Time Travel and the Time-Turner: Questions and Ponderance v2

Greetings chums,

This thread is for all your questions relating to time travel. If you have difficulty getting your head around the concepts involving time travel (as I do, so I try not to think about it too much) please seek clarification here.

I'm afraid I'm useless at explaining or understanding time travel -- it's all a bit theoretical for my liking and my mind doesn't work well in the abstract. As far as I'm concerned Harry and Hermione have been trapped in a cycle of going backwards and forwards in time since PoA. ;)

Version one of this thread can be found here (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=16898).

Have fun!

Important Note:

Machiavelli, in their infinite wisdom, has provided a brief summary as to how, precisely, time travel worked in PoA:

Short version follows:

The idea is that the time travel episode in PoA doesn't actually change anything. You have to accept that premise in order to understand the chain of events. Remember that nothing they experience before the time travel event takes place is contradicted by anything they do. Right?

So... we all know what happens with Hagrid's hut, the rat, the tree, the shack, the dementors, the patronus... Harry and Hermione end up in the hospital wing. Dumbledore tells them to use the time turner, tells them vaguely what they can do and emphasizes they must not be seen. Hermione turns the time turner and she and Harry find themselves three hours back in time. Keep in mind that although an observer would see two Harrys and two Hermiones, they are different people because one set is three hours older than the other set - right?

Harry and Hermione then go about events from their new perspective, saving Buckbeak, waiting in the forest, and finally Harry stepping out and saving his own and Sirius' lives with his patronus charm. They fly buckbeak up, save Sirius and race back to the hospital wing arriving at the door just after the moment when the time turner took effect - and remember they are now three hours older than the Harry and Hermione who just left. They experience the whole thing as a linear journey even though some of that journey was retracing their steps.

Please consider this first before posting any questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Machiavelli
Okay, I can think of one other solution that would work sort of. If you limited time travel to a psychological state - where you could impose your own mind upon an earlier version of yourself, and then also assume that it's a one way trip and you can't return to the future, because the future you came from no longer exists. In fact, I'll go totally out there and claim that deja vu is evidence of this phenomenon! But that's probably because it's really really late...



Now that's definately a theory I have never heard before. I'm interested to know how and why you thought that. Can you elaborate?Actually I was trying to figure out why the heck Deja vu even exists, and what could explain it. It's almost always about something really trivial, and as soon as you recognize what's happening the sensation disappears. I was playing around with it being an inadvertant form of time travel... I had a lot of fun thinking about it actually and trying to figure out how it could be possible. I finally refined it down only a psychological thing, and somehow an interposition of minds... only backwards (although deja vu makes it look like you've looked ahead somehow)... it's complex but it was interesting trying to think through it!

Every conscious moment you exist, you're making memories. Scientists explain Deja vu by saying that your brain puts a memory into the long term section rather than the short term, making it seem that it has happened before. It is also the reason it is so brief. Only that memory is put in the wrong place and the proceeding ones are not.

Scientists are wrong quite a bit but it sounds good enough to me.

I hope that helped :)

Every conscious moment you exist, you're making memories. Scientists explain Deja vu by saying that your brain puts a memory into the long term section rather than the short term, making it seem that it has happened before. It is also the reason it is so brief. Only that memory is put in the wrong place and the proceeding ones are not.

Scientists are wrong quite a bit but it sounds good enough to me.

I hope that helped :)Hey - not saying I believed my theory! I threw it out as something funny, and HermioneLuna asked for clarification. Actually, I've read that before... somewhere... and then read this really funny vitipurative reply by another scientist who rubbished their ideas and was very rude. I love science! Let's say that my theory is very very improbable, but it is possible!

Other scientists theorize that it is a misfiring of the nerves across the synapses in your brain. They think that it fires twice instead of once making you re-live/feel/see an experience.

As far as I'm concerned Harry and Hermione have been trapped in a cycle of going backwards and forwards in time since PoA.

That usually happens when you think of time as linear. Like a time line seperate from the actions in the universe. The current thought of time in quantum mechanics states that everything in the past/present/future occurs at the same time. We only experience the present because that is the position we are in. I don't think this is making sense. But I understand it, if that helps.

We should probably wrench this back to discussing time-travel in the HP books though before the ever-watchful (and wonderful naturally) mods slap some wrists for off-topic posting!

Last version we were mostly talking about the time travel issue in PoA - and I think we had finally gotten everyone to the point where they thought they understood... but I don't know that we all thought we understood the same way!

So ...

Getting the thread back online ...

Could it be possible,that Dumbledore, is the wise man he prevails to be, because he keeps going back to warn himself of certain happenings?

And the thing that was said about the reason for going back not exisiting anymore - well I think in Jo's timetravel theory this is not possible. Certain things cannot be changed I reckon - it seems to me, as if certain things kind of change for the person reliving his past. Let me explain what I mean a bit further.

I live my life in the present, and certain things happen, I make a choice to do something and that turns out to have been a wrong choice - If I should travel back in time and try and prevent what has happened, perhaps that is where fate comes into it - something like the me from the future being the very thing that makes me make the wrong choice inthe first place.

I beleive that if Harry would have gone back in the veil room to try and prevent Sirius from falling through the veil - of course he would have been wearing his cloak, so that noone sees him. Well he positions himself on the podestal thing where the veil is and waits there as to be able to push Siruis back when he falls -so the fight gets going Harry's watching and in the end he somehow gets in Sirius way, who trips and falls through the veil anyway.

I beleive the things that happened in the past of the one travelling back are sort of predestined to happen anyway - call it fate or Schicksal as we call it in Germany. Kind of what-will-be-will-be theory, but in this sense with a as-it-already-was twist. Otherwise the wizards knowing of Timetravel could have gone back in time and killed Voldy's mother before Voldy was even born -
ending in Harry Potter being ONE Book at not a 7 band series!

But who knows - perhaps they did try - and thats why she died shortly after the birth - leaving Voldy with no looooving mother, rejected from his fatehr and that's why he turned out the bad, power hungry, evil guy he is! *just kidding on that one - Really!*

greetings from germany
nano

Someone (sorry... can't remember and give credit) pointed out that Hermione did not use her time-turner to go and do that charms class after Harry and Ron told her she had missed it. Clearly she doesn't think she can change something that has already happened.

Please forgive me if some already asked this (and if you'll point me there, I'll be glad to delete this post & go read somewhere else). Is time travel (time turner or some other method) the way Dumbledore was able to be there on time for Harry's trial in OoTP?

Please forgive me if some already asked this (and if you'll point me there, I'll be glad to delete this post & go read somewhere else). Is time travel (time turner or some other method) the way Dumbledore was able to be there on time for Harry's trial in OoTP?Gee - I dunno! But the fact that he was, as Harry was, actually late makes me think no. But don't sweat asking questions - that's the way all the fun discussions get started! And don't take my word for it... anyone else have an opinion?

(although deja vu makes it look like you've looked ahead somehow)... it's complex but it was interesting trying to think through it!In my experience, deja vu is a result of dreaming.

He might have been late to have made them not eventhink that he might have used a time turner - if he would have been on time they may have suspected him of doing so, but turning up late - now if you traveled back as not to miss something, then would you turn up late??? makes it less suspicious doesn't

nano
*wink*

In my experience, deja vu is a result of dreaming.Mine too, which is why I have a hard time with the misfiled neuron theory... doesn't equate with my personal experiences. Actually, I have a good friend who has extremely vivid deja vu (although it's rare) and can remember the night he dreamed it and all sorts of other details; so either it's more complex than we think, or he's completely mental. Either one is possible really...

Mine too, which is why I have a hard time with the misfiled neuron theory... doesn't equate with my personaly experiences. Actually, I have a good friend who has extremely vivid deja vu (although it's rare) and can remember the night he dreamed it and all sorts of other details; so either it's more complex than we think, or he's completely mental. Either one is possible really...
It's kind of circuitous since what you dream is based on what you have been thinking.

Gee - I dunno! But the fact that he was, as Harry was, actually late makes me think no.

He wasn't very late - he got there before they had really gotten started. Dumbledore has so much to do, it seemed odd to me that he would accidentally show up three hours early -- he doesn't have that much time to spare. As far as we know, the time turner takes you back in one hour increments. So maybe he had a choice of going back three hours and get there just a little late, or back four hours and wait around the MoM for most of an hour until it started?

wasn't there a theory to do with quantum physics and deja vus???

something like normally things can't be in two places at the same time, or a space cannot be filled with two objects at the same time. Wasn't it proved in quantum physics, that this theory might not withhold, and I remember on some weird programm someone saysing that deju vu experiences might even be proof of this theory???

not saying it is my personal opinion ... just chipping in ...

nano
*tea anyone? Machiavelli ... yours was with lemon right???*

In J.K. Rowling's world, is time linear? Because there are things that would seem to suggest that and things that would seem to dispute it. I, too, tend to find myself thinking that the time loop in Prisoner of Azkaban is still happening. I just can't seem to fathom how it isn't.

Mine too, which is why I have a hard time with the misfiled neuron theory... doesn't equate with my personaly experiences. Actually, I have a good friend who has extremely vivid deja vu (although it's rare) and can remember the night he dreamed it and all sorts of other details; so either it's more complex than we think, or he's completely mental. Either one is possible really...Last thought before someone opens a deja vu thread. :rolleyes: It seems like the extent and depth of the deja vu experience varies with the ability to remember dreams.

The end. :)

Someone (sorry... can't remember and give credit) pointed out that Hermione did not use her time-turner to go and do that charms class after Harry and Ron told her she had missed it. Clearly she doesn't think she can change something that has already happened.

well she knows the rules doesn't she, and Hermione being Hermione would probably only go back for the actual class time. I mean she would only go back for the exact time the thing was given to her for. When exactly did Ron/aHarry point out she had missed it? If it would have envolved going back for more thanjust for the lesson - would she have risked it???

nano

He wasn't very late - he got there before they had really gotten started. Dumbledore has so much to do, it seemed odd to me that he would accidentally show up three hours early -- he doesn't have that much time to spare. As far as we know, the time turner takes you back in one hour increments. So maybe he had a choice of going back three hours and get there just a little late, or back four hours and wait around the MoM for most of an hour until it started?I think it's more likely that this is yet one more example of Dumbledore keeping a very tight eye on Harry - I'd rather know how he knew to come then... he certainly doesn't come up with a tight cover story! But hey, time travel is possible too. The real reasons I'm not supporting it in this instance are: 1. I don't think JKR will over-use the time travel thing and 2. There's no real proof. Of course, like most good theories, there's no good proof against it either!



nano
*tea anyone? Machiavelli ... yours was with lemon right???*Lemon, exactly.

well she knows the rules doesn't she, and Hermione being Hermione would probably only go back for the actual class time. I mean she would only go back for the exact time the thing was given to her for. When exactly did Ron/aHarry point out she had missed it? If it would have envolved going back for more thanjust for the lesson - would she have risked it???

nanoNot sure, and I doubt it can be taken for proof either way since I think it was just a way of hinting about Hermione's strange abilities to attend multiple classes. I think they asked her about it right after Charms, but I don't really remember.

well she knows the rules doesn't she, and Hermione being Hermione would probably only go back for the actual class time. I mean she would only go back for the exact time the thing was given to her for. When exactly did Ron/aHarry point out she had missed it? If it would have envolved going back for more thanjust for the lesson - would she have risked it???

nano

They found her asleep in the Gyffindor common room just after Charms. They were confused as to why she missed the class because she was just behind Harry when he opened the door. I think the reason she didn't go back was because there would have actually have been three of her if she tried.

They found her asleep in the Gyffindor common room just after Charms. They were confused as to why she missed the class because she was just behind Harry when he opened the door. I think the reason she didn't go back was because there would have actually have been three of her if she tried.Woah... hold on, trying to work out the three of her thing... give me a minute....Got it. Okay, that's possibly why - although JKR doesn't say anything about time travel wearing you out or anything. Still, it would be one more added complication for poor Hermione wouldn't it! The other concept is that she's so over-worked that it simply didn't occur to her...

They found her asleep in the Gyffindor common room just after Charms. They were confused as to why she missed the class because she was just behind Harry when he opened the door. I think the reason she didn't go back was because there would have actually have been three of her if she tried.

Ron & Harry already knew she had missed the class. How could she then disappear and go back and go to class without explaining to them, which she couldn't because she promised not to tell anyone about the time turner? Hmmm, except that if she went back, she wouldn't have missed the class. I don't think anyone will ever solve the time travel paradox. :huh:

They found her asleep in the Gyffindor common room just after Charms. They were confused as to why she missed the class because she was just behind Harry when he opened the door. I think the reason she didn't go back was because there would have actually have been three of her if she tried.

I though the fact she dissappeard from behind Harry was because she went back to do the lesson that fell in the same period as the last one - so she must have just gone back to her room (to get her books maybe?) and fell asleep and forgot to show up at charms ... did she have to timetravel to do charms with something else also???

nano

I though the fact she dissappeard from behind Harry was because she went back to do the lesson that fell in the same period as the last one - so she must have just gone back to her room (to get her books maybe?) and fell asleep and forgot to show up at charms ... did she have to timetravel to do charms with something else also???

nanoI think she did - but I can't remember whether it was runes or arithmancy... I think runes?

she definitely had Arithmancy together with Care of magical creature lessons and Muggle studies to gether with Divination lessons

but it may well be exactly what HermioneLuna said - as Harry and ron knew she had missed it she was obviously not there, so regardless of her sticking to the rules or not - she couldn't changed the fact that she wasn't ther anyway - The way it works out Ithink you can only go back and do extra things that won't have an impact - oh no here we go again ...

nano
*gets out the biscuit tin - how wants some hob-knobs?? Richteas?? the good ones with chocolate coating!*

she definitely had Arithmancy together with Care of magical creature lessons and Muggle studies to gether with Divination lessons

but it may well be exactly what HermioneLuna said - as Harry and ron knew she had missed it she was obviously not there, so regardless of her sticking to the rules or not - she couldn't changed the fact that she wasn't ther anyway - The way it works out Ithink you can only go back and do extra things that won't have an impact - oh no here we go again ...

nano
*gets out the biscuit tin - how wants some hob-knobs?? Richteas?? the good ones with chocolate coating!*Thanks, but I'm not a huge sugar person. I'll just have a square of very good dark chocolate, but I'm willing to share it around!

Yeah, that's sort of what I started with, it seemed to show that once something definitely did (or didn't) happen, then you don't go mucking with it because you're getting yourself into problems.

not so sure now though ... it also says somewhere, that she has Divination together with Muggle Studies AND Arithmancy ...

nano
*grumbles and tries to find the bit where she dissapears before charms*

it might also be like I said in post #7 - that even if you try to change things that havent happened, then something (timeforce - jediforce *lol* - destiny) would make sure, that they still do happen, or that even your meddling things turn out to be the reason they happen - so when going back, things that have happened inevitabley WILL happen again no matter what you do to change that.

nano
*I've got some dark cooking chocolate in the fridge - sprinkle of chilli with that??*

nano
*I've got some dark cooking chocolate in the fridge - sprinkle of chilli with that??*Okay, now you're starting to scare me! I save my chili for curry, thanks! Just dry red wine, and a small bit of very dark chocolate, now that's the way to end the day!

See, if Hermione did go back and take charms, then Harry and Ron wouldn't have mentioned that she wasn't there - and we'd be back in paradox land again. I'm just going to have to decide that she knew she couldn't because of what they had told her and that's that. My proof? It's Hermione! If there were any way at all that she could have gotten that class in she would have. So there.

So ...

Do you think the creation of time turners has anything to dowiththat thing in the DoM (where that guys head got changed back to that of a baby and back again etc...)

As the time went in both directions there, does that mean that both directions of timetravel can be accomplished???

thoughts???

nano
*chilli and chocolate scare you ... you don't know what you are missing, hot chocholate with a pinch of chilli in it - yummy*

Some people think deja vu is part of the process of reincarnation. We have lived many times before, so some things remind us of a past life - like a shadow memory. Also, did you know that deja vu is most strongly connected to the sense of smell? I think that is why deja vu is so common in the fall, with the scent of woodsmoke, dried leaves, etc.

That is the extent of my knowledge of time. I have no theories and I'm afraid of some of the ones I read. :p I sincerely hope that time travel doesn't play a major role in future books, and I hope all the time turners were destroyed when the DOM was trashed in OotP. Please, God.

Now - who wants a Krispy Kreme chocolate doughnut? I have a whole box, and a new pot of coffee. :blush:

Some people think deja vu is part of the process of reincarnation. We have lived many times before, so some things remind us of a past life - like a shadow memory. Also, did you know that deja vu is most strongly connected to the sense of smell? I think that is why deja vu is so common in the fall, with the scent of woodsmoke, dried leaves, etc.

That is the extent of my knowledge of time. I have no theories and I'm afraid of some of the ones I read. :p I sincerely hope that time travel doesn't play a major role in future books, and I hope all the time turners were destroyed when the DOM was trashed in OotP. Please, God.

Now - who wants a Krispy Kreme chocolate doughnut? I have a whole box, and a new pot of coffee. :blush:

Hey SIP, here's a new one. We're in total agreement. :) I think I would be very upset if it all came back to time travel. My head is going to implode if I have to try to figure out one more time loop or anything of that nature.

If you have any doughnuts left, I'll take one. :)

Some people think deja vu is part of the process of reincarnation. We have lived many times before, so some things remind us of a past life - like a shadow memory. Also, did you know that deja vu is most strongly connected to the sense of smell? I think that is why deja vu is so common in the fall, with the scent of woodsmoke, dried leaves, etc.

That is the extent of my knowledge of time. I have no theories and I'm afraid of some of the ones I read. :p I sincerely hope that time travel doesn't play a major role in future books, and I hope all the time turners were destroyed when the DOM was trashed in OotP. Please, God.

Now - who wants a Krispy Kreme chocolate doughnut? I have a whole box, and a new pot of coffee. :blush:I had no idea there were so many deja vu theories running about! I can't remember one single one of mine that had to do with smell though... but I don't think I dream about smell at all... now there's something about me I know you were all dying to know!

Excellent! I hadn't realized there were so many anti-time travel folks kicking around. I feel less of a minority now. If I can just get you all to join me on the anti-polyjuice potion bandwagon too then we'll really be in business!

However, where does that leave this thread?

However, where does that leave this thread?
open with us waiting for the next person to come along and not understand the PoA Scene ...

I don't know wether I am a time theory fan or not, even though I do have that theory of my own regarding the propehcy and timetravel I do not know wether I would like it to turn out that way or not - I just like the brainjogging that comes from thinking about timetravel. But I can't really see a childrens book ending up with the major plot using timetravel - but saying that, perhaps that is why JKR keeps it simple ... but it would still need quite a bit of explanation for the kids ...

nano
*you got low fat doughnuts too? I've already had enough Cals with my biscuits*

I still don't understand something. If someone changes something in the past by time traveling, therefore unmaking the universe that they left, did they every really go back in time? After all, the reason they went back wouldn't exist anymore. And since there is only one timeline once something has been changed, then they would never go back even though they had.

I still don't understand something. If someone changes something in the past by time traveling, therefore unmaking the universe that they left, did they every really go back in time? After all, the reason they went back wouldn't exist anymore. And since there is only one timeline once something has been changed, then they would never go back even though they had.And the thread lives again!

Well, depends on if you mean HP universe or not! We had pretty much decided (and if I'm wrong, someone whack me with the Monty Python rubber chicken or something) that time travel as presented in HP in the PoA is extremely limited, and that in that scenario they didn't actually change anything. The impetus to go back came not from them but from and outsider, Dumbledore, who didn't tell them to change anything, but gave them enough hints that they could do what they needed to do.

However, in our universe, you'd have to imagine a whole slew of circumstances to protect the one travelling from paradox. I.E., that person is in a special space-time pocket that buffers them from the effects so they keep their memory of what has occured... multiple universes split off each time a change is made... that sort of thing.

If someone changes something in the past by time traveling,
I think that is the point that we have to understand in JKR's perception of timetravel in the books.

I think JKR uses the single-universe model of time, where going back in time only fulfills the present and future, rather than changing it.
click here (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=12063) for the rest
So you don't go back in the past to change anything, you go back to fulfill something that has already happened ....

I think if you would try to actually change something, then some kind of force would prevent you from doing so, or you would find out that your trying to change that event is actually what lead to it ...

nano

I think that is the point that we have to understand in JKR's perception of timetravel in the books.


So you don't go back in the past to change anything, you go back to fulfill something that has already happened ....

I think if you would try to actually change something, then some kind of force would prevent you from doing so, or you would find out that your trying to change that event is actually what lead to it ...

nano

You go back in time to make something that has already happened happen? Now I am completely confused. Can anyone explain this to me using language that you would use for someone who just doesn't get the concept? Because I really don't understand.

perhaps it helps to think of this kind of time travel in the following lines:

At a certain point in time Harry starts to exist twice. One of theese Harrys knows about the other and knows exactly what is going to happen to him and his surroundings. The other Harry knows nothing of the sort, not that the other Harry is there, and certainly not what is going to happen to him.

Now if the knowing Harry tries to change something - he just simply can't, because he already knows it happened that way. If he were to try and stop it, it would still happen, because he remembers it happened. So actually his trying to change that fact could well be the actual reason for it happening in the first place. If he would suceed in changing something, then he wouldn't have had to have changed it, wouldn't have gone back and that would then undo the going back bit all over again, so whatever happens. The event would still take place. And at some point in time it goes back to only one Harry with memory of living through the same piece of timeline twice! You just simply CANNOT change anything, only fullfill what has already happened!

Like the example going back to fix a chair that you tripped over. Perhaps you tripped over it because your other you tried to warn you that that would happen (by distracting you in some shape of form). whilst not looking the chair got in the way - presto. the other went back to change the event, and fulfilled it at the same time!

nano

You go back in time to make something that has already happened happen? Now I am completely confused. Can anyone explain this to me using language that you would use for someone who just doesn't get the concept? Because I really don't understand.It's all intention as far as I can see in PoA. Harry and Hermione know what they have to do, they just don't know how to make it happen. Of course, when they make the choice to go back in time Buckbeak has already been saved, and Harry has already cast his patronus. They don't know that they are the ones who have done these things so they go back with no intention of changing anything that they know themselves to have done. Notice that no one (aside from Harry at the lake) sees them when they are being Harry2 and Hermione2.

Now, if Harry had leapt out and grabbed Pettigrew or if he had snagged the cloak before Snape got there then we'd have a problem - and frankly I don't know what JKR would say would happen in that case because history definitely would have been changed. I'm not saying it's not possible to change things through time travel in the Potterverse - I'm just saying that JKR carefully made sure no one did!

Hermione Luna: I'm so glad we agree on something! Have two doughnuts!

I've decided if I could go back in time, I would go back to my senior year and get a make-over before my senior pictures were taken, lol. Of course, I'd have to get my "other self" out of the way - oh, gosh, that won't work.

Anyway, my stumbling block with this is the death of Buckbeak. He died, yet they were able to go back and save him. So how can the "already fulfilled" part happen if he is dead in one scenario and alive in the other scenario? Blah.

Maybe the death cannot be changed if you are human and have a soul. And that is why Harry can't go back and save Sirius Black. Or maybe, in the Sirius case, there are just too many variables, too many "what ifs" that would have to be changed, from Umbridge, to Kreacher, to Dumbledore, to Snape, to Hermione, to Sirius himself. And that is where Fate just takes over like an all-encompassing wave, or like God. Some things are just meant to be, and we can't change them. If magic could change all these things, witches and wizards would never lose a loved one, or be unhappy. But it is a fact that they have to accept certain rules just as all humans do.

The whole point about Voldemort is that he is cheating Death, and cheating Time, and it is unnatural.

Anyway, my stumbling block with this is the death of Buckbeak. He died, yet they were able to go back and save him. So how can the "already fulfilled" part happen if he is dead in one scenario and alive in the other scenario? Blah.
He never did die in the first scenario, please quote the part, where it is actally stated, that Buckbeak dies!!! You can't it is impossible. You hear the swoosh of the Axe and the axe hitting something.
There was a jumble of indistinct male voices, a silence and then without warning, the unmistakeable swish and thud of an axe
Hermione only assumes "They did it!"

The trio never looked back the *first* time did they? then they heard Hagrid howling, and thought he was crying because of the execution.
Then, behind them, they heard a wild howling. 'Hagrid,' Harry muttered.Without thinking about what he was doing, he made to turn back, but both Ron and Hermione seized his arms.
'We can't,' said Ron, who was paper white. 'He'll be in worse trouble if they know we've been to see him ...'
The future Harry and Hermione also hear these sounds.
There was a swishing noise and the thud of an axe. the executioner seemed to have swung it into the fence in anger. and then came the howling, and this time they could hear Hagrid's words through his sobs.
'Gone! Gone! Bless his little beak, he's gone! Musta pulled himself free! Beaky, yeh clever boy!' [Emphasis mine]
But there they are explained. The executioner hitting the axe into the fence, was what they had earlier mistaken for the actual chopping off of Buckbeaks head, but they were mistaken. Hagrids howling was a howl of Joy that Buckbeak got away.

So there never was a scenario when Buckbeak died was there? DD knew that Buckbeak hadn't been executed. So he already knew, that one life had been saved. I think when he said that perhaps two lives could be saved he actually meant perhaps they could also save Sirius, not, as everyone seems to take it: 'heh, why'll your at it,why not save Buckbeak too? - he wasn't sure that they could save Sirius, cause he at that time didn't know if Sirius still was locked up, but neither did anyone else, so the chances were, they had saved, him, but DD could not know that for sure. He didn't have to assume they could save Buckbeak cause he knew someone already had!

Has that solved the inconsistency you seem to see???? They didn't change a thing. They fulfilled what had already happened!

nano

As was once said in the sci-fi mag Aurealis: "Time travel is tricky".

As was once said in the sci-fi mag Aurealis: "Time travel is tricky".
Or sticky.

Hermione said something about seeing your future self would not be a good thing. Since the future self is perfectly fine with seeing the past self, the past self can't face the future self--and why? If we take a look at Harry's own impression of his future self (he didn't, he thought it was his dad--but ironically his dad represents his past self/ancestry) would there be a consequence, that it would change the insight of self? What is self by perception, like we see of ourselves or how others see us?
by nano
Has that solved the inconsistency you seem to see???? They didn't change a thing. They fulfilled what had already happened
And that could be the answer.

I don't mind if time travel happens again but I don't think it was really called time travelling in the sense that you can go back too far. (as most people believe except in DD is Ron thread :p ) Could the perception have something to do with Harry's green eyes too?

Some people think deja vu is part of the process of reincarnation. We have lived many times before, so some things remind us of a past life - like a shadow memory. Also, did you know that deja vu is most strongly connected to the sense of smell? I think that is why deja vu is so common in the fall, with the scent of woodsmoke, dried leaves, etc.

That is the extent of my knowledge of time. I have no theories and I'm afraid of some of the ones I read. :p I sincerely hope that time travel doesn't play a major role in future books, and I hope all the time turners were destroyed when the DOM was trashed in OotP. Please, God.

Now - who wants a Krispy Kreme chocolate doughnut? I have a whole box, and a new pot of coffee. :blush:

And some people think deja vu is a result of time travel....no need to be afraid of that theory, but if you are, you're on the right track with doughnuts (ice cream works too).

And a note to Nano -- instead of thinking that time goes in both directions, try thinking that it's all happening at once.

My take on the whole time travel thing is like this.

Ther's the old paradox that you can't go back in time and kill your past self. there are variations, like you can't kill your mum before you were born and all that, but the basic idea is the same. If you travel back in time and go from today to a week ago and then kill your past self, it means that you won't be alive today in order to travel back in time. And because you never went back in time, you can't kill yourself, which means that you WILL be alive today. So you CAN travel back in time...

It's all one confusing circle.

I prefer this take. it's much simpler....

Let us assume that there are two versions of me. my present self (as I am today), and my past self (as I was a week ago).

Now, i can't go back in time and meet my past self, because I have no memory of it. After all, if I had met myself a week ago, I'd certainly remember it! but, I can travel back in time and meet myself. So, how can I do that?

Well, i think that the answer is in the fact that my present self didn't exist a week ago. So, if I was to travel back in time right now, I'd be traveling back not only to another time, but another timeline. In other words, two realities would exist - one that I came from (in which my present self did not exist a week ago), and an alternate timeline, in which my present self DID exist a week ago. the alternate timeline would have been created simply by the presence of my present self at the previous point in time. Think of it as a path, and there's a fork in the road that branches off the instant I arrive in the past, and that fork is the alternate timeline.

So, if this is true, it means that we have seen two timelines in HP (I'm refering to the timeturner here.)In the first timeline, Harry and hermione use the TT to travel back in time. if we were in that timeline, we would see them disappear. And they would never reappear. This is because they can't simply travel back into the future again - that, after all, would merely be travelling into the future of the alternate timeline. So, in the original HP timeline (TL1), ron would be left by himself and pine over his poor lost Hermy.:p. Alas, Bucky would lose his head and his life, and Sirius would lose his soul.

However, from harry and Hermione's POV, they would arrive a few hours previously. Immidiately prior to their arrival, it would have been the same timelien (TL1) but, as their arrival in the past had never happened in TL1, the timeline they are experiencing immediately branches off to become TL2. In TL2, they are able to save Bucky and sirius, and everyone lives happily ever after. BTW, the Harry and Hermione already in TL2 when it was created would then travel back in time. After all, the only difference between TL1 and TL2 is that there is an extra Harry and Hermione in TL2. And since the extra H&H had no influence on the original H&H, the H&H native to TL2 would have made the same choices as the H&H from TL1. Confused yet?

So, in the end, H&H travel from TL1 to TL2 with no hope of returning to their original timeline (but as the differences between the timeliens are minimal, they don't really notice.) TL1 Ron loses harry and hermione (but perhaps the H&H from yet another timeline arrive in his, and he can be friends with them), and ever since PoA, we've been reading about the events in TL2.

But, as I said, the only difference between TL1 and TL2 is that H&H from TL1 arrived in TL2, so there is no other significant change in the plot of the books.

Right. Now that I have thoroughly melted everyone's brain, I'm off.

Okay ... but this is a different approach to timetravel than the on in the book
So, if this is true, it means that we have seen two timelines in HP (I'm refering to the timeturner here.)In the first timeline, Harry and hermione use the TT to travel back in time. if we were in that timeline, we would see them disappear. And they would never reappear. This is because they can't simply travel back into the future again - that, after all, would merely be travelling into the future of the alternate timeline. So, in the original HP timeline (TL1), ron would be left by himself and pine over his poor lost Hermy.. Alas, Bucky would lose his head and his life, and Sirius would lose his soul.
But we only ever saw one timeline all along. Buckbeak never died, even the first time we were reading about the scene. And Sirius also never lost his soul (that part hadn't even happened when they travelled back - he was still locked in that room, and the dementors were being called to do their evil work).

And the most important thing :
The Harry that went back in time did remember seeing himself - okay, he thought it was his father, but only because of this thought was he where he was, when his previous self was being attacked by the dementors. The fact, that he wanted to see his father up close made him go to the other side of the lake. It was only there, that he realised he hadn't seen his father, but himself, meaning he was the one, who had to do the action he had already seen himself do - in other words, he had to fulfill what he already remembered had happened.

So there never was an alternative timeline, there only ever was this one - no lonesome Ron, no chage in events - and definitely no timeline2 that we are now on regarding your words. we are still on timeline1, because it is the only timeline there is!

nano

First of all, I don't want to get drawn into a debate about time travel with you, because this isn't the thread for it, adn besides, I'm just anerd with an overactive imagination. But, remember, we never found out for a fact that Bucky didn't die. We did hear the thud, remember? But...

My take on what happened in the TL1 is...

Harry and hermione arrive from the future of an alternate timeline (TL3). and watch all th stuff happen.
TL3 Harry and Hermione do all the things that TL1 H&H do in TL2. They save beaky and Sirius.
Harry and hermione travel back in time and arrive in TL2, never to return.
TL3 H&H continue to live the rest of their lives in TL1, while TL1 H&H continue to live out the rest of their lives in TL2.

Considering that we are following *** adventures of TL1 H&H, I think that we're now reading about TL2.

But this is my interpretation of what time travel would REALLY be like, and I have no idea whether or not it applies to the fictional HP universe.

However, from harry and Hermione's POV, they would arrive a few hours previously. Immidiately prior to their arrival, it would have been the same timelien (TL1) but, as their arrival in the past had never happened in TL1, the timeline they are experiencing immediately branches off to become TL2. In TL2, they are able to save Bucky and sirius, and everyone lives happily ever after. BTW, the Harry and Hermione already in TL2 when it was created would then travel back in time. After all, the only difference between TL1 and TL2 is that there is an extra Harry and Hermione in TL2. And since the extra H&H had no influence on the original H&H, the H&H native to TL2 would have made the same choices as the H&H from TL1. Confused yet?

So, in the end, H&H travel from TL1 to TL2 with no hope of returning to their original timeline (but as the differences between the timeliens are minimal, they don't really notice.) TL1 Ron loses harry and hermione (but perhaps the H&H from yet another timeline arrive in his, and he can be friends with them), and ever since PoA, we've been reading about the events in TL2.

But, as I said, the only difference between TL1 and TL2 is that H&H from TL1 arrived in TL2, so there is no other significant change in the plot of the books.

Right. Now that I have thoroughly melted everyone's brain, I'm off.

I was with you up until the quoted part. Then I got confused and the more I read it, the more confused I become. That's probably because humans aren't meant to time travel.

So what's happening in TL1? Is it still continuing? Or has it ceased to exist because there's no way for those events to have happened? What I mean is TL1 was what Harry2 and Hermione2 went back to alter. If the events of TL1 no longer happened as they originally did and Harry1 and Hermione1 are now Harry2 and Hermione2 living in TL2, what happened to TL1?

Also, in your theory, when Harry2 cast the patronus to save Harry1, was it because he had already done it? The way I understand it is that there was never a time when Harry2 wasn't there to save Harry1 because it is all one timeline. The events all happened at one time so there was never a time when Harry1 had to survive the dementor attack without Harry2.

However in the alternate timeline theory, Harry1 would have to have survived long enough to become Harry2, wouldn't he? So if that's the case, how did Harry1 survive the dementor attack long enough to accomplish this?

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to understand what you're saying.

There remained a H&H in TL1, but the were not the same H&H that started off here. I'm getting really tired though, so I'm afraid you'll have to wait for a more detailed explanation...

Tiberius, I think you did melt a few brains. We worked so hard to cure them of multiple timeline thinking, because it isn't how Jo seems to have crafted timetravel in PoA, and now you throw it back into the mix...

I tend to agree that multiple timelines is the way time travel will "ordinarily" work, because ordinarily (to the extent there is ordinary time travel ;) ) the past will be changed, which will influence the future in unanticipated ways.

In PoA, however, Harry and Hermione were under strict orders to influence nothing other than saving Buckbeak and Sirius (and Harry also saved himself, the only thing that deviated from what DD said they were to do.) They followed DD's directions, and so their brief time loop was on a single timline; the future was not changed; they perceived all of their influences as they lived the timeline the first time they experienced it.

I can't tell if this is Jo's formula for all time travel (it gets hard to wrap your head around longer-term travel, or travel to a vast number of years in the past, but it can work), or if it's just because it's such a short, clean time loop.

BTW, this is exactly the thread on which to discuss time travel theories. Look at the title; look at version 1. Discussing how time travel works takes up most of our time.

I've recently come to understand why it is people keep saying that our language isn't constructed to talk about time travel. There are so many different variants and possibilities to consider that I get a headache trying to explain what I do and don't understand. I was so clear on the non-multiple timeline thinking and then out of no where comes TL1, TL2, and TL3 and I'm almost back to S1 (square 1). :).

Anyway, Tiberius, I patiently await your full explanation, however brain frying it will be.

There is only one timeline, nothing changes. There are two sets of Harry and Hermione existing at the same time in the past, but the people from the future merely make the past occur. They don't change the past, they merely interact in the past as part of the events as they occur for the first time.

Tiberius and HermioneLuna are saying the same thing, just in a different way. The important thing I think is that in any timeline Buckbeak never dies

okay, let me try this...

I tried to get columns, but it didn't work. So please imagine these lists as being side byu side...

TL1

TL2HH arrive from the future of TL2
TL2HH save TL1 Buckbeak and Sirius.
TL1HH travel back in time, and then arrive in the past of TL2. We follow the story there. TL2HH are left as the only HH in TL1.


TL2

TL1HH arrive from the future of TL1.
TL1HH save TL2 Buckbeak and Sirius.
TL2HH travel back in time, and then arrive in the past of TL1. TL1HH are left as the only HH in TL2.


I'm not sure if that's clearer or not. it was meant to be in columns side by side, but if you can imagine that identically numbered points happened simultaneously. That is, both points 1 occured at the same time, merely in different timelines.

Think of it like this; There are two HH pairs in each timeline (Arguably an infinate number of timelines, but my melted brain and I will just deal with two). One HH pair is ignorant of what actyually happens (they're the HH native to that timeline - the ones that start out there, and they don't know what really happened to Bucky and all that) and the second HH pair knows what happens (because they're the ones that make sure everyone is saved)

Each HH pair starts out as the ignorant pair, and then, after everything has happened and they are given the TT by DD, the ignorant HH (enough double letters for you yet?) travel back in time, arrive in the alternate timeline and become the HH "in the know".

Because we follow our HH into TL2, we have no way of knowing what happenes in TL1. All we know is that nothing happens in TL1 to stop TL1HH from travelling back to a previous point in TL2. So, Bucky and Sirius might have died/lost soul in TL1, and TL1HH would know nothing about it.

I hope that makes it clearer.

okay, let me try this...

TL1 TL2

H&H from TL3 arrvie from H&H from TL1 aarive from
the future of TL3 the future of TL1, we begin
following the story.

H&HTL3 save Bucky and Sirius H&HTL1 save Bucky and sirius.

H&HTL1 go back in time, and then H&HTL2 go back in time and then
arrive in the past of TL2. We follow arrive in the past of another timeline.
the story there.

I'm not sure if that's clearer or not.

Think of it like this; There are two HH pairs in each timeline (Arguably an infinate number of timelines, but my melted brain and I will just deal with two). One HH pair is ignorant of what actyually happens (they're the HH native to that timeline - the ones that start out there, and they don't know what really happened to Bucky and all that) and the second HH pair knows what happens (because they're the ones that make sure everyone is saved)

Each HH pair starts out as the ignorant pair, and then, after everything has happened and they are given the TT by DD, the ignorant HH (enough double letters for you yet?) travel back in time, arrive in the alternate timeline and become the HH "in the know".

Because we follow our HH into TL2, we have no way of knowing what happenes in TL1. All we know is that nothing happens in TL1 to stop TL1HH from travelling back to a previous point in TL2. So, Bucky and Sirius might have died/lost soul in TL1, and TL1HH would know nothing about it.

I hope that makes it clearer.
There is only one timeline. There is never an alternative history. JKR is using different rules from many SciFi stories.

hermione could have a new time turner.
she could have taken one with her when they where at the mom.
It took he some time to come and help harry and neville so
Well we know show wont chance history in a important way but she could make some small changes?

please give me some feedback if you like

hermione could have a new time turner.
she could have taken one with her when they where at the mom.
It took he some time to come and help harry and neville so
Well we know show wont chance history in a important way but she could make some small changes?

please give me some feedback if you like
I don't think this is likely. I think that it is much too risky and would get too complicated. Just look at how hard it is for us to wrap our minds around the idea of one time turner.

okay, let me try this...

I tried to get columns, but it didn't work. So please imagine these lists as being side byu side...

TL1

TL2HH arrive from the future of TL2
TL2HH save TL1 Buckbeak and Sirius.
TL1HH travel back in time, and then arrive in the past of TL2. We follow the story there. TL2HH are left as the only HH in TL1.


TL2

TL1HH arrive from the future of TL1.
TL1HH save TL2 Buckbeak and Sirius.
TL2HH travel back in time, and then arrive in the past of TL1. TL1HH are left as the only HH in TL2.


I'm not sure if that's clearer or not. it was meant to be in columns side by side, but if you can imagine that identically numbered points happened simultaneously. That is, both points 1 occured at the same time, merely in different timelines.

Think of it like this; There are two HH pairs in each timeline (Arguably an infinate number of timelines, but my melted brain and I will just deal with two). One HH pair is ignorant of what actyually happens (they're the HH native to that timeline - the ones that start out there, and they don't know what really happened to Bucky and all that) and the second HH pair knows what happens (because they're the ones that make sure everyone is saved)

Each HH pair starts out as the ignorant pair, and then, after everything has happened and they are given the TT by DD, the ignorant HH (enough double letters for you yet?) travel back in time, arrive in the alternate timeline and become the HH "in the know".

Because we follow our HH into TL2, we have no way of knowing what happenes in TL1. All we know is that nothing happens in TL1 to stop TL1HH from travelling back to a previous point in TL2. So, Bucky and Sirius might have died/lost soul in TL1, and TL1HH would know nothing about it.

I hope that makes it clearer.It's reasonably clear, and if you find that a more acceptable time-travel answer philosophically that's great. As you say, there's no evidence that it didn't happen that way, because we never see the alternate timeline. For me, it's an unnecessary complication and I find the lack of evidence a problem. I like my time-travel simple! But, hey, sounds like it works very well for you, and it could easily sort out some stuff for people who can't get it the way we've been explaining it.

hermione could have a new time turner.
she could have taken one with her when they where at the mom.
It took he some time to come and help harry and neville so
Well we know show wont chance history in a important way but she could make some small changes?

please give me some feedback if you like Hmmm... again, I think this is needlessly complex. Interesting, but I don't quite see what use it would have. Anything Hermione would change would have to be totally irrelevent to the plot in OotP and so having something important pop up in HBP that Hermione happened to take care of in the last story... I don't know... seems like JKR would avoid that sort of writing. But don't take my word for it, I'm quite against overuse of the time-travel gimmick as it is!

And the thread lives again!

Well, depends on if you mean HP universe or not! We had pretty much decided (and if I'm wrong, someone whack me with the Monty Python rubber chicken or something) that time travel as presented in HP in the PoA is extremely limited, and that in that scenario they didn't actually change anything. The impetus to go back came not from them but from and outsider, Dumbledore, who didn't tell them to change anything, but gave them enough hints that they could do what they needed to do.

However, in our universe, you'd have to imagine a whole slew of circumstances to protect the one travelling from paradox. I.E., that person is in a special space-time pocket that buffers them from the effects so they keep their memory of what has occured... multiple universes split off each time a change is made... that sort of thing.

It's the difference between physics and magic. :D

It's the difference between physics and magic. :DIt is indeed - and given JKR's notorious problem with maths I'm going to say that she's firmly in the magic camp! However, I think she has a very scientific mind really in the way she has crafted her plots. She has made a very logical "science" of magic and that's why it works so well - it's quite believable because she has thought through most of the limitations and things.

I think the reason so many people are confused about the time travel thing is that we're all so used to the "Back to the Future" version, where going back in time changes things and creates alternate timelines. That's usually how it's shown in SciFi. But I much prefer JKR's version, it makes everything so much simpler. Another difference, of course, is that you can't go forward in time (at least not that we've seen), you just stay hidden until your past self goes back in time and there's only one of you again.

Of course, time travel would never work in the real world IMO, because of all the paradoxes that would inevitably arise. Even JKR's version doesn't totally make sense--Dumbledore only sent them back because he already knew they'd gone back. It's rather circular.

In J.K. Rowling's world, is time linear? Because there are things that would seem to suggest that and things that would seem to dispute it.

Time being linear or non-linear is not something you get to chose really. Either JKR works in the universe as it is (ie time is not linear, it is only relative) or in a place like our universe but with different rules of physics. Time being non-linear is a quality of the universe as we understand it, not just a way of thinking about it.

I'd say Jo's world has different laws of physics than ours does. After all, people can't fly on brooms. It's possible that time in the Potterverse is linear. It sure seems to be.

I'd say Jo's world has different laws of physics than ours does. After all, people can't fly on brooms. It's possible that time in the Potterverse is linear. It sure seems to be.

Hmm. Hard to tell whether flying on brooms is a good test of JKR's physics, that's a function of magic since muggles & squibs can't fly and they're in the same universe. But I do have a question......let's say we do assume that in the Potterverse time is linear -- is time travel even possible as an agent of change, or only as an observer?

Time being linear or non-linear is not something you get to chose really. Either JKR works in the universe as it is (ie time is not linear, it is only relative) or in a place like our universe but with different rules of physics. Time being non-linear is a quality of the universe as we understand it, not just a way of thinking about it.
Well - After all we are reading Harry Potter, and he is a wizard. I suppose wizards can do a lot of things that run totally against our physical rules. And it is Jo's book - so its her who creates the laws and rules, even if it does mean bending the laws of physics of our reality. It would be a bit boring reading about magic, that can't accheive anything but what we could also accheive with our muggleways. Hogwarts being unvisible is a quality of Potterverse, and so is the linear timetravel bit.
let's say we do assume that in the Potterverse time is linear -- is time travel even possible as an agent of change, or only as an observer?
Thats the whole point. You only go back in time to fulfill what you have already done. If you were an observer - then you observe. if you took any actions then you will take the actions. But you don't change anything, cause it has already happened, by the time you travel back in time. It is just, that at the moment where you decide to travel back you are unaware of this. Things that you are aware of, seem to make the things the timetraveling you do exactly what you had done all along.

I think perhaps it can be explained by just saying from a certain point in time two instances of the same entity exist. The one, that dosn't know of the other is doing things of his own accord. The other one, that knows of the other (the timetraveler) is just playing his part in the story, He does exactly what happened the 'first' time, only there is no 'first' time - there is only the here and now that person is experiencing. He thinks he is acting of own accord, but in truth what happens is kind of already decided as it has already happened - so he can only fulfill that! Call it fate for all I know.

It's like the path of the non timetraveller leaves is still undecided, but the path of the timetraveller is already a dotted line, and by going back in time the timetraveller just finishes the dot-to-dot picture. So in actual fact he is only reacting the past.

I think Harry saving himself could be seen as proof of this. If Harry1 hadn't thought he had seen his father, the timetraveling Harry2 wouldn't have been where he was inthe first place. He wouldn't have wanted to go see his father close up. But he did remember 'seeing' his father, so he went. and his being there made him realize what he had to do to fill in the dots. I do not think Harry2 could have done anything else other than save himself - as that would have brought up a paradoxon.

So you think you are changing something, when actually you are fullfilling the past. Hope that was understandable.

nano

Another way to explain it is that the influences of what you did while time travelling in the past are felt in your past, when you first experienced that same time frame. So, no changes are made, because your future self's influence on the time in question was felt on your first time living through the time period.

We discussed this ad nauseum in the first thread, you may want to take a look there.

BTW, time travel in the books is also magic, just like flying on brooms. Presumably muggles and squibs can't time travel in the Potterverse either. ;)

BTW, time travel in the books is also magic, just like flying on brooms. Presumably muggles and squibs can't time travel in the Potterverse either. ;)But is the magic a function of the person using the time-turner, or of the time-turner itself? All Hermione seemed to do was flip over the hourglass and whiz back in time - there didn't seem to be a spell or anything and she didn't pull out her wand. Not judging either side of this argument BTW, I figure it's just as likely that the time-turner uses the inherent magic of the person using it as a "battery" or something to get the whole thing going.

The time turner is a magical device that moves you in time, like a portkey moves you to another place. Can muggles use portkeys? If they can, then they can probably use timeturners too - only guessing! but I don't think they can.

The time turner is a magical device that moves you in time, like a portkey moves you to another place. Can muggles use portkeys? If they can, then they can probably use timeturners too - only guessing! but I don't think they can.Well, I don't think it's definitive, but in GoF they said that they disguise portkeys as rubbish so muggles won't mess with them. Not sure if that's because the muggle would be transported or because they don't want someone walking off with the portkey!

Well - After all we are reading Harry Potter, and he is a wizard. I suppose wizards can do a lot of things that run totally against our physical rules. And it is Jo's book - so its her who creates the laws and rules, even if it does mean bending the laws of physics of our reality. It would be a bit boring reading about magic, that can't accheive anything but what we could also accheive with our muggleways. Hogwarts being unvisible is a quality of Potterverse, and so is the linear timetravel bit.



Time being non-linear makes time travel possible without magic. Thinking of time being linear is what causes people to be stuck in the time travel loop. That is all I am saying. Time being non-linear helps prove the existence of time travel without being stuck in the same moment based loop forever.

Time being non-linear makes time travel possible without magic. Thinking of time being linear is what causes people to be stuck in the time travel loop. That is all I am saying. Time being non-linear helps prove the existence of time travel without being stuck in the same moment based loop forever.

How would that work? I haven't read the whole previous version of this thread but from what I did read I don't think anyone explained how time being non-linear would make it easier to comprehend. And in this thread no one seem to have said anything about that either. I kind of get how time being linear would get people stuck in the same time loop. How would a non-linear timeline fix that confusing bit?

Sorry if this has been already discussed, and if that's the case I would appreciate if someone could just give me an idea of how far on v.1 this is so I can read it myself.

Time being non-linear makes time travel possible without magic. Thinking of time being linear is what causes people to be stuck in the time travel loop. That is all I am saying. Time being non-linear helps prove the existence of time travel without being stuck in the same moment based loop forever.

True. Time isn't linear at all, we just perceive it that way, and as long as we do, we're stuck. Einstein once said that he feared people's strong attachment to the ideas of "past, present and future" would be a stumbling block to the understanding of the true nature of time and space.

True. Time isn't linear at all, we just perceive it that way, and as long as we do, we're stuck. Einstein once said that he feared people's strong attachment to the ideas of "past, present and future" would be a stumbling block to the understanding of the true nature of time and space.Agree - but in the HP world time can be linear and still work with the limited notion of time travel as presented in the PoA. In other words, you can explain everything that happened on a linear path and not run into paradox... but it's very very limited in its scope and will not support the more exotic theories floating around about Dumbledore and Ron, Harry and James at Godric's Hollow etc.

Agree - but in the HP world time can be linear and still work with the limited notion of time travel as presented in the PoA. In other words, you can explain everything that happened on a linear path and not run into paradox... but it's very very limited in its scope and will not support the more exotic theories floating around about Dumbledore and Ron, Harry and James at Godric's Hollow etc.

Good point. Also think some of those theories (especially Dumbledore and Ron) are problematic in any setting.

Good point. Also think some of those theories (especially Dumbledore and Ron) are problematic in any setting.No kidding! I'm aesthetically opposed to them, although I admit JKR MIGHT be able to pull it off. I see the time-turner as a plot device that could be far too easily abused. I doubt that JKR will use it much in the future - if at all.

I don't see the time turner as a key plot device, because it would be too much deus ex machina. I think JKR didn't rule it out because she didn't want to tie her hands should she need it somewhere she hadn't thought of yet as a minor plot point. But the grand scale plots like the redhead forever or Godric's hollow are not feasible as major plot points. They are too contrived and convoluted (sorry whiz :angel: :love: ).

I don't see the time turner as a key plot device, because it would be too much deus ex machina. I think JKR didn't rule it out because she didn't want to tie her hands should she need it somewhere she hadn't thought of yet as a minor plot point. But the grand scale plots like the redhead forever or Godric's hollow are not feasible as major plot points. They are too contrived and convoluted (sorry whiz :angel: :love: ).
Shhhhh... if we're really quiet whiz will be so busy in the Hamlet's Mill thread we won't get in trouble!

Whenever we theorize I think the first thing to take into account is the type of hints, clues and themes that JKR uses - those that are absolutely certain that is (IMHO some of the foreshadowing others have seen is not yet demonstrated). In this case I don't think we can deviate from the type of time-travel we've seen. Hermione's use of the turner is nearly below radar as we don't see it from her point of view, so the only incident we can really use is the one where she chooses not to use the turner to attend the charms lesson she missed. I think it's arguable that she didn't go back because the boys had already told her she had missed it and she knew she couldn't change that... but it's not a water tight argument I know. Still, given that episode and the major one with Harry and Hermione I would say that time travel on the grand scale with the intention of changing really essential events is extremely unlikely!

Whoa! Stop!

You guys are making my head hurt!!! :( But if you can spare your time turner for a few minutes....I'd like to go back and re-do the past 22 years!! (Or at least to last Friday....the weekend went by too quick!)

I'm like RosiePots......I can't bend my mind around time travel!

I actually like JKR's version of time travel since it is the only one that logically makes sense. Anything that someone from the future did would automatically be already part of their own past. But using it that way, anything we already know as fact in the books cannot be changed. There is only one past, one present, and one future. There is no going back to change something, but there is going back to interact to bring about the past, present, and future.

I don't see any do-overs for that reason, since no one can change something if it did already happen since obviously their present reflects what is already done. They can prevent events or influence the outcome of events. But it will be something that already exists as fact in the future. There is no going back and re-doing something, there is only one past.

I actually like JKR's version of time travel since it is the only one that logically makes sense. Anything that someone from the future did would automatically be already part of their own past. But using it that way, anything we already know as fact in the books cannot be changed. There is only one past, one present, and one future. There is no going back to change something, but there is going back to interact to bring about the past, present, and future.


I agree with that and I think it makes time-travel much more simple without having to worry with creating any paradoxes. That would also keep its use to a minimum since in order to pull it off on a major plot point the path would have to be laid since very early in the books.

I don't see any do-overs for that reason, since no one can change something if it did already happen since obviously their present reflects what is already done. They can prevent events or influence the outcome of events. But it will be something that already exists as fact in the future. There is no going back and re-doing something, there is only one past.

That makes perfect sense in my head (and there are not many things that make sense there :p) and when I finally think I've figured it out I get stuck in that loop with H+H. How did you guys get past it?

My melted brain can't take it anymore...

I don't get how they could report back to where they started without doing everything they did at the end of PoA all over againt I guess everytime I've read it (I dunno--10?) i've been confuzzled. I've also had a headache just thinking about it....But I'm sure I'll firgure it all out someday...just try to help me out and answer this for me, will you? :p

I don't get how they could report back to where they started without doing everything they did at the end of PoA all over againt I guess everytime I've read it (I dunno--10?) i've been confuzzled. I've also had a headache just thinking about it....But I'm sure I'll firgure it all out someday...just try to help me out and answer this for me, will you? :p
They reported back to a point in time right after they left, not right when they left.

They reported back to a point in time right after they left, not right when they left.
yeah, but wouldn't they have to do it all over again?? They had just left again, so....*confuzzled*

yeah, but wouldn't they have to do it all over again?? They had just left again, so....*confuzzled*
No, because they had just done it. It is now part of their past. There is no "again". They arrived back after they had left the first time.

I don't get how they could report back to where they started without doing everything they did at the end of PoA all over againt I guess everytime I've read it (I dunno--10?) i've been confuzzled. I've also had a headache just thinking about it....But I'm sure I'll firgure it all out someday...just try to help me out and answer this for me, will you? :pYou ready ComicBookWorm? Here we go again!

Okay, this has been talked about back in the thread, so you might want to back read a bit to see what has been covered. Sometimes someone said something in a way that just clicked with one person while other people were still 'confuzzled' (good word!) so if this doesn't make sense to you you might find something back there that does.

Short version follows:

The idea is that the time travel episode in PoA doesn't actually change anything. You have to accept that premise in order to understand the chain of events. Remember that nothing they experience before the time travel event takes place is contradicted by anything they do. Right?

So... we all know what happens with Hagrid's hut, the rat, the tree, the shack, the dementors, the patronus... Harry and Hermione end up in the hospital wing. Dumbledore tells them to use the time turner, tells them vaguely what they can do and emphasizes they must not be seen. Hermione turns the time turner and she and Harry find themselves three hours back in time. Keep in mind that although an observer would see two Harrys and two Hermiones, they are different people because one set is three hours older than the other set - right?

Harry and Hermione then go about events from their new perspective, saving Buckbeak, waiting in the forest, and finally Harry stepping out and saving his own and Sirius' lives with his patronus charm. They fly buckbeak up, save Sirius and race back to the hospital wing arriving at the door just after the moment when the time turner took effect - and remember they are now three hours older than the Harry and Hermione who just left. They experience the whole thing as a linear journey even though some of that journey was retracing their steps.

So - given that very long short version... what still confuzzles you?

I don't see any do-overs for that reason, since no one can change something if it did already happen since obviously their present reflects what is already done. They can prevent events or influence the outcome of events. But it will be something that already exists as fact in the future. There is no going back and re-doing something, there is only one past.

I quite agree. PA time travel makes more sense than, lets say, in Terminator 2. They send the terminator back in time to finish off John Connors. But this mission had to be a failure (and it was). Think about it. If they killed Connors in the past, they would have no reason to send a terminator from the future to the past. And if Connors still survived in the present time, then they must have known that Connors escaped the terminator sent back in time to kill him.

I quite agree. PA time travel makes more sense than, lets say, in Terminator 2. They send the terminator back in time to finish off John Connors. But this mission had to be a failure (and it was). Think about it. If they killed Connors in the past, they would have no reason to send a terminator from the future to the past. And if Connors still survived in the present time, then they must have known that Connors escaped the terminator sent back in time to kill him.
Giggle. That is exactly right.

I quite agree. PA time travel makes more sense than, lets say, in Terminator 2. They send the terminator back in time to finish off John Connors. But this mission had to be a failure (and it was). Think about it. If they killed Connors in the past, they would have no reason to send a terminator from the future to the past. And if Connors still survived in the present time, then they must have known that Connors escaped the terminator sent back in time to kill him.

Earlier in this thread, I mentioned my theories of alternate timelines. The theory of mine hypothesizes that if you travel back in time, your arrival creates an alternate timeline that branches off the original timeline at the exact instant you arrive in the past.

Therefore, any changes you make will occur in the alternate timeline (instead of the original timeline that you came from), and you'll be able to make the changes without disturbing your own memory of the events. This neatly avoids the paradoxes mentioned in the above quote by Prongz.

No, it then creates the problem of multiple alternative timelines. And this is just not the way JKR has presented it. I have read stories like this and it winds up with thousands of alternative universes out there to account for. I even wrote a story like that, and it was difficult for me to keep track of the all alternative universes.

I am certain that JKR had no intention to get that metaphysical about the HP universe. There is one timeline. That is easy to see if you piece all the events together. PoA movie did a good job of showing how only one set of events occured, but there were two sets of Harry and Hermione experiencing it. It shows the different viewpoints and how only one set of events unfolded--just how we perceive it differs.

We don't need to start juggling multiple alternative timelines to explain the events in PoA. This is simple and clean, we don't need to make it muddy and complex.

Okay, this has been talked about back in the thread, so you might want to back read a bit to see what has been covered. Sometimes someone said something in a way that just clicked with one person while other people were still 'confuzzled' (good word!) so if this doesn't make sense to you you might find something back there that does.

Short version follows:

The idea is that the time travel episode in PoA doesn't actually change anything. You have to accept that premise in order to understand the chain of events. Remember that nothing they experience before the time travel event takes place is contradicted by anything they do. Right?

So... we all know what happens with Hagrid's hut, the rat, the tree, the shack, the dementors, the patronus... Harry and Hermione end up in the hospital wing. Dumbledore tells them to use the time turner, tells them vaguely what they can do and emphasizes they must not be seen. Hermione turns the time turner and she and Harry find themselves three hours back in time. Keep in mind that although an observer would see two Harrys and two Hermiones, they are different people because one set is three hours older than the other set - right?

Harry and Hermione then go about events from their new perspective, saving Buckbeak, waiting in the forest, and finally Harry stepping out and saving his own and Sirius' lives with his patronus charm. They fly buckbeak up, save Sirius and race back to the hospital wing arriving at the door just after the moment when the time turner took effect - and remember they are now three hours older than the Harry and Hermione who just left. They experience the whole thing as a linear journey even though some of that journey was retracing their steps.
I vote that RotsiePots should put Macchiavelli's short explanation up on the first post of this second thread as it a very good explanation to JKR's Timetravel. Cause to be honest noone reads through more than 50 posts to get the jist of it (I admit to have read 300 summing posts before - but not always!!!). Any Questions still not understood could then be porsted at the end of the thread. It can be argued, that there are other theories, but they are NOT the ones JKR obviously uses.

I think the majority of us agree, that Macchiavelli wrapped it up in a nutshell. What do you think???

:tu: Good one Macchiavelli!

nano

It did sum it up in a nutshell. And the thread could benefit from it at the start, and it couldn't hurt. But I suspect that every couple of pages someone will make a post indicating they have not read the info. But it is worth a shot.

Machiavelli seems to have said everything that can be said on HP time travel in the sense that i don't think JKR would say much different to this. I love indulging in the finer simantics and ramafications of time travel, with all the paradox's abd the fact that arguably to people of the same mass'desnity ad molecular structire can not occupy the same space at the same time and so if your future self shock your past or present self at the very least you should inplode, at worst you would rip a whole in space-time but as a result of travelling through time you would only rip a hole in the timeline that has thus since been created due to your journey, which would only (in theory) be a separate timeline from the original one you arrived from and so would never consequently affect anyone, only those in the alternate parallel timeline which would not have existed had you not travelled back in time bla bla ba.

The point is, like nano and comicbookworm said, i don't think JKR intended it to be this confusing. And so, anything said further to what Machiavelli has said should reside, perhaps only in fan-fiction. Any thoughts? :gryff:

It did sum it up in a nutshell. And the thread could benefit from it at the start, and it couldn't hurt. But I suspect that every couple of pages someone will make a post indicating they have not read the info. But it is worth a shot.
To be able to discuss in a thread, you should at least read the very first post, to see what it is about - or at least, that is how I understand the rules of this Forum. So what next? PM RotsiePots and ask him???

We could try shouting : ROTSIEPOTS!!!! alltogether now!!! 1... 2.... 3 .... R...

nano

Awwww guys - thanks. You give me the comfortable illusion that I made time travel (in HP, limitations apply, please see fine print for details) make sense.

We don't need to start juggling multiple alternative timelines to explain the events in PoA. This is simple and clean, we don't need to make it muddy and complex.

But if there is only one timeline, then it means that it is possible to go back in time and kill your younger self. That leads to even messier temporal paradoxes...

But if there is only one timeline, then it means that it is possible to go back in time and kill your younger self. That leads to even messier temporal paradoxes...
Which is the reason it is overlooked so closely by the ministry. I understand it, that the past CANNOT be changed, which would mean you cannot kill your past self - if you did try, it would most probably end up in a messy paradox with your time traveling self dying instead of your past self dying. And in any case if you are still alive to travel back in time - then you know, that trying to kill yourself in the past will not work, as you have already survived, so whats the point of trying???

Your timetraveling self CANNOT kill your past self, as your future self would otherwise have no chance to be there and couldn't have killed your past self in the first place. But your past self CAN kill your future self, as there is nothing logically stopping it from happening - but then again if you remember killing yourself- would you go back in the first place? I suppose you would have to as it has already happened.

Am I making sense???? :huh:

In any case - in HP the timeline is linear - fullstop.

nano

But if there is only one timeline, then it means that it is possible to go back in time and kill your younger self. That leads to even messier temporal paradoxes...
You can't have killed yourself since it didn't happen.

Besides there is nothing in the theory of multiple timelines that doesn't stop you from going back and killing yourself in the alternative timeline since by the time you go back in time you are in the alternative timeline.

And since JKR didn't design a time travel method that introduces multiple timelines, we don't need to make ourselves dizzy thinking about it.

Okay, this has been talked about back in the thread, so you might want to back read a bit to see what has been covered. Sometimes someone said something in a way that just clicked with one person while other people were still 'confuzzled' (good word!) so if this doesn't make sense to you you might find something back there that does.

Short version follows:

The idea is that the time travel episode in PoA doesn't actually change anything. You have to accept that premise in order to understand the chain of events. Remember that nothing they experience before the time travel event takes place is contradicted by anything they do. Right?

So... we all know what happens with Hagrid's hut, the rat, the tree, the shack, the dementors, the patronus... Harry and Hermione end up in the hospital wing. Dumbledore tells them to use the time turner, tells them vaguely what they can do and emphasizes they must not be seen. Hermione turns the time turner and she and Harry find themselves three hours back in time. Keep in mind that although an observer would see two Harrys and two Hermiones, they are different people because one set is three hours older than the other set - right?

Harry and Hermione then go about events from their new perspective, saving Buckbeak, waiting in the forest, and finally Harry stepping out and saving his own and Sirius' lives with his patronus charm. They fly buckbeak up, save Sirius and race back to the hospital wing arriving at the door just after the moment when the time turner took effect - and remember they are now three hours older than the Harry and Hermione who just left. They experience the whole thing as a linear journey even though some of that journey was retracing their steps.

Great job Machiavelli, that should definitely should be on the first post of this thread! It would have saved me from reading several posts (many of them confuzzled me even more...:grumble:).

But now, even though the whole time travel episode in PoA seems much more simple than what I was picturing, I still can't stop trying to figure out what happened to the "three hours youger" H+H. Did they just disappear once the "older" pair had already fullfilled the past events?

I realise I have already asked a very similar question a couple of pages ago so don't hold that against me. I'm not trying to mess with you guys or anything but since you seem to have it so well organized in your minds I was just hoping you could help me clear that up because really want to get that straight so I can move on... My brain can't take thinking about time travel much longer and I still have to take my finals at school so I'll need a functioning brain for them. :D

[EDIT] Just had a little brainstorm and came up with this:

At the same time DD locked H+H in the hospital wing the first time (that we read about) he came out and met them after they had done it all over again. This means that the H+H that DD was seeing out side the door was actually the same H+H that he had just sent back, just three hours older. I know that is kind of confuzzling (I really like this word! :D) but is that correct?

Yes it is correct, and he knew already that they had succeeded, as he unlike H&H already knew Buckbeak had been saved - and H&H didn't look sad, so he knew that they had managed to save Sirius also ... plus the fact they told him.

DD says ... "Yes, I think you've gone, too. Get inside - I'll lock you in - '. So they arrive back to exactly where they started, but 3 hours older in age as you have already managed to figure out for yourself.

nano

*jumps up and down with excitement*

Thanks, thanks, thanks nano! :tu: I can't believe I got it! Now I can finally study in peace...

Now I can finally study in peace...
Or use a time turner, go back a few days and get in some extra review time for yourself ...

Good Luck on your studies anyway - I realized two years back never to start reading the HP Series, when anything important is supposed to happen within the next two weeks ... *lol* learnt it the hard way though ... man I could have done with a timeturner then, boy I could

nano

Or use a time turner, go back a few days and get in some extra review time for yourself ...

nano

:rotfl: That would be a great idea! I just doubt that from all the trouble I had figuring out how it worked I'd be able to avoid any paradoxes or kill myself in the process.

But, thanks, I'll take your advice into account and hide my HP books for awhile... Or ask someone else to do it so when I time travel back I won't go for them instead of studying! :D

Great job Machiavelli, that should definitely should be on the first post of this thread! It would have saved me from reading several posts (many of them confuzzled me even more...:grumble:).Excellent... I'm going to add confuzzled to my personal vocabulary btw.

[/qUOTE]But now, even though the whole time travel episode in PoA seems much more simple than what I was picturing, I still can't stop trying to figure out what happened to the "three hours youger" H+H. Did they just disappear once the "older" pair had already fullfilled the past events? [/QUOTE]Nope, no one disappears at all. On the earlier version of this thread I compared their path to a strip of paper. In normal life the strip just goes along in a nice straight line. Now, fold that strip of paper so that it reverses direction and doubles back on itself - good so far? Fold it again, so that it goes back in the original direction and continues on. Notice that at one point there are three layers of paper in one section. Right, Now the middle layer of paper is when Harry and Hermione travel backwards - something that happens extremely quickly. But it's still just one nice long line isn't it? They never disappear. The Harry and Hermione that are at Hagrid's hut when the time travel starts are three hours younger than the Harry and Hermione that travel back to that point, but they continue on their merry way finding Scabbers, braving the willow etc and aging at a dramatic 60 seconds to the minute the whole time until they end up in the hospital wing. They turn the turner, and take the path back in a blink ending up in the past... but three hours older. Again, they follow their path. For Harry and Hermione it happens exactly as it's narrated - they experience everything in the present because for them it all is.

[EDIT] Just had a little brainstorm and came up with this:

At the same time DD locked H+H in the hospital wing the first time (that we read about) he came out and met them after they had done it all over again. This means that the H+H that DD was seeing out side the door was actually the same H+H that he had just sent back, just three hours older. I know that is kind of confuzzling (I really like this word! :D) but is that correct?Exactly! Yes - you have it! Harry and Hermione don't change, they just age. Hope the above was clear and not confuzzling.

/me looks at first post (http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=1350446&postcount=1)...

*w00t*w00t*

Sorry, got a bit carried away there - Macchiavelli - your post is up front - brilliant short explanation of a confuzzling twist.

nano

Wow. Shouting really worked! It's cool but kind of Big Brother all at the same time. Thanks rotsiepots.

nah ... no Big Brother there - I reckon rotsiepots received an owl ...
:whistle:

nano

I think Harry saving his own life must have some serious implications in the future story line. I mean in a way Harry should have died in PoA because it was only his future time turner self that saved his life, something that confuses me completely. How can there be a future Harry if he originally died with Sirius, surely there would be no later time turner Harry to go back in time and stop himself from dieing. This is why I think Dumbledore may have actually somehow intervened in the time turner event, as someone must have saved Harry's life for him to go back in time and save himself again. I'm really confused with that issue in the time turner part of PoA.

For Harry to be able to go back in time, someone else must have initially saved Harry’s life.

For Harry to be able to go back in time, someone else must have initially saved Harry's life.Someone did save Harry's life - Harry himself.

There was no 'initially' - no *first* time line - If you read the very first post - with a very good short explanation on how time travel works in the potterverse, you will see, that there only is one timeline, even though Harry and Hermione relive a part of it. They didn't do anything, that hadn't already been done.

At the very moment Harry experienced those dementors the *first* time as you see it - his future self was already on the other side of the lake (the person he thinks is his father!!! - we even read it in the book - Harry was already there the *first* time round), as he had already arrived in the initial harry's present. From the time the time traveling Harry arrived in the past there were two Harry's for the next three hours - there never was an timeline where there was one Harry during that period. He had always already been there.

nano

Harry and Hermione then go about events from their new perspective, saving Buckbeak, waiting in the forest, and finally Harry stepping out and saving his own and Sirius' lives with his patronus charm. They fly buckbeak up, save Sirius and race back to the hospital wing arriving at the door just after the moment when the time turner took effect - and remember they are now three hours older than the Harry and Hermione who just left. They experience the whole thing as a linear journey even though some of that journey was retracing their steps. How does this tie in with Hermione using the timeturner to take classes simultaneously.

There is only one timeline because when what happens, happens .... that's what happened. sigh

If there are no changes made then time isn't the issue at all. What's required is for a wizard to be in two places at once and time is not the issue at all. But that's not what we see. When H2H2 go back in time, there are two simultaneous timelines and H2H2 do make changes. But once they reach the starting point there is only one timeline, and what happened when H1H1 and H2H2 were present simultaneously is what happened. There's no alternate. If they had not gone back, then events would have been different and Buckbeak, Sirius and probably Harry would all have been killed. And that would have been what happened because that's what happened. :D Get it? H2H2 did make changes and their presence was detected because after they returned to the starting point ........ that's what happened.


I get it, I just can't explain it. :(

Get it? H2H2 did make changes and their presence was detected because after they returned to the starting point ........ that's what happened
With 'make changes' you mean the actions H2&H2 took - but they weren't 'changes' as such, because, they had already done it. It is like you said a bit before the Quote - they didn't 'change' anything, they just did what they did - H1&H1 + H2&H2 were acting simultaneously all along, just that H1&H1 at one point in time, had to travel back / dissappear back into time to actually make the simultaneous actions they had taken possible and to make them actually happen.

yes it does get confuzzeled, but I think you are on the right track ... it is very hard to put timetravel into words ...

nano

How does this tie in with Hermione using the timeturner to take classes simultaneously.

There is only one timeline because when what happens, happens .... that's what happened. sigh

If there are no changes made then time isn't the issue at all. What's required is for a wizard to be in two places at once and time is not the issue at all. But that's not what we see. When H2H2 go back in time, there are two simultaneous timelines and H2H2 do make changes. But once they reach the starting point there is only one timeline, and what happened when H1H1 and H2H2 were present simultaneously is what happened. There's no alternate. If they had not gone back, then events would have been different and Buckbeak, Sirius and probably Harry would all have been killed. And that would have been what happened because that's what happened. :D Get it? H2H2 did make changes and their presence was detected because after they returned to the starting point ........ that's what happened.


I get it, I just can't explain it. :(Whiz - gotcha! I see you made it then...

About the Hermione doing multiple lessons thing - you'll notice that when the boys told her she had missed Charms that day she did not immediately turn the turner back and go do that lesson. She knew she had missed it and so she went to appologize. I figure if there is any way Hermione could have gotten to that lesson she would have, but she coudln't so she didn't. Make sense?

And as they say above, read the narrative of PoA and you'll see that Harry and Hermione were always there in the time sequence - nothing changes. Buckbeak never did die, the executioner just swung his axe. 'This time' Harry and Hermione could hear the words Hagrid was saying while he howled. If you take that view then everything works out nicely!

:no:
The timeline goes through with only H1H1. But we have no idea what happened in that timeline, because after H2H2 went through the timeline a second time and made their changes, that became the only timeline, so the only timeline and the only memory there is, is the one we all saw with H1H1 and H2H2 going through simultaneously. You see? We just don't remember what happened when only H1H1 went through, because it was altered, and after H2H2 merge back to the present, that's all there is. Any other timeline is gone along with all memory of it. So, yes they made changes and yes it's all we remember. It's like nothing else ever happened.
I don't see why you're postulating an extra timeline that we don't need here. It's probably all that rollerskating going to your head. You need to change to blades Whiz.

Whiz - gotcha! I see you made it then...

About the Hermione doing multiple lessons thing - you'll notice that when the boys told her she had missed Charms that day she did not immediately turn the turner back and go do that lesson. She knew she had missed it and so she went to appologize. I figure if there is any way Hermione could have gotten to that lesson she would have, but she coudln't so she didn't. Make sense?

And as they say above, read the narrative of PoA and you'll see that Harry and Hermione were always there in the time sequence - nothing changes. Buckbeak never did die, the executioner just swung his axe. 'This time' Harry and Hermione could hear the words Hagrid was saying while he howled. If you take that view then everything works out nicely!

Then why did they go back at all? That doesn't make any sense.

I suspect Hermione didn't go to charms because she would have had to change to much. It was too late. And McGonagall may have given her strict guidelines.

But that's a guess. I'll have to read that part again.

I don't see why you're postulating an extra timeline that we don't need here. It's probably all that rollerskating going to your head. You need to change to blades Whiz.That's the point. There can only be one timeline. That's why they can only remember one series of events. Anything that happened before the alterations were made is "gone." It never happened. The only thing that happened is what happened after the changes, after H1H1 and H2H2 went through simultaneously. There can only be one timeline.

Then why did they go back at all? That doesn't make any sense.Of course it does! Because they didn't know that everything was already done... they hadn't experienced doing it yet. It wasn't Harry or Hermione who were the impetus to go back - it was Dumbledore. What you should be asking is: how did Dumbledore know to send Harry and Hermione back?

Take a look at what he says to them when he tells them to go. He isn't direct, he doesn't given precise instructions and the only thing he really emphasizes is that they must not be seen. They do not have the complacent idea that everything will turn out okay, so they frantically go through a successful program of rescue culminating with Harry's patronus. But there is only one timeline through here, because 1. that's all there needs to be and 2. anything else runs into paradox.

I drew you a picture.

Everything in the squiggle is gone, like it never happened, because there is only one timeline.

I drew you a picture.

Everything in the squiggle is gone, like it never happened, because there is only one timeline.It's a lovely squiggle - it really is! It's just not necessary. There's not evidence that there's some timeline we all collectively don't remember - everything can be explained if you assume that Harry and Hermione were in that time frame both as the younger versions of themselves, and as the three-hours-older versions. I don't understand why you need an alternate reality! Occam's razor baby - Occam's razor.

However, I do know a university that buys modern art so...

Now I need help. :huh:

I have come as far as envisioning one single timeline for the events in PoA.
To explain how I think, I'll use my own life as an example. I imagine the time as a ruler, and my life as a piece of string lain out along it. If I make a small loop in the string, it will cross the same section of the ruler twice, meaning that I will see the same time twice. I (the string) also exist in double at the same time, one "normal" bit of string, and one bit that is further down the string, i.e. the me from the future. (Actually I would pass the same time tree times, but since the time-turner obviously throws you back very fast, we can ignore that fact.)
I am therefore OK with the fact that I can not change anything, since I have already been there, and I can't change my memories of that time. I also realise that the reason that I had to go back in time was that there was this loop on the string, i.e. that I had already been there.
The thing I can't understand, however, is what caused the loop in the first place? I couldn't have created the loop myself, since the loop was already there when I reached that point in my life.
The way time travel is described in the HP universe requires you to believe in some kind of fate that will "preloop" your life for you, doesn't it?

I have heard theories that time is not linear at all, but I have yet to meet anyone who can explain how that would actually work. If somebody here can, I'm all ears!

Now I need help. :huh:

I have come as far as envisioning one single timeline for the events in PoA.
To explain how I think, I'll use my own life as an example. I imagine the time as a ruler, and my life as a piece of string lain out along it. If I make a small loop in the string, it will cross the same section of the ruler twice, meaning that I will see the same time twice. I (the string) also exist in double at the same time, one "normal" bit of string, and one bit that is further down the string, i.e. the me from the future. (Actually I would pass the same time tree times, but since the time-turner obviously throws you back very fast, we can ignore that fact.)
I am therefore OK with the fact that I can not change anything, since I have already been there, and I can't change my memories of that time. I also realise that the reason that I had to go back in time was that there was this loop on the string, i.e. that I had already been there.
The thing I can't understand, however, is what caused the loop in the first place? I couldn't have created the loop myself, since the loop was already there when I reached that point in my life.
The way time travel is described in the HP universe requires you to believe in some kind of fate that will "preloop" your life for you, doesn't it?

I have heard theories that time is not linear at all, but I have yet to meet anyone who can explain how that would actually work. If somebody here can, I'm all ears!Hmmm... not sure what you mean about 'fate'. The 'thing' that creates the loop is the time turner - the mechanism. The reason for using it was provided by Dumbledore. He is the extermal impetus for going back. Could you explain more? I don't see why there's a need for anything other than those two things...

It's a lovely squiggle - it really is! It's just not necessary. There's not evidence that there's some timeline we all collectively don't remember - everything can be explained if you assume that Harry and Hermione were in that time frame both as the younger versions of themselves, and as the three-hours-older versions. I don't understand why you need an alternate reality! Occam's razor baby - Occam's razor.

However, I do know a university that buys modern art so...I don't know anything about Occam. Which book is he in?
Anyway,


"Now pay attention," said Dumbledore, speaking very low, and very clearly. "Sirius is locked in Professor Flitwick's office on the seventh floor. Thirteenth window from the right of the West Tower. If all goes well, you will be able to save more than one innocent life tonight. Dumbledore is not certain of the outcome. This is not a done deal. They have one memory because the timeline was rerouted at the point that Hermione turned the timeturner. The other timeline "never happened," as a result.

I don't know anything about Occam. Which book is he in?I"m not sure if you're taking the mickey or not.. but you asked for it!

William of Occam (or Ockham... bless their little pointed medievally spelling heads) Philosopher of the 14th century, very influential and quite controversial in his time. Born around 1285 or so. Basically, I'm bringing in Occam's Razor or the Principle of Parsimony which says that : One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything. So, you can explain the whole time travel episode with one timeline quite nicely, and bringing in a second timeline that disappears leaving no trace of itself in the text or anywhere else is an unneeded complication! Unles it helps you understand the whole thing better in which case - go f'rit.

I think his original way of putting it BTW was something like: plurality should not be assumed without necessity

Or - the simplest solution is usually the best.
Anyway,
Dumbledore is not certain of the outcome. This is not a done deal. They have one memory because the timeline was rerouted at the point that Hermione turned the timeturner. The other timeline "never happened," as a result.Actually, I think Dumbledore is totally sure of the outcome. Read the description of how he behaves at Hagrid's hut and you'll see that he 'sounds amused' and delays various things at various times so that Harry and Hermione have time to do what they need to do. As I said, the real question is how does Dumbledore know?

I"m not sure if you're taking the mickey or not.. but you asked for it!

William of Occam (or Ockham... bless their little pointed medievally spelling heads) Philosopher of the 14th century, very influential and quite controversial in his time. Born around 1285 or so. Basically, I'm bringing in Occam's Razor or the Principle of Parsimony which says that : One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything. So, you can explain the whole time travel episode with one timeline quite nicely, and bringing in a second timeline that disappears leaving no trace of itself in the text or anywhere else is an unneeded complication! Unles it helps you understand the whole thing better in which case - go f'rit.

I think his original way of putting it BTW was something like: plurality should not be assumed without necessity

Or - the simplest solution is usually the best.
Actually, I think Dumbledore is totally sure of the outcome. Read the description of how he behaves at Hagrid's hut and you'll see that he 'sounds amused' and delays various things at various times so that Harry and Hermione have time to do what they need to do. As I said, the real question is how does Dumbledore know?
Occam's philosophy is interesting. Have you consulted with JKR to assert that she's applying this principle? It seems irrelevent otherwise.

When Dumbledore sends HH back, he is uncertain of the outcome, but in the rerouted timeline, he does know what's going on just as Harry remembers seeing who he thought was his father doing the patronus. But all of this occurs within memory, so within the rerouted timeline.

Dumbledore is WELL aware of the outcome of some of the events. He KNOWS Buckbeak managed to escape, because he was at the hut and saw that he had gone. He knows Harry managed to sve himself, as Harry is alive in the hospital wing - I don't know if he knows Sirius is already gone out of the office Was it Flitwick's office?) - but he certainly implies that they could save more than one life, meaning they could save sirius as well while they are at it ... Perhaps he does already know that Sirius is no longer in the office, but we don't see that. he certainly knows shortly afterwards when he lets the returning timetraveler back into the hopspital ward.

Here is my graphical version of the time traveling theory in Potterverse - Machiavelli any comments?

Does that help see things clearer???

nano

Hmmm... not sure what you mean about 'fate'. The 'thing' that creates the loop is the time turner - the mechanism. The reason for using it was provided by Dumbledore. He is the extermal impetus for going back. Could you explain more? I don't see why there's a need for anything other than those two things...

OK, so you mean that Dumbledore was the one who caused this loop? But that would mean that he actually caused things to change in the past, only that he used Harry & Hermione to do it for him. Otherwise, how would he get the idea that he should send them back in time?

DD is a wise old soul, and god knows what all those gadgets are for up in his office ...

He seems to sum up things a lot quicker than anybody else in the books - and when he saw Buckbeak gone, and realized someone had saved Harry, perhaps he just put 2 and 2 together and came up with the right answer. He most probably knows a lot more about time travel than anyone eles at Hogwarts or perhaps even than at the ministry ... i recklon he does a bit of traveling himself...

perhaps one of his gadgets told him there were 2 instances of Harry & hermione, perhaps one of the paitings or ghosts told him. Perhaps he even went back and told himself ... (I know you can't confront yourself, but i think DD would be able to rip that off) ...

Fact is he knew what had happened and the only explanation that seemed possible to him was that H&H had timetravelled, so he worked out when they must have gone, and gave them the inscent to do so ...

nano

OK, so you mean that Dumbledore was the one who caused this loop? But that would mean that he actually caused things to change in the past, only that he used Harry & Hermione to do it for him. Otherwise, how would he get the idea that he should send them back in time?That's the big question isn't it! What I'm postulating is that there wasn't a 'change,' Dumbledore sent them back because he knew they had been there at the time - he knew the whole story and so he sent them back. I don't know how he knew... one idea is that Lupin saw two Harry's on the map and told Dumbledore before rushing off to the Shack, another is that Dumbledore is watching Harry 'more closely than' he knows and that's what told him... not sure on that one but feel free to theorize!

Nano - that's a lovely image... although maybe you could show the whole line? The loop backward and the travel forward again? I tried, but I don't have any of my graphics stuff on this computer so the result was... primitive!

Whiz - Occam irrelevent! Never!! No, all I'm saying is that the solution I'm proposing covers everything in the text and makes no assumptions outside of it. What you're proposing assumes something that can never be proven, or brought up because it never exists. Seems to me that there's no support for what you're saying. Now, if that's your view because that's your philosophy then there's no answering that! I'll totally grant anyone the right to believe what they like... I'm just saying it's not supported, and as I understand it can't be supported so I don't see why it's necessary.

And didn't you know I have a private line to JKR? I mean, look at all the wisdom I spout all over the place!

So I'm just curiuos, but does your re-routed timeline have something to do with the whole Redhead forever theory? 'Cause you're really adamant and you don't seem to have any major argument to back it up... makes me curious!

He seems to sum up things a lot quicker than anybody else in the books - and when he saw Buckbeak gone, and realized someone had saved Harry, perhaps he just put 2 and 2 together and came up with the right answer. You're only looking at the final product, the rerouted timeline. At the point that Dumbledore sent H1H1 back, he was not sure of the outcome.
If all goes well, you will be able to save more than one innocent life tonight. The existing memory is only of the changed or rerouted timeline, and in that memory, yes, Dumbledore knows what's happening.
Fact is he knew what had happened and the only explanation that seemed possible to him was that H&H had timetravelled, so he worked out when they must have gone, and gave them the inscent to do so ...
nano I don't think you get it. Your description of events is entirely pointless. To say that they went back because Dumbledore figured out they went back is awful risky. Supposing he had been busy looking for a chamber pot and missed the cues? Then what?

That's the big question isn't it! What I'm postulating is that there wasn't a 'change,' Dumbledore sent them back because he knew they had been there at the time - he knew the whole story and so he sent them back. I don't know how he knew... one idea is that Lupin saw two Harry's on the map and told Dumbledore before rushing off to the Shack, another is that Dumbledore is watching Harry 'more closely than' he knows and that's what told him... not sure on that one but feel free to theorize!


But this is exactly the problem I'm talking about - it is a so called causal loop. "I (or somebody else) had to do this because I (or somebody else) already did" is a circular reasoning - an event cannot be caused by itself.
If it then was Harry who realised that he saw himself, or Dumbledore who saw him doesn't matter, the causal loop is still there.
On the other hand, if Dumbledore just said to himself "let's send these kids back in time and see what happens", without knowing that it already happened, he could be the cause of the loop. That way, there would be an external reason (even if it is just Dumbledore's curiosity) to start the chain of events.

And for the record, my brain is currently overheating. :rotfl:

I'm not sure why you brought up Redhead Forever. It's one of those theories that I'd rather be on the fence about because it does seem "out there." I just can't disprove it or refute most of the clues ....... yet. ;) (I tried. That's how I ended up a reluctant supporter. :D See, I can be swayed. :elaugh: )

But your explanation makes no sense. We do not have any indication that Dumbledore was complacent about the outcome when he sent HH back. But we do see it in Hagrid's hut, or rather we see him buying them time. Why? Because the timeline didn't reroute until Hermione used the time turner. Before she used it, Dumbledore says, "If." After, he is confident. See?

Thanks for the compliment Machiavelli ...

But what more should be on that image do you think? (By the way - word is the word , or rather the proggy I used to create it with - drawing features in word rather) That is the whole timeline as far as I understand it. the grey line represents the 'normal' timeline with only one instance of Harry & Hermione. The black bit is the duration of time, when two instances of Harry & Hermione exist. The black dots on the line represent the moment in time they arrived in their past and the moment they left off to reach that point. The continouing grey line is after H&H return back to the hospital wing wheneverthing goes back to normal with the three hours older Harry & Hermione.

I specifically didn't put a timeLOOP into the image, as to show that nothing happened on it's own, or the 'first' time round, as it always was like it is seen in the image and that there is nothing, that falls out of the timeline or becomes 'cutoff' / 'nonexistent' as Whizbang explains it.
Even when it was still unknown to Harry & Hermione that they indeed WOULD travel back in time, they were still coexisting along the black bit of the timeline together with the other instances of their person (the timetraveling H&H), as the H&H that in the future WOULD decide to travel back had already arrived in the past ...

yes it is a mind bender

nano
*passes Macchiavelli a fresh Cuppa - now where did I put those lemons I bought today???*

And for the record, my brain is currently overheating. :rotfl:

ICE!

DD acted the way he did in Hagrids hut the first time we read about it - we just don't see the outcome. He KNEW that Buckbeak had been saved when he tells them to go back in time.

The 'IF all goes well,' bit, doesn't mean he does not know the outcome of the buckbeak incident, it indicates that he does not know if they actually DID - notice did not will!!! - manage to save Sirius aswell. That is why he says save more than one innocent life - he already knows they saved buckbeak - one innocent life - he has yet to learn if they also manage to save another - Sirius. He doesn't know of the outcome of this bit of the plan, till the timetraveler return to him in front of the hospital wing and tell him.

nano

DD acted the way he did in Hagrids hut the first time we read about it Where? Page? - we just don't see the outcome. He KNEW that Buckbeak had been saved when he tells them to go back in time.

The 'IF all goes well,' bit, doesn't mean he does not know the outcome of the buckbeak incident, it indicates that he does not know if they actually DID - notice did not will!!! - manage to save Sirius aswell. Hmmmmm........ I'll concede it might be read that way. But doesn't that suggest that they have to go back in time to c
"change" something? If Buckbeak is alive they just need to get to him and rescue Sirius. There's no need for a time turner. Even the name of the instrument "Time Turner" suggests that time is being "turned" forward or backward. If there are no changes ........ ?????

It's all irrelevant. Why discover that someone used a time turner to turn back time, and apparently not change anything if ..... nothing is being changed?

:shrug: You're not making any sense to me. If H2H2 are three hours older than H1H1, then everything is already different.

Hmmmmm........ I'll concede it might be read that way. But doesn't that suggest that they have to go back in time to c
"change" something? If Buckbeak is alive they just need to get to him and rescue Sirius. There's no need for a time turner. Even the name of the instrument "Time Turner" suggests that time is being "turned" forward or backward. If there are no changes ........ ?????

It's all irrelevant. Why discover that someone used a time turner to turn back time, and apparently not change anything if ..... nothing is being changed?
Thats what I am trying to say all along they don't *change* anything - they just fulfill what they have already done, but for them to be there to actually dowhat they had done, they have to travel back in time.

It's like when Harry says, he knew he could do it this time, because he already knew the outcome of it. He already remembered that a patronus had been conjured up, so the timetraveling harry already knew that he would sucessfully cast a patrionus. But he had to travel back in time, otherwise he wouldn't have been at the other side of the lake to throw the charm ...

It does sound paradox, and it is hard to get your head round, but what happens happens - and it happens that way the *first* time we read about it and it also happens the *second* time we read about it - it is just that we are reading the story from two different perspectives - first we are with the younger H&H, that do not know that they will travel back in time - that is why harry rthinks he sees his father - then we read it from the perspective of the time traveling H&H - that is where Harry2 realizes it wasn't his father who does the patronus, but it was himself.

EDIT: try and find something the first time you read about the 3 hours in question that contradicts what you read about the second time or vice versa - you won't be able to, that is what makes it so creepy - it was right in front of your eyes all the time, but you read a different meaning into it. The second time round you actually see what is happeneing even in perspective to what H&H had experienced earlier on, and then it hits you, that it had been that way all the time.

nano

Thats what I am trying to say all along they don't *change* anything - they just fulfill what they have already done, but for them to be there to actually dowhat they had done, they have to travel back in time.


I think that both I and Whizbang understand this already. (I'm sorry Whizbang for assuming, but that's how I read your last post).
Nano, what you describe is what happens in the book, and it may also be how Rowling intended it to be. But I cannot quite accept the fact that "he already did it", as the whole reason for the time travelling event. Why did anybody think of time travel in the first place? Future selves don't just suddenly come out of nowhere, they must have had a reason to go back in time to be there at all.

lmagine I dropped a cup (event A), and the cup breaks (event B). It is then perfectly logic to say that the reason that the cup broke was because I dropped it - event A leads to event B. It is NOT logic to say that the reason that I dropped the cup was that it was going to break, because event B could not have happened without event A.
Along the same line it is logic to say that Harry went back in time (event A) and saw himself (event B) - event A leads to event B. To say that Harry went back in time because he saw himself would be to claim that event B caused event A, and that doesn't make sense, since event B cannot happen without event A.

So it doesn't really have anything to do with time anymore, it is just about the cause of events.

But that is where you are getting it wrong
- I think
You get Event A muddled up with Event B

what happened first??? Harry saw himself - Event A - it was only because he realised that it was himself that he had seen, that he actually performed the Patronus charm - he right up to that moment thought he was gonna see the person who did it which he thought was his dad. Harrys going back intime was Event B

DD *saw* all these 'Event A's and added two & two together and come up with the solution, that H&H must have traveled back in time - so he hints at Hermione what is to be done - and H&H do it Event B

nano

But that is where you are getting it wrong
- I think
You get Event A muddled up with Event B

what happened first??? Harry saw himself - Event A - it was only because he realised that it was himself that he had seen, that he actually performed the Patronus charm - he right up to that moment thought he was gonna see the person who did it which he thought was his dad. Harrys going back intime was Event B

DD *saw* all these 'Event A's and added two & two together and come up with the solution, that H&H must have traveled back in time - so he hints at Hermione what is to be done - and H&H do it Event B

nano
No, this is why I say that this issue has nothing to with the timeline. Harry sees himself before he goes back in time, but that's not what defines the events. Harry sees himself BECAUSE he has gone back in time - he could not have seen himself if he had not used the time-turner. That's the terms I have used - Event A is an independent event (in this case, Harry's use of the time-turner), while event B (in this case, Harry seeing himself) is directly caused by event A and could not have happened without event A.
In normal life "Event A's" always happen before "Event B's", and are therefore easy to understand, but what we have here is a case when it is the other way around - when a result happens before an action. But the result can still not be the cause of the action.

Thats what I am trying to say all along they don't *change* anything - they just fulfill what they have already done, but for them to be there to actually dowhat they had done, they have to travel back in time.You don't understand. Just for the sake of argument, what if Dumbledore hadn't sent them back?

There is only one timeline, but it was rerouted at the point that Hermione used the timeturner. The only memory possible is the rerouted one. They didn't go back because they went back. :huh: They went back to change events and allow for Buckbeak and Sirius to escape. Little changes that affect outcomes.
It's like when Harry says, he knew he could do it this time, because he already knew the outcome of it. He already remembered that a patronus had been conjured up, so the timetraveling harry already knew that he would sucessfully cast a patrionus. Of course! There is only one timeline to remember. But it is a "redo," a rerouted timeline. This is not what happened when H1H1 went through the first time, without H2H2 present. But whatever that was is gone, unless Dumbledore could store it somewhere, perhaps in a pensieve, before he sent H2H2 back. They can't remember what "didn't happen."

EDIT: try and find something the first time you read about the 3 hours in question that contradicts what you read about the second time or vice versa - you won't be able to, that is what makes it so creepy - it was right in front of your eyes all the time, but you read a different meaning into it. The second time round you actually see what is happeneing even in perspective to what H&H had experienced earlier on, and then it hits you, that it had been that way all the time.

nanoThat's right. Because there's only one timeline. And Harry and Hermione are in it twice. Heaven knows who else is in there twice unseen, because it's the law.

If DD wouldn't have sent them back then there would have only been 3 books to the series as harry woiuld have died.

But the fact is he did send them back - DD didnt' have to store anything anywhere. because nothing else ever happened - not to the *first* set of H&H and not to the second set - there was only one set of H&H all along.

But there were two instances of this set for this three hour period. And there always were right from the beginning of that three hour period right up to the moment they travel back.

There was no first time where Harry had to cope with the Dementors on his own, because the other instance of himself - yes he himself, not a changed him, just a three hour older him was standing at the other side of the lake. Actually if you want to look at the cause and effect bit - why was harry at the other side of the lake? because he saw himself there and beleived iot to be his father. Only because he wanted to see his father was he where he was in the first place. And only because he was there did he realise that he had not seen his father but himself save hisself - you just cannot get around that one properly using the cause & effect theory - but then again that doesn't really account for timetravel does it???

If Harry2 had not been there the first time round already there would never have been a timetraveling Harry as the Harry being attacked by the Dementors would have died. That prooves that he was there all the time - even the *first* time he experienced it, he was already being influenced by the fact that he would inthe near future travel back in time. There never was a part of that three hour timeline without the influence of the timetravelers - NEVER - not even the *first* time round, because that was the *ONLY* time round - only Harry & Hermione got to experience that time period twice - but the events of the time period never changed.

nano

If DD wouldn't have sent them back then there would have only been 3 books to the series as harry woiuld have died. Exactly! Something was changed.
But the fact is he did send them back - DD didnt' have to store anything anywhere. because nothing else ever happened - not to the *first* set of H&H and not to the second set - there was only one set of H&H all along. I disagree. It looks to me like there were two sets in one timeline. But it's true that what happened is what happened and there is nothing else to remember, because there is only one timeline.
But there were two instances of this set for this three hour period. And there always were right from the beginning of that three hour period right up to the moment they travel back. That's true, because there's only one timeline. What you refuse to see is that something was changed. They went back because if they hadn't, the outcome would have been different. The timeline was rerouted, and whatever happened the first time has ceased to exist in any way shape or form, even from memory.
There was no first time where Harry had to cope with the Dementors on his own, because the other instance of himself - yes he himself, not a changed him, just a three hour older him was standing at the other side of the lake. When H2H2 returned to their point of departure in the timeline, then what happened is what happend. It's the only thing that happened and the only thing that can be remembered. Actually if you want to look at the cause and effect bit - why was harry at the other side of the lake? Because something was changed. The timeline was rerouted from events that have ceased to exist, to the only thing that ever happened. because he saw himself there and beleived iot to be his father. Only because he wanted to see his father was he where he was in the first place. And only because he was there did he realise that he had not seen his father but himself save hisself - you just cannot get around that one properly using the cause & effect theory - but then again that doesn't really account for timetravel does it???Try to understnd ... there is only one timeline. What happened in the timeline with H1H1 and H2H2 coexisting is all there is to remember because everything that happened from the point in time that Hermione set the timeturner back to, (three hours before she used the turner) ceased to be and the timeline continued from that point, with H1H1 and H2H2 both present and allowing changes to be made. There were never two timelines and there is no loop. When Hermione set her turner to, was it seven o'clock, time continued from that point and the three hours never happened. This allowed H2H2 to make the changes necessary for the timeline to continue with events altered to allow a different outcome.
If Harry2 had not been there the first time round already there would never have been a timetraveling Harry as the Harry being attacked by the Dementors would have died. We have no idea what happened the first time around. It's gone. It never happened. The outcome has been changed.

When Hermione set her turner to, was it seven o'clock, time continued from that point and the three hours never happened. This allowed H2H2 to make the changes necessary for the timeline to continue with events altered to allow a different outcome. We seem to agree on most parts of the theory. But this bit is where I think you are making the mistake. Hermione turning the timeturner didn't 'reset' the global timeline to a three hour earlier point in time. It only sent Harry & Hermione back 3 hours. The three hours had already happened, otherwise, they would have had no memory of it ... and wouldn't have known what they are actually there for, they would have been thrown back to what they were 3 hours before and would have wondered why all of a sudden they were standing in the hall, when they just that minute had been together with Ron walking down the staircase ...

If the 3 hours hadn't already happened - or the timeline had been globally 'reset' as you put it - , then Harry would have no memory of seeing his father,he wouldn'thave gone to get a closer look, he wouldn't have been at the lake, he couldn't have saved himself -ergo, there would be no harry to travel back - *BANG* Harry would evapourate at the least.

But they DO remember what happened, because it HAD already happened - so in the three hours that were to follow everything was kind of destined to happen the exact same way they had experienced it the *first* time - they knew the outcome of certain things they had experienced, well at least they thought so - they didn't know it all - i.e. that Buckbeak had been saved. If they had tried o *change* anything, I beleive, that it would have brought on a paradoxon.

So what H&H did in the next 3 hours was also destined to happen, beacuse it HAD already happened, H&H were only ther to fulfill these events - play their role, act their part so to speak - point is - they weren't making changes - they were doing exactly what had been done the first time round - just they didn't know that. There was no *other* way the things ocurred, that then faded out because they travelled back. History was already written at the time they traveled back 3 hours - so their future three hours HAD to fit the history that had already happened - and it did perfectly, but not because anything was changed and noone remembered how it happened before it was changed, but because it was the ONLY way the events EVER took place.

There ALWAYS were those two sets of H&H - right from the word go. there NEVER was a variant of the timeline, where they didn't travel back in time, otherwise Harry wouldn't have survived! Just the same as H&H couldn't decide not to travel back in time, they HAD to, because the past withthem in it had already happened, so it wasn't their choice,it was their fate, if you want to put it that way.

If we agree on the outcome of what happened happened - okay fine by me- if it is easier for you to understand with your bit of timeline that got *stored* or *undone* - okay - but that is the multiple timeline theory and is obviously not the approach Jo took on the subject. There are other theories, and I see what you are getting at, it jusn't isn't the way it happened in the Book, and that is what we are discussing here.

nano

We seem to agree on most parts of the theory. But this bit is where I think you are making the mistake. Hermione turning the timeturner didn't 'reset' the global timeline to a three hour earlier point in time. It only sent Harry & Hermione back 3 hours. The three hours had already happened, otherwise, they would have had no memory of it ... and wouldn't have known what they are actually there for, they would have been thrown back to what they were 3 hours before and would have wondered why all of a sudden they were standing in the hall, when they just that minute had been together with Ron walking down the staircase ...I must have a totally different timeline myself because I always miss the juicy discussions! Nano- bravo you're doing well.

If the 3 hours hadn't already happened - or the timeline had been globally 'reset' as you put it - , then Harry would have no memory of seeing his father,he wouldn'thave gone to get a closer look, he wouldn't have been at the lake, he couldn't have saved himself -ergo, there would be no harry to travel back - *BANG* Harry would evapourate at the least.Exactly - the re-set scenario involved paradox, and requires much more complex explanation.

But they DO remember what happened, because it HAD already happened - so in the three hours that were to follow everything was kind of destined to happen the exact same way they had experienced it the *first* time - they knew the outcome of certain things they had experienced, well at least they thought so - they didn't know it all - i.e. that Buckbeak had been saved. If they had tried o *change* anything, I beleive, that it would have brought on a paradoxon.

So what H&H did in the next 3 hours was also destined to happen, beacuse it HAD already happened, H&H were only ther to fulfill these events - play their role, act their part so to speak - point is - they weren't making changes - they were doing exactly what had been done the first time round - just they didn't know that. There was no *other* way the things ocurred, that then faded out because they travelled back. History was already written at the time they traveled back 3 hours - so their future three hours HAD to fit the history that had already happened - and it did perfectly, but not because anything was changed and noone remembered how it happened before it was changed, but because it was the ONLY way the events EVER took place. So there's also no point in asking 'what if' because we already know they didn't do anything else! We know that from the first time around. There's no problem with Dumbledore figuring out to send them back - he knows doing so won't change anything but will fulfill what he as observed as having to happen. I really don't understand why having Dumbledore send them back is paradoxical - it's quite logical.

There ALWAYS were those two sets of H&H - right from the word go. there NEVER was a variant of the timeline, where they didn't travel back in time, otherwise Harry wouldn't have survived! Just the same as H&H couldn't decide not to travel back in time, they HAD to, because the past withthem in it had already happened, so it wasn't their choice,it was their fate, if you want to put it that way.Whiz - in your version of events how do you explain how Harry survives to travel back? Who saves the 'erased timeline Harry?'

I agree with machiavelli! The rest is beyond me. Harry and Hermione were transported back to another point on the only timeline there is, just as a portkey moves a wizard to another geographical point.

I think Dumbledore actually saw Harry taking Buckbeak from Hagrid's window. He knew that it was timeturner-Harry because he can see through invisibility cloaks (PS and CoS) and had just see the trio leaving.

I must have a totally different timeline myself because I always miss the juicy discussions!You used your timeturner once to oftenNano- bravo you're doing well.Why thanks Machiavelli ... :blush:

Harry and Hermione were transported back to another point on the only timeline there is, just as a portkey moves a wizard to another geographical point.Thats kind of how I think of timeturners - 4th dimensional portkeys ... good one!!! :tu:

nano

AHh!! great thread, can't believe I haven't seen it before, must leave very shortly so I will post thoughts and read all posts later, probably Monday. But Time Travel, a fascinating topic, the 4th dimension, the 3rd derivative. The best way to start thinking and talking about it is by reading Madeliene L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time! And realize that time is not linear. We only experience it in a linear fashion. I'm dabbling with it in a book I'm writing. Can't wait to read your posts!

We seem to agree on most parts of the theory. But this bit is where I think you are making the mistake. Hermione turning the timeturner didn't 'reset' the global timeline to a three hour earlier point in time. It only sent Harry & Hermione back 3 hours. The three hours had already happened, otherwise, they would have had no memory of it ... and wouldn't have known what they are actually there for, they would have been thrown back to what they were 3 hours before and would have wondered why all of a sudden they were standing in the hall, when they just that minute had been together with Ron walking down the staircase ... This is why they can't be seen

If the 3 hours hadn't already happened - or the timeline had been globally 'reset' as you put it - , then Harry would have no memory of seeing his father,he wouldn'thave gone to get a closer look, he wouldn't have been at the lake, he couldn't have saved himself Of course he would, because the only thing to remember is what happened when H1H1 and H2H2 were all present simultaneously. There is nothing else to remember.
-ergo, there would be no harry to travel back - *BANG* Harry would evapourate at the least. Well, apparently not. Try to understand, events were changed and we don't know what happened in the erased part of the timeline, the point between Hermione using the timeturner, and the point three hours before where they began their "redo." What ever events transpired the "first time" no longer exist to be remembered. But as they cannot bring back the dead, the events in the erased three hours either didn't culminate in any deaths, or they were prevented some other way.
But they DO remember what happened, They remember because that's all there is to remember.
So what H&H did in the next 3 hours was also destined to happen, beacuse it HAD already happened, H&H were only ther to fulfill these events - play their role, act their part so to speak - point is - they weren't making changes - they were doing exactly what had been done the first time round - just they didn't know that. There was no *other* way the things ocurred, that then faded out because they travelled back. History was already written at the time they traveled back 3 hours - so their future three hours HAD to fit the history that had already happened - and it did perfectly, but not because anything was changed and noone remembered how it happened before it was changed, but because it was the ONLY way the events EVER took place.

There ALWAYS were those two sets of H&H - right from the word go. there NEVER was a variant of the timeline, where they didn't travel back in time, otherwise Harry wouldn't have survived! Just the same as H&H couldn't decide not to travel back in time, they HAD to, because the past withthem in it had already happened, so it wasn't their choice,it was their fate, if you want to put it that way.

If we agree on the outcome of what happened happened - okay fine by me- if it is easier for you to understand with your bit of timeline that got *stored* or *undone* - okay - but that is the multiple timeline theory and is obviously not the approach Jo took on the subject. There are other theories, and I see what you are getting at, it jusn't isn't the way it happened in the Book, and that is what we are discussing here.

nano
Well, then prove your points with canon instead of exclamation points.



Whiz - in your version of events how do you explain how Harry survives to travel back? Who saves the 'erased timeline Harry?'It's not saved. That's why there we don't see it and the characters don't remember anything different. It's erased. Gone. (That said, I put nothing past Dumbledore or his pensieve. Dumbledore has exhibited behavior on other occasions that suggest "redos" of a timeline.)

What we have is H2H2, (wizards in two places and times at once) going through a single timeline and affecting events so that a different outcome is reached. Understand that we don't know what happened the first time but there no longer is a first time. It's gone. The only timeline in existence is the one in memory in which H2H2 existed simultaneously with H1H1 for the purpose of making subtle changes. So that is the only memory available.


Harry and Hermione were transported back to another point on the only timeline there is, just as a portkey moves a wizard to another geographical point.
Thats kind of how I think of timeturners - 4th dimensional portkeys ... good one!!!

nano Are you suggesting there was a timeline before they went back? A timeline that the timeturner moved them back three hours on? Isn't that a "first timeline?" Where is it now?

The best way to start thinking and talking about it is by reading Madeliene L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time! And realize that time is not linear. We only experience it in a linear fashion. I'm dabbling with it in a book I'm writing. Can't wait to read your posts!:welcome: Genevieve. I think it's important to remember that we're not talking about physics. We're talking about magic. Physics, I understand. :D

But if we look at time from the right side of the brain, superconsciousness, all time is now and backwards and forwards are illusions sustained by the imagined order of events. Perhaps this is Dumbledore's perspective.

.

Are you suggesting there was a timeline before they went back? A timeline that the timeturner moved them back three hours on? Isn't that a "first timeline?" Where is it now?

Time in the books is a line, on its own, without any other lines, like a road that goes from one place to another, the only road without junctions or parallel roads. Imagine walking down a long straight road. You use a portkey to move yourself to another point further back on the road. That doesn't create a new road, it is the same road because there is only one road and it is still there.
:huh: :sigh: :agree: :clap:

Time in the books is a line, on its own, without any other lines, like a road that goes from one place to another, the only road without junctions or parallel roads. Imagine walking down a long straight road. You use a portkey to move yourself to another point further back on the road. That doesn't create a new road, it is the same road because there is only one road and it is still there.
:huh: :sigh: :agree: :clap:So essentially, H1H1 went down the road, then at about 10pm they flipped a timeturner and went back three hours and as H2H2 and went over the same road simultaneously with H1H1? What happened on the timeline when only H1H1 went through it alone?

So essentially, H1H1 went down the road, then at about 10pm they flipped a timeturner and went back three hours and as H2H2 and went over the same road simultaneously with H1H1? What happened on the timeline when only H1H1 went through it alone?

He never went alone because his future self had already gone back and was there all the time. Nothing changed. It was always just as it happened. Now I give up! I have to go to work. Bye!

Have a good one. :)

He never went alone because his future self had already gone back and was there all the time. Nothing changed. It was always just as it happened. If H2H2 were ther the first time, why did they have to back and do it again? If it's already done ....... isn't it already done? If they were all there simultaneously the first time ...... who needs a timeturner?

If H2H2 were ther the first time, why did they have to back and do it again? If it's already done ....... isn't it already done? If they were all there simultaneously the first time ...... who needs a timeturner?

They had to timeturn back to fullfill what had already happened (at least saving Buckbeak). If there wasn't a timeturner things wouldn't have happened the way they did because H2H2 wouldn't have been there simultaneously.

What makes it so confuzzling to understand is that we're forced to read things from Harry's perspective. So to us it looks like there are 2 timelines as you've said, but there actually aren't, there is only one that is the "first" timeline we read about. If you pay very close attention to when you read about the "first" time Harry and Hermione experience these events you'll see the evidence to support these points. The movie did a great job portraying this IMO. That part where that small rock hits Hermione in the head and that after we find out that it was Hermione2 who threw it. It helps us understand how things WERE happening simultaneously. When I first got how it worked it was by thinking of a moment where there only one set of H+H in the timeline (when they meet DD outside the hospital wing door). You have to accept the fact that the H2H2 that DD was talking to were the same H1H1 he had just locked in and timetraveled back, just three hours older and that's what makes turns them into H2H2. That timeline which they went back in time from didn't continue without them or nothing of the kind, instead it sort of waited for them to relive those three hours.

They had to timeturn back to fullfill what had already happened (at least saving Buckbeak). If there wasn't a timeturner things wouldn't have happened the way they did because H2H2 wouldn't have been there simultaneously. Exactly. The timeline existed first, without H2H2. Otherwise, all Dumbledore would have had to do was tell them where Buckbeak was and send them to rescue Sirius. But instead, he sent them back.

What makes it so confuzzling to understand is that we're forced to read things from Harry's perspective. It's worse than that. We only see the simultaneous timeline from both perspectives. We never see what happened before the changes were made.So to us it looks like there are 2 timelines as you've said, but there actually aren't, there is only one that is the "first" timeline we read about. There is only one timeline. At some point h2h2 are sent back three hours. At that point, 7 oc'clock, it is seven o'clock. The time from 7 to 10 is gone. It never happened, except it did, and changes need to be made. If you pay very close attention to when you read about the "first" time Harry and Hermione experience these events you'll see the evidence to support these points. [QUOTE=bel15]No, that's the second time. The first time was erased when Hermione took them back.[QUOTE=bel15]You have to accept
I'm not one who's confused. :)

Whiz - can I get you to go back a minute to the Harry was never saved thing? You lost me. If he was never saved the story ends there. No time travel because they never reach that point! Harry's dead. End of book. You must have a different take on this and I'm not getting it... would you be nice and elucidate? Please?

Exactly. The timeline existed first, without H2H2. Otherwise, all Dumbledore would have had to do was tell them where Buckbeak was and send them to rescue Sirius. But instead, he sent them back. It's worse than that. WRONG! Sorry Whiz, but it is. There NEVER existed a different timeline where the actions that H2&H2 took didn't exist. NEVER! Otherwise there would not have been a Harry to travel back. well at least not a sane Harry. He would have been worse than dead, kissed by the Dementors.
We only see the simultaneous timeline from both perspectives. We never see what happened before the changes were made.Thats because there NEVER were any changes made. The first time we read about the events from H1&H1's point of view there is nothing that contradicts the events that are simultaneously happening to H2&H2. We read what is happeneing, and it is the only way it is happening - there is NO first time when things happen differently and is then forgotten, because of the 2 going back, because even the *first* time round H2&H2 ARE already there influencing the present. We just don't see tehm, otherwise it would have given away the plot of the book.
There is only one timeline. At some point h2h2 are sent back three hours. At that point, 7 oc'clock, it is seven o'clock. The time from 7 to 10 is gone. It never happened, except it did, and changes need to be made.
If the time from 7 till 10 never happened - then how come Harry and Hermy knew what they were there for??? If that is the case, then the memories of that time they already had, would have been wiped out also. The time was not 'globally reset'!!! The timeline carried on like it always did, but from 7 till three with two sets of H&H, one of them knowing what the other set had gotten up to, thinking they had to change something, but in reality, they were only retracing there steps - because what they were about to do was already predestined, cause in the time they came from their actions WERE already history

nano

Exactly. The timeline existed first, without H2H2. Otherwise, all Dumbledore would have had to do was tell them where Buckbeak was and send them to rescue Sirius. But instead, he sent them back.

It's worse than that. We only see the simultaneous timeline from both perspectives. We never see what happened before the changes were made.

There is only one timeline. At some point h2h2 are sent back three hours. At that point, 7 oc'clock, it is seven o'clock. The time from 7 to 10 is gone. It never happened, except it did, and changes need to be made.

I'm not one who's confused. :)

OMG Whiz! You managed to misundertand everything I said. :rotfl:

I think I'll let nano keep trying to explain it to you, since she seems to be doing a better job.:D

I understand exactly what you're saying. :) I'm trying to show you where you're going wrong. :agree:

Whiz - can I get you to go back a minute to the Harry was never saved thing? You lost me. If he was never saved the story ends there. No time travel because they never reach that point! Harry's dead. End of book. You must have a different take on this and I'm not getting it... would you be nice and elucidate? Please?It's because you're assuming that exactly the same events took place ......

H1H1 got through the timeline from 7-10pm. Something needs to be changed to bring about a different outcome. Dumbledore sends H2H2 back to 7 o'clock. Now we have two wizards in two places at once. They all go through the timeline. Changes are made. But since the first 7-10 no longer exists, there is nothing to remember. What happened the second time through the timeline is "what happened." There's nothing else anymore. Changes were made, the outcome is improved, H2H2 merge at the point of departure, the only memory anywhere is the timeline with two wizards in two places (but only one time) at once.

We have no clue what may have occured the first time through the timeline, because it's gone. It no longer exists.

You're assuming that Harry and Sirius were attacked by dementors, but we can't know that.


If the time from 7 till 10 never happened - then how come Harry and Hermy knew what they were there for??? If that is the case, then the memories of that time they already had, would have been wiped out also. The time was not 'globally reset'!!! The timeline carried on like it always did, but from 7 till three with two sets of H&H, one of them knowing what the other set had gotten up to, thinking they had to change something, but in reality, they were only retracing there steps - because what they were about to do was already predestined, cause in the time they came from their actions WERE already history

nanoThen why send them back a second time? If it was already done, why did dumbledore send them back at all. He could have told them where they left Buckbeak and sent them to rescue Sirius. There's no reason to go back and do something that's already been done. That's a time loop.

If you cannot change anything in the past, why would anyone ever get the idea to create a time-turner in the first place?
I am still looking for a motive for H2/H2's actions. If Buckbeak was never in danger, why would they bother to save him? Whizbang's explanation would solve that problem nicely.
But I also agree that Harry couldn't have been there to go back in time if the dementors had gotten him - that's why I don't think the book makes sense.

I wish Rowling herself was here to explain how she intended this to work. :huh:

It's because you're assuming that exactly the same events took place ......

H1H1 got through the timeline from 7-10pm. Something needs to be changed to bring about a different outcome. Dumbledore sends H2H2 back to 7 o'clock. Now we have two wizards in two places at once. They all go through the timeline. Changes are made. But since the first 7-10 no longer exists, there is nothing to remember. What happened the second time through the timeline is "what happened." There's nothing else anymore. Changes were made, the outcome is improved, H2H2 merge at the point of departure, the only memory anywhere is the timeline with two wizards in two places (but only one time) at once.

We have no clue what may have occured the first time through the timeline, because it's gone. It no longer exists.See - that's where you lose me! Why is this necessary? Why do you postulate a timeline that you can't predict, that you can't describe, and that has no evidence? We know why Harry and Hermione go back with the time turner because it's there in the existing timeline... so why do they go back in yours? We don't see it - is that what you're saying? Do we not see the moment they go back in time from that missing line? Because that totally confuzzles me!

You're assuming that Harry and Sirius were attacked by dementors, but we can't know that.

Then why send them back a second time? If it was already done, why did dumbledore send them back at all. He could have told them where they left Buckbeak and sent them to rescue Sirius. There's no reason to go back and do something that's already been done. That's a time loop.He didn't send them back a second time - he only sent them once. He sent them back because they had to be there when they were there... because they were there! The reason to go back was because it had to happen and Dumbledore knew it. He also knew that the only way for it to happen was for them to go, so he sent them.

I'm still not clear on this whole missing timeline thing because it seems so unecessarily complex.... in your theory - why do they go back? And when? And then why does Dumbledore send them back when he does? Confuzzled!

He didn't send them back a second time - he only sent them once. He sent them back because they had to be there when they were there... because they were there! The reason to go back was because it had to happen and Dumbledore knew it. He also knew that the only way for it to happen was for them to go, so he sent them.

This reasoning is totally circular.
"They had to go there because they had already been there?" - but WHY were they there in the first place? There must have been an original reason, even though it may be lost in the existing timeline.

This reasoning is totally circular.
"They had to go there because they had already been there?" - but WHY were they there in the first place? There must have been an original reason, even though it may be lost in the existing timeline.Why does there have to be an original reason? I mean, what trouble do you have with Dumbledore sending them back? I know you've tried to explain, but please imagine I'm really dim and explain it again in small words... for me?

I wish Rowling herself was here to explain how she intended this to work. :huh: That would be the best solution. But for some reason, she objects to stalkers, so ...... we're back where we started for now.

I'll try to get try to get back tonight. We have a chip full of photos to upload and fuss with.

We can see that both sets of Harrys and Hermiones co-exist in the same period when you read the text and see the movie. If Harry had been kissed by the Dementors in the earier timeline there wouldn't have been a second version of Harry to send back and intervene. So there would be no redo possible.

Dumbledore either saw the second set of Harry and Hermione during earlier timeline, or he surmised what happened because he knew of Hermione's timeturner. He merely facilitated their trip back in time based on what he could see was an opportune moment. In doing this, Dumbledore was just playing his role in the unfolding events.

See - that's where you lose me! Why is this necessary? Why do you postulate a timeline that you can't predict, that you can't describe, and that has no evidence? We know why Harry and Hermione go back with the time turner because it's there in the existing timeline... so why do they go back in yours? We don't see it - is that what you're saying? Do we not see the moment they go back in time from that missing line? Because that totally confuzzles me!

You're assuming that Harry and Sirius were attacked by dementors, but we can't know that.

He didn't send them back a second time - he only sent them once. He sent them back because they had to be there when they were there... because they were there! The reason to go back was because it had to happen and Dumbledore knew it. He also knew that the only way for it to happen was for them to go, so he sent them.

I'm still not clear on this whole missing timeline thing because it seems so unecessarily complex.... in your theory - why do they go back? Yours is easier? It requires someone knowing that they or someone else has to go back. What if no one knows and someone who's supposed to go back doesn't? And if Dumbledore only sent H2H2 back once, what were they already doing there? How did they get there? If they were already there, why did they have to go back and be there again? Is that the definition of a time loop? We saw events first through H1's eyes, then through H2's eyes. But we know they were both there, both times we saw the timeline. If H2 was there, why did he have to go back, again? And why is that easier?

Why does there have to be an original reason? I mean, what trouble do you have with Dumbledore sending them back? I know you've tried to explain, but please imagine I'm really dim and explain it again in small words... for me?
The problem is, I think, that if they need no reason other than the fact that it had to happen, there is no free choice anymore. The universe is suddenly totally predetermined - you have to go back with your time-turner at certain times, simply because it has to happen.
But what if Hermione and Harry had refused to use it? I don't quite buy the deterministic view that your life will end up the same whatever you do, because what is then the point of having a free will?

Also, it is pure logic. Think of my previous example where I dropped a cup and the cup broke. I can say that the cup broke because I dropped it - totally logic. If I had a deterministic world view I could also say that I dropped the cup because it had to break - less logic, but some people still think that way. But what really caused those events was neither me dropping the cup or the cup breaking - the original cause was something that happened before the first event. Perhaps me stumbling over my cat and therefore losing hold of the cup.

In the same way, even if you say that Harry went back in time because he saw himself, and he saw himself because he went back in time, something must have STARTED that chain of events - and that should have happened, in Harry's point of view, before the first event. If you think of it - the first event in this case is actually the use of the time-turner, because the second event (Harry seeing himself) would not have been possible without it.
And here is where I think the problem is. It seems like the original cause (Dumbledore telling them to use the time-turner?) occured in the timespan BETWEEN the second event (Harry seeing himself) and the first event (the use of the time turner). Therefore, Harry would afterwards (note this - afterwards, not before he was time-travelling!) believe that he went back because he had already done so. But before he used the time-turner he didn't know he had seen himself, he thought he had seen his father, so why would he feel obligated to go back? Therefore, the original cause for all these things happening was not that they saw themselves, it was something else.
And if you go one step further, Dumbledore must also have had some motive to tell them to use the time-turner, because otherwise he would not have initiated this chain of events in the first place. And I still think his motive was to save Buckbeak.

In short; things don't just start to happen by themselves, at least they haven't done so since the Big Bang. :)

H1H1 got through the timeline from 7-10pm. Something needs to be changed to bring about a different outcome. Dumbledore sends H2H2 back to 7 o'clock. Now we have two wizards in two places at once. They all go through the timeline. Changes are made. But since the first 7-10 no longer exists, there is nothing to remember. What happened the second time through the timeline is "what happened." There's nothing else anymore. Changes were made, the outcome is improved, H2H2 merge at the point of departure, the only memory anywhere is the timeline with two wizards in two places (but only one time) at once.

We have no clue what may have occured the first time through the timeline, because it's gone. It no longer exists.

You're assuming that Harry and Sirius were attacked by dementors, but we can't know that.

Then why send them back a second time? If it was already done, why did dumbledore send them back at all. He could have told them where they left Buckbeak and sent them to rescue Sirius. There's no reason to go back and do something that's already been done. That's a time loop.
what you are implicating is the multiple timeline theory - where things could happen, one goes back in time, changes the outcome, and the timeline takes a new fork, becuase of theese events.
If that was what Jo had wanted, then we would have most probably seen the changes they made, and along with Harry & Herminone be the only ones, who have knowledge of the timeline that was.

If it happens that way, then Harry & Hermy would be the ONLY ones, that knows of the changes - but DD knows of them, too. When he says 'save more than one innocent life' it implies, that he already knows, that they saved ONE life, and that it might be possible to save more than one, because Sirius hasn't yet been kissed. If it works the way you say, then DD couldn't have known that, unless he were to go back with them.

There is no implication, that we are looking at multiple timelines. And why would we read about the changed events, already influenced by H2&H2 through the eyes of H1&H1 in the first place??? Jo was very smart in writing that bit. You think Buckbeak is dead, but it is NOT in canon. Along with Harry you think he might have seen his father. But what you actually read, is that he sees someone who is strangely familiar. Why would Jo leave this room if it were not meant to imply, that what we see the second time we read about it, fits in perfectly with the events the first time, because they already happened???

On the bit of cause and effect - there was a second set of H&H in the three hour period, because of this they had to go back - so the cause still happened BEFORE the effect. In H&H's personal feeling of the timeline, the cause of them being in the past, was the fact they turned the timeturner, which would mean the cause happened after the effect. But if you look at it from timeline in an objectional view - what happened first??? H&H arrived from the future - becuase they were there, the first set of H&H had no choice but to travel back. So them traveling back was the effect of them being there from the future.

Cause and effect gouverned by rules of OUR world, where we do not know if timetravel to this extent exist - What we mustn't forget, is that we cannot apply our rules of our physical world, to what Jo rights in her books - it's magic remember. I mean wizards can apperate - that also goes against our physical laws, as we know them, but we don't go on a humpty on that one, because we take Jo's word for it. They can fly on brooms & carpets, which defies the laws of gravity - but we aren't up in arms onthat either - so why should we try and imply OUR set or laws & rules to timetravel in the book. Because of this, even if cause & effect dosn't fit the plot (which I still think it does) then it is not the reason to dismiss the one tim,eline theory and try and substitue it with th multiple timeline theory, which is what Whiz is doing.

It might well be, that it all drudges down to fate & destiny, perhaps that is even what is behind the door in the DoM - okay different thread - but I really think, that the timetravellers were bound by the actions, that they had already taken - and that there was no other way they could have happened. They couldn't NOT travel back - that wasn't a choice they had, because they already had arrived in the past. So it had already taken place,it just had to be played out. Given the choice to go back and save Sirius, do you think harry & Hermy would EVER had made a different choice??? It's not about the fact they could have and everything would have turned out different, it's about the fact that NEVER would have, and so they would always have already been there to influence the events they had already experienced ....

Coooah ... that was a long one ... sorry for that rant

nano

This is clearly an emotional issue, so this is my last post here. Then I will unsubscribe.PoA, pg 396, scholastic

..... I've been turning it back so I could do hours over again, that how I've been doing several lessons at once, see? But ...

"Harry, I don't understand what Dumbledore wants us to do. Why did he tell us to go back three hours? How's that going to help Sirius?"

Harry stared at her shadowy face.

"There must be something that happened around now he wants us to change," he said slowly. "What happened? We were walking down to Hagrid's three hours ago ..."

"This is three hours ago, and we are walking down to Hagrid's," said Hermione. "We just heard ouselves leaving .."
Harry realizes that there is something Dumbledore wants them to change. Also, Dumbledore sends them back just before midnight in the book, so they go back to just before 9 pm, rather than 7 as in the movie. At that lattitude and season, must have been getting dusky by then.

I also noticed that Hermione says "several lessons at once." This suggests that the same timeframe can be travelled more than twice and that it is somehow possible to remember what happened each time through ... or Hermione takes great class notes. Hmmmmmm......... Interesting.

"Hermione," said Harry suddenly, "what if we - we just run in there and grab Pettigrew - "

"No," said Hermione in a terrified whisper. "Don't you understand? We're breaking one of the most important wizarding laws! Nobody's supposed to change time, nobody! You heard Dumbledore, if we're seen -"

"We'd only be seen by ourselves and Hagrid!"

"Harry, what do you think you'd do if you saw yourself bursting into Hagrid's house?" said Hermione.

"I'd - I'd think I'd gone mad, " said Harry, "or I'd think there was some Dark Magic going on - '

"Exactly! You wouldn't understand, you might even attack yourself! Don't you see? Professor McGonagall told me what awful things have happened when wizards have meddled with time ..... Loads of them ended up killing their past or future selves by mistake!"

If changes can't be made, I suggest there wouldn't be laws against it. And again, if changes can't be made, how would wizards have accidently killed their past or future selves? Seems like a big change. Meddling with time is dangerous, but not impossible.

As I typed this out, I wondered what examples McGonagall shared with Hermione. :huh:

I think the timeline in POA works something like this:

I agree with a lot of you that there is only a single timeline at work. Here's why:

Imagine Harry is on a 24 (hours in a day) meter running track. Harry has to run down this track with his firebolt in hand. At the 19 (7:00) meter line he drops his firebolt. Unsure whether to pick it up or not he continues on to the 22 (10:00) meter line. At this time, he decides to go back and get his firebolt. He then continues on to the end.

So, it makes sense that he only traveled one path. He may have backtracked a little but there is only one path. Hence, only one timeline. If there were two timelines, it would suggest that Harry started all over and made sure he didn't drop his firebolt.

Also, there is only one timeline because Harry and Hermione didn't go forward in time after they did their stomping around. If they had gone back and said to themselves that "scabbers is pettigrew" and then gone forward they would have created another timeline and erased the one they were on.

Also, after he would have started moving again, those 3 meters would be different. Harry on the track knows that the added weight of the firebolt might make those 3 meters a teeny bit harder to run. Just like redoing the 7-10 pm time slot would be different even though they had already experienced it.

Sorry to lose you Whiz if we did! I don't think it's an emotional issue - we just have different views on how to make this thing work. Personally I think your version involves paradox and isn't supported - you feel the same way about mine! That's fine. In fact, I think it's good to have more than one theory out there so people who are confuzzled by the sinlge-line version have another option. Sure, it confuzzles me and I still don't get your objections as they don't seem logical to me... but that's my problem! See you around layers then.

Oh, and on free-will and time travel, I don't see that this episode is a problem. That's rather like saying you have no free choice when a cup breaks because you dropped it! There is cause and effect in a normal time-line that imposes choices and consequences because of the nature of time as we experience it... this is just a facet of that situation!

Hey, has anyone here seen the movie 12 Monkeys?

I know it's pretty out there, it's sci-fi after all :rolleyes:, but the way they present time travel is similar to our "one timeline" theory. The summed up version of the story is something like this:

There's this main character (James Cole) that travels back to the past to get information about this virus that almost exterminated human kind. And through the movie we see him remembering things about his past (when he was a child, before the virus attacked) through his dreams and as the plot evolves we see the events he experienced in the past through his "grown-up timetraveling self". He knows he can't change what has happened in the past because it has already happened, so he's aware he can't stop the outbreak and all he's supposed to do is get information about the virus so the scientist in the future can create a vaccine in the future.

Well, that probably doesn't make any sense for those who haven't seen the movie but the important part is that just like in PoA he sees in his "past" things that happened to and because his timetraveled self was there as there was only one timeline and that he was already there the "first" time around. I realise that doesn't have anything to do with HP but maybe someone that is having trouble understanding how it works could find a new perspective from watching that movie, and since it is completely devoted to timetravel and how it affects the past (or doesn't) it would be a clearer point of view without getting confuzzled by other events that happen in the HP books. :D

Just a thought... I know it helped me understand it a little.

Hey, has anyone here seen the movie 12 Monkeys?

I know it's pretty out there, it's sci-fi after all :rolleyes:, but the way they present time travel is similar to our "one timeline" theory. The summed up version of the story is something like this:

There's this main character (James Cole) that travels back to the past to get information about this virus that almost exterminated human kind. And through the movie we see him remembering things about his past (when he was a child, before the virus attacked) through his dreams and as the plot evolves we see the events he experienced in the past through his "grown-up timetraveling self". He knows he can't change what has happened in the past because it has already happened, so he's aware he can't stop the outbreak and all he's supposed to do is get information about the virus so the scientist in the future can create a vaccine in the future.

Well, that probably doesn't make any sense for those who haven't seen the movie but the important part is that just like in PoA he sees in his "past" things that happened to and because his timetraveled self was there as there was only one timeline and that he was already there the "first" time around. I realise that doesn't have anything to do with HP but maybe someone that is having trouble understanding how it works could find a new perspective from watching that movie, and since it is completely devoted to timetravel and how it affects the past (or doesn't) it would be a clearer point of view without getting confuzzled by other events that happen in the HP books. :D

Just a thought... I know it helped me understand it a little.Nevver'eard of it -but sounds like you've found a comparison that works! It's difficult for me to know when I'm explaining something clearly or not because it all sounds so reasonable in my head and I don't always understand why someone else doesn't get it. Ah well... I haven't had to deal with time travel outside the norm in my own life... as far as I know... so speculation doesn't hurt!

This is clearly an emotional issue, so this is my last post here. Then I will unsubscribe.
Sorry to lose you Whiz if we did!
Same here - I really enjoyed discussing it with you - even though we have two opionions in the matter - but thats what keeps these threads alive - how boring would it be if one person states something, and the others all agree.
And I hope it wasn't me, that made you think it is an emotional issue, because I don't se it as one, and hope it didn't come over that way.

Hey, has anyone here seen the movie 12 Monkeys?
Yeah bel - great, weird, timetraveling film - funny how he sees that 'blonde' guy at the end heh??? And yes it does seem to me, that a similar timeline theory was used there. I think I will rewatch it and see if I can find any direct paralells.

nano

AHh!! great thread, can't believe I haven't seen it before, must leave very shortly so I will post thoughts and read all posts later, probably Monday. But Time Travel, a fascinating topic, the 4th dimension, the 3rd derivative. The best way to start thinking and talking about it is by reading Madeliene L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time! And realize that time is not linear. We only experience it in a linear fashion. I'm dabbling with it in a book I'm writing. Can't wait to read your posts!

AHh!! great thread, can't believe I haven't seen it before, must leave very shortly so I will post thoughts and read all posts later, probably Monday. But Time Travel, a fascinating topic, the 4th dimension, the 3rd derivative. The best way to start thinking and talking about it is by reading Madeliene L'Engle's A Wrinkle in Time! And realize that time is not linear. We only experience it in a linear fashion. I'm dabbling with it in a book I'm writing. Can't wait to read your posts!Wrinkle is great fun. For a more... intersting introduction to time and probability you could try 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'! Dive on in and then tell us we're all wrong. Oh, and where's that darn smiley... I never use smilies but... :welcome:

Sorry I'm always smiling, I wrote that when I was running out the door and using the quick post :angel:
I tried to read Hitchhikers 10 years ago, maybe I was too young then, and should give it another try. I couldn't get into it at the time but things change :tu:

Sorry I'm always smiling, I wrote that when I was running out the door and using the quick post :angel:
I tried to read Hitchhikers 10 years ago, maybe I was too young then, and should give it another try. I couldn't get into it at the time but things change :tu:

I agree with Machiavelli, you should give "Hitchhiker's Guide" another try, it's really a fun read.

If the plot has got everything to do with time then the speech in CoS where Tom states that Voldemort is my past, present and future may have great importance. We have seen Voldemorts present as Tom, we have seen Tom's future as Voldemort but what we have not seen is Tom past yet.

JKR did state that something about the birth was to be very important so maybe the only way to stop Voldemort is to go back in time to a point where he can not do harm and destroy him but would Harry be able to destroy a baby.

If Harry can save himself then he can also prevent Tom from turning into Voldemort perhaps at some point in his past life, something made Tom change while at Hogwarts.

If the plot has got everything to do with time then the speech in CoS where Tom states that Voldemort is my past, present and future may have great importance. We have seen Voldemorts present as Tom, we have seen Tom's future as Voldemort but what we have not seen is Tom past yet.Well, it could be Tom rejecting everything about him that isn't the all powerful Lord he's trying to create - he is 16 and males of that age do sometimes... well... have issues about grandeur. However, the past thing is interesting.

JKR did state that something about the birth was to be very importantReally? Cool - do you know where that quote is?
so maybe the only way to stop Voldemort is to go back in time to a point where he can not do harm and destroy him but would Harry be able to destroy a baby.Well, that would contradict what we've seen of time travel so far - and it would erase the history of the books as we have them. I mean, clearly Harry didn't do that because there's Voldemort striding about in his seriously evil robes... I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it would be a bit odd to suddenly have the previous books erased!

Well, you are all thinking linearly in terms of "timeline." Most of the time when time travel is postulated in SciFi, time is not viewed as a linearity. All points of time exist at every point in the time continuum, synchronic rather than diachronic occurance. It's a paradox. It cannot be explained in terms of timeline and before/after.

Well, you are all thinking linearly in terms of "timeline." Most of the time when time travel is postulated in SciFi, time is not viewed as a linearity. All points of time exist at every point in the time continuum, synchronic rather than diachronic occurance. It's a paradox. It cannot be explained in terms of timeline and before/after.Yeah... but in a literary setting unless you postulate multiple probability lines - and also establish them as a plot device in some way - you have to accept a linear and cause-effect view of time. I am aware that in quantum physics linear time is non applicable, but this isn't quantum physics! As JKR has not established, as far as I can tell, any hints or clues that there are multiple universes or timelines I do not think she will take that route. We've talked about how paradox is avoided in PoA through a strictly limited, and linear view of both time and time travel. That's the way the text reads to me anyway. I'd love to see a really good string of quotes that support a non-linear time view if someone wants to put it together!

Well, that would contradict what we've seen of time travel so far - and it would erase the history of the books as we have them. I mean, clearly Harry didn't do that because there's Voldemort striding about in his seriously evil robes... I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it would be a bit odd to suddenly have the previous books erased!
If timetraveling were a big twist & plot device towards the end of the book, then I agree totally with the linear view of time. Then it would consist of the 'changes' (here we go again) - you know what I mean Machiavelli - already having had taken place - meaning what we have read so far is exactly what happened.

If there was a timetravel plot device, that would allow changes and run on the multiple timeline theory, then to me it would be jsut as bad as a final where Harry' wakes up and finds out it has all been a dream.

I am not saying I want a BIG timetravel plot device (perhaps another small one ... this is fun!!!) - Just stating it could be a possibility - but in my eyes it would be the same as in PoA - the indirect answers would have to have been there all the time, just that we are not able to make head & tail of them at the moment, for we don't see the clues as what they are, and take things for fact, that actually perhaps aren't ...

Hope I didn't confuse anyone!

nano

If timetraveling were a big twist & plot device towards the end of the book, then I agree totally with the linear view of time. Then it would consist of the 'changes' (here we go again) - you know what I mean Machiavelli - already having had taken place - meaning what we have read so far is exactly what happened.

If there was a timetravel plot device, that would allow changes and run on the multiple timeline theory, then to me it would be jsut as bad as a final where Harry' wakes up and finds out it has all been a dream.I totally agree with this! I so hope that neither one happens.

I am not saying I want a BIG timetravel plot device (perhaps another small one ... this is fun!!!) - Just stating it could be a possibility - but in my eyes it would be the same as in PoA - the indirect answers would have to have been there all the time, just that we are not able to make head & tail of them at the moment, for we don't see the clues as what they are, and take things for fact, that actually perhaps aren't ...

Hope I didn't confuse anyone!

nanoThat's why I can't rule out those Dumbledore = Harry (or Ron) totally and completely... I just can't see the point. Ah well... back to the wait for book VI...

as bad as a final where Harry' wakes up and finds out it has all been a dream.

My biggest fear is that Harry will have dreamt all of this... you know the idea of an abused child escaping his circumstances with imagination. That would be the ultimate worst ending I can imaging (much worse than Harry dying). And the scariest part is that I can see a lot that could be just him escaping mentally.


I had almost finished a post for this thread with lots of theoretical stuff in it, and then my computer crashed and I was depressed. So I'm not going to attempt that again right away, and will just introduce myself quickly. Name's Matt, and I'm a Junior at USC (Southern California, the only one that counts) studying for a degree in Physics.

I like theoretical science... alot. So suffice to say, I should be around this thread a lot. :)

Oh ... I can get to do that smilie now ...

EDIT: welcome to the thread - better now???

there is a thread about the worst fears for the rest of the books and the 'dream-theory' is high on ranks in there!!!

I totally agree with this! I so hope that neither one happens
:clap: Hooray - you agree - not that we ever disagreed - I love the logic in your posts!!! But true - whilst I can see it happening, I hope there is a bit more to it - although I wouldn't mind seeing timetravel used again, but not as a major plot twist.

nano

Oh ... I can get to do that smilie now ...

:welcome: to the thread

Lol I *hate* that smiley ;)

Lol I *hate* that smiley ;)In that case you're definitely welcome to the thread! Physics and you don't like smilies? Well, at least some smilies... hope you can make sense of the babbling so far... and I'll warn you the theory we're going for right now doesn't use any of the fun stuff - no string theory, no Feynman diagrams with pretty symmetries of time... just plain old linear thinking and a healthy dose of logic. And stubborness. Lots of stubborness.

just FYI String Theory isn't Physics... don't get me started on those guys.:grumble: My physics professor had a nice way of putting it but I don't think it would be acceptable to post lol.

String theory is just a bunch of mathematicians wanting to feel good about themselves and looking for meaning in math. It has no basis in the real world and only works with 11 or more dimensions.

I like smilies... just not that one lol dunno why :)

just plain old linear thinking and a healthy dose of logic. And stubborness. Lots of stubborness.
There's a contradiction in that ;) Linear thinking and logic don't work well when time travel is involved hehe they get up and walk out the door.

just FYI String Theory isn't Physics... don't get me started on those guys.:grumble: My physics professor had a nice way of putting it but I don't think it would be acceptable to post lol.

String theory is just a bunch of mathematicians wanting to feel good about themselves and looking for meaning in math. It has no basis in the real world and only works with 11 or more dimensions.

I like smilies... just not that one lol dunno why :)A physicist is a mathematician gone bad (math friend's def) a mathematician is... sorry, family friendly so I can't quote! (physicist friend after two in the pub with math friend).


There's a contradiction in that ;) Linear thinking and logic don't work well when time travel is involved hehe they get up and walk out the door.That's okay s'long as they don't come back before they left.

A physicist is a mathematician gone bad (math friend's def) a mathematician is... sorry, family friendly so I can't quote! (physicist friend after two in the pub with math friend).
Hehe we don't get along well with mathematicians and not just because they don't shower or change their clothes... though that might have something to do with it ;)

That's okay s'long as they don't come back before they left.
LOL! I guess you've heard about us making light go faster than the speed of light? So that the light seemingly arrives before it leaves.

Hehe we don't get along well with mathematicians and not just because they don't shower or change their clothes... though that might have something to do with it ;)'I am leaving physics for mathematics; I find physics unrigorous, elusive.' assistant to Dirac speaking to Freeman Dyson
'I am leaving mathematics for physics for exactly the same reason' Dyson's reply.

LOL! I guess you've heard about us making light go faster than the speed of light? So that the light seemingly arrives before it leaves.Oh yes. I enjoy being on the layman's side of quantum physics. That way I can enjoy it without having to muck about with explanations!

Ugh I hate Quantum Physics (as a class)

I had the intro to that last semester and trust me, you don't want to mess with Schrodinger equations *shudder* Lots of nasty calculus involved there.

I have two semesters solely on Quantum Physics when I get back to the States too... not looking forward to that at all!

But if for some saddistic reason you are interested...

here is a picture and a link:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/Images/ae329a.jpg (http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae329.cfm)

That pitchforky thing (Psi) is the Schrodinger wave function:
Wave Function Steps (http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:NOH7TYw9pTsJ:physicsx.pr.erau.edu/Courses/coursesF2004/EP455/chapter_1.pdf+schrodinger+wave+function&hl=en)

Yikes!

Welcome to this thread Ranador! Don't worry, I'm not going to use that smile. :)

I actually thought my brain had already completely melted until I saw that picture of yours. New levels of liquefaction...

So, feel free to make our brains melt even more than I thought it was possible! :D

Yikes!

Welcome to this thread Ranador! Don't worry, I'm not going to use that smile. :)

I actually thought my brain had already completely melted until I saw that picture of yours. New levels of liquefaction...

So, feel free to make our brains melt even more than I thought it was possible! :D
Lol I shall try my best ;)

Although all this nice talking is something common to this forum, I like to ask: Where are the theories? Are these solely on how it works in the book, or in real time (to coin a phrase?) just wondering....

Although all this nice talking is something common to this forum, I like to ask: Where are the theories? Are these solely on how it works in the book, or in real time (to coin a phrase?) just wondering....
Well most of what I've read in this thread has been a debate on how you perceive time.

Is time linear?

It's not, but it's very confusing for people to understand, because our brains are set for linear thought and "logic". A common current theory in the real world is that time doesn't really so much flow. The blocks of time exist and are put into order by our brains.

We remember the "past", live in the "present" and move towards the "future". But scientists are arguing that may not always have been the case, and that it's definitely not a rule. Time exists because we perceive it. It seems to flow in the way it does, because we perceive it. But there is no reason why an creature couldn't have existed that viewed what we'd call the "past" as the present.

No such creature would last very long. A frog that lived in the past, so to speak, would get very hungry when he strikes at a fly that has been gone for minutes already. He would "see" in the past, but his actions would take place in what we'd call the present and he'd starve.

We evolved (or were created) to live linearly: past, present and future. It helps us hunt for food and react to things around us. It's probably the best way of viewing time, but may not be the only way.

You could think of Spiderman if you wish. His spidey sense might be a form of pre-cognition. Maybe he's developed the ability to slip some blocks from the "future" ahead of the line in his brain so that he glimpses whats about to happen.

Such a development might even be preferable. Maybe it's something some creatures in the real world do have. An ability to parse a few of the blocks ahead of their 'normal' position in line. A few seconds advance knowledge when understood would be very helpful for a hunter. Understood being the key word. If the creature doesn't come to some understanding that it needs to wait a bit to react or doesn't understand on some level that the prey isn't in that position yet its going to be there in a short time, then the creature won't be a very good hunter.

What does this have to do with Harry Potter?

Nothing really, but it's important to understand about our perception of time. We would logically think that Harry and Hermione's events in PoA were linear, they did what they did, went back in time and changed some stuff and then went on with their lives.

But Aristotilian logic dies when you are talking about time travel and the paradoxes that lie therein.

From Harry's point of view they did move very linearly through time and maybe on some level he has a memory of Buckbeak being killed (or thought he was killed).

But you must take the view of an omnipotent being watching the Hogwarts grounds that night. You would see both events happening at the same time. There is no second run through of the events, because there really is no flow of time. They would exist in two places at the same time with different knowledge (and memories) and doing different things, but you would never see an instance of just the first set of Harry and Hermione because there is no first "run" of the timeline.

Because Harry and Hermione go back in time, they were there in all related blocks of time.


That all, of course depends on whether or not you accept time as a single finite thing. The other possibility is that time travel involves infinitely many alternate universes that are the same as the one you left until you make a change. Under those circumstances you could make changes to the timeline.

I think it is best to think of time with one finite universe. And that is how it is represented in Harry Potter which is the most important reason for accepting it in this thread ;) You can't change anything because there is no "second run-through". If you "decide" to go back in time then you will have existed in that time block always and will be in two places at once, the younger version of you just has no idea you are there and so it seems linear to you when you go back in time.

Aha, well, that's all very nice and very broad, so I'll just start on how things might be in the books. Maybe my views add to the discussion, who knows.

As I see it, JKR is human, and therefore, time is also linear in her books. Everything that has happened in the past is unchangeable, no extra time-lines can sprout from a point in time where time-travellers 'change' something, because those travvelers never 'change' anything. They are there to make sure the time line continues as it did!

The only time travels we know of are: Hermione who gets to almost all her classes, and the saving private hippogrif part.

On Hermione: The most telling part is when she misses a class because of Malfoy. It had been recorded, by Ron and Harry for starters, that she didn't attend Flitwicks class. If time would change if you used the time turner, she could have easily gone back in time and take the class, and thus produce a new timeline, in which she did attend the class, and then live happily further, without an paradox, because time still went linear for her, and that's one way of looking at it. But she didn't....Or...Couldn't, because the time turners don't work like that.

A bit more evidence in the other part: We know that DD was behind it all, so let's see what he saw: He went down to Hagrids, to support him when Buckbeak was beheaded. They all saw Buckbeak, and knew he was tethered securely. Also, DD knew Hagrid wouldn't cross the MOM, because he was to afraid to do so. When they step outside, BB is gone. DD at that time does not know how or why, but he knows somebody had to free him. Let's fast forward: DD learns from Sirius that he is innocent. He wants to help him. While standing in Flitwicks office, on the seventh floor, he suddenly realises that the only way to free Sirius is through the window, on something that flies.....He links it to BB's escape and knows that he had something to do with it. He knows he has to send Hermione back to save BB, no to change time, but to let time run as it is supposed to run. So he sends Harry and Hermione back and tells them that 'if all goas well, you might save MORE than ONE innocent life' In other words, he already knows they will save BB, because he has witnessed it himself, they got away. He doesn't know if they will be able to free Sirius (because he hasn't witnessed that yet as it is happening at that moment upstairs, while he is downstairs. So that is the right remark. Therefore I stand: You cannot change time in the books, but you do have to go back sometimes to make the time-line go the way it's supposed to go.

Anyway, on time in the real world: let's add another dimension: perception. Because it's true that perception of man is why we see things liniear. But what we percieve is always the past! Seeing means: light comes from an object, and hise to travel to your eye (takes time) then the cells in your eyes have to change light into electricity, which takes time, this signal has to go to some part of the brain, this takes time. There it has to be compared with millions of other signals to find out what it is, and even more signals to see the bigger picture (from green to tree, for instance) this takes time. So by the time we perceive things, they're already some place else. And then we still have to react! We're lucky to still be alive, don't you think?

Same goes for reactions. You can react to something, which might be a reflex. In that case, the signal that makes your muscles move has already been given and received before the signal reaches your head and is perceived as an action! So we are hopelesly out of time, but doing quite nicely!

Aha, well, that's all very nice and very broad, so I'll just start on how things might be in the books. Maybe my views add to the discussion, who knows.

As I see it, JKR is human, and therefore, time is also linear in her books. Everything that has happened in the past is unchangeable, no extra time-lines can sprout from a point in time where time-travellers 'change' something, because those travvelers never 'change' anything. They are there to make sure the time line continues as it did!You're pretty much agreeing with what many of us have postulated - so obviously you're a very intelligent person!

Anyway, on time in the real world: let's add another dimension: perception. Because it's true that perception of man is why we see things liniear. But what we percieve is always the past! Seeing means: light comes from an object, and hise to travel to your eye (takes time) then the cells in your eyes have to change light into electricity, which takes time, this signal has to go to some part of the brain, this takes time. There it has to be compared with millions of other signals to find out what it is, and even more signals to see the bigger picture (from green to tree, for instance) this takes time. So by the time we perceive things, they're already some place else. And then we still have to react! We're lucky to still be alive, don't you think?Here's another little perception point though... although we're certainly seeing things that have already ocurred, our brains automatically predict the probably outcome of observed events; we anticipate what is about to happen. This anticipation occurs at varying rates, depending upon the speed of observed events (we predict further ahead when we are driving in a speeding car and need to react to that speed; people in the car having a conversation are anticipating at a slower speed). This is why when an accident occurs time appears to slow down - the predictions the brain has made are suddenly null and so it kicks into high gear to take in as much of the new information as quickly as possible. This processing speed is out of synch with 'normal' brain activity and so it appears that events are actually slowing down. So, we actually live in a strange combination of the very near past and the very near future - there is really no such thing as the 'present'.

Same goes for reactions. You can react to something, which might be a reflex. In that case, the signal that makes your muscles move has already been given and received before the signal reaches your head and is perceived as an action! So we are hopelesly out of time, but doing quite nicely!Well, some people are; but the rest of us probably can't blame it on misconceptions of time alone!

Yay - We are all agreeing on the linear timeline in HP - makes a change.

Did any of you read Michael Crichton's 'Timeline' or see the film. It works with the same timeline, and might be able to help those, who don't understand the linear theory. Although it uses Wurmholes to travel and there is a way back to the future in the book, it still shows, that what we perceive as the past is not changed when one travels to the past, but that the events we remember might be so, because the timetravel took place.

I find it quite interesting, and it only occurred to me the other day, when I saw the film, that the timetravel theory is almost the same as in HP. Perhaps thats where she got it from??? Anyone know of other books like this???

nano

It's all moot in the end, because there is no such thing as time.

The universe is.

Time is the ordered way we look at it. Our brains take the information it gathers from our senses and pieces it together in a logical order so we perceive time, even though it doesn't exist.

And perceived time is dependent on your relative velocity and mass travelling through space. Lol its much easier to think of the universe as a room full of cutup frames from a movie reel. Our brain analyzes the frames and puts them in an order that is (usually) pleasing to our logic.

This is the timeline as I see it:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v421/ranador/timeline.png

Description of the points:
A - Point before the trio leave to visit Hagrid
B - Point where Hermione and Harry take themself out of the timeline
C - Point where Hermione and Harry enter the timeline
D - Point where the story continues after the first set of Harry/Hermione remove themselves from the timeline and the second set returns to the hospital wing

The events of B and C are happening at the same time so nothing can be changed by "going back in time" because there was only one run through.

The dotted line would not be seen by an third party watching from some omnitient point of view. They would see the two versions and Harry and Hermione doing their seperate things.

The dotted line represents the timeline as perceived by Hermione and Harry. In their minds they experience the same 3 hour period twice in a linear fashion that has them going back in time to relive it from a different perspective.


That is what happens... but Hermione mentions they mustn't make changes, so obviously they could, but I think anything like that would likely catch them in a paradox or timeloop they'd be unable to escape. Which is why timetravel is dangerous.

That is what happens... but Hermione mentions they mustn't make changes, so obviously they could, but I think anything like that would likely catch them in a paradox or timeloop they'd be unable to escape. Which is why timetravel is dangerous.Doesn't she actually mention that they mustn't be seen? I don't remember her saying they mustn't change anything... I believe her point is that things could go seriously wrong if they see themselves - and really that makes sense too. Other people have supposed that the future self could kill the past self leading to paradox - but what is more likely to happen? The future self knows that he/she will be seeing a past self while the past version is unprepared - who's more likely to go for a wand? And if your past self kills your future self there's no paradox! Just a very, very odd funeral...

I didn't mean to underscore the importance of not being seen, but I think that Hermione would've known right away that she was seeing a future self since she's been travelling all semester and might be able to stop Harry killing himself.

In fact, I think she might actually say that they mustn't be seen, not that they shouldn't change anything. But I think the ultimate danger is not from their past selves, but rather Fudge or someone else seeing them and realizing they are in two places at once somehow. That could link them to misuse of the time turner and be a very serious crime.

Also, regardless of whether she said it or not, I wanted to point out how dangerous it would be if they had changed something that they knew happened. If they had stopped Snape entering the Whomping Willow then Sirius might've gotten away, and they wouldn't have a need to go back in time, so then they wouldn't have gone back in time and wouldn't have stopped Snape... paradox/timeloop.