does this law govern every single event? It is a bit like Newton's theory that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Certainly not.
And something the OP is missing is the issue of purpose.
For what purpose should one give equal value?
And then, by what means would such a "law"/"moral" be efficacious?

In addition, "value" is relative. Your value ontology determines value for yourself, but not to others.
One should not generally exchange for equal value to themselves. Why bother with an uncertain product if there is nothing to gain? One would merely increase the complexity of his life and waste time better spent else where.

Have a plan and increase the probability of your plan, else do nothing but maintain it.

Have a plan and increase the probability of your plan, else do nothing but maintain it.

Right there is a perfect example of how this "guide" can be used. It's more of a moral guide but can still give its own sense of inspiration. Which again is also relative.

Have a plan and increase the probability of your plan, else do nothing but maintain it.

Right there is a perfect example of how this "guide" can be used. It's more of a moral guide but can still give its own sense of inspiration. Which again is also relative.

Equivalent exchange is not a guide or a moral code. If true, then it is a law of nature.

Equivalent exchange is not a guide or a moral code. If true, then it is a law of nature.

Precisely my meaning.

-- Updated March 10th, 2012, 9:01 pm to add the following --

Equivalent exchange is not a guide or a moral code. If true, then it is a law of nature.

Precisely my meaning.

A theory brought up in Full Metal Alchemist and a motif of the show. I thought it was interesting and realized it is 100% true. Equivalent exchnge is the theory that in order to gain something, something of equal value must be given. When you excercise, whatever your goal is, you build faster if you work harder.
Do not mistake this with karma. Karma says if you do something good, you will recieve something good. Equivalent exchange says in order to get something, you must give something of equal value.

I find off about the theory not so much the show, is that there appears to be no real measure for what something of "equal value" constitutes. Yes, it's true that the harder you work the faster you build muscle which creates the premise that Muscle Gained is equal to Effort by Time (MG=ExT). But what about steroids? Is that one, quite costly, injection hve equal value to the work one would put in over time at the gym? Wouldn't that give money and resources a higher value than effort and time?

Another example, knowledge. It is often made out to be powerful and high cost (ask any college student), yet from one institution of thought to another there is a different dollar amount assign to the amount of knowledge you are recieving. What makes Harvard's knowledge cost more than Yale's? And who is to say that what you pay is equal in value to what you receive?

You don't nesscesarily get only one thing of equal value. You could get a couple of things from an over-priced education that, when combined, equal the value of your money, and effort. But as you stated, there is no way for us to measure equivelancy. That would probably be either left to some diety, or just always happen because that's how it's supposed to.

That would probably be either left to some diety, or just always happen because that's how it's supposed to.

That being who? In FMA the alchemist serve as a sort of pseudo-god, manipulating elements and energy, even people at tiime.

That would probably be either left to some diety, or just always happen because that's how it's supposed to.

That being who? In FMA the alchemist serve as a sort of pseudo-god, manipulating elements and energy, even people at tiime.

It didn't specify, but I would guess that in FMA, The Truth over-saw all of the transmutations, and every other event to make sure what was put into anything was also taken away from it, and vice-versa.