Why did the Triwizard Cup return Harry to Hogwarts?

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Why not the same way they got in? This seems to be what Harry thought they had to do.

Because it would give the judges no insight into who touched the cup first, which was the only factor for winning, according to Bagman.

For the sake of discussion--we don’t know that. There may be some type of conservation of energy of which we are not aware. The fact that Gamp postulated his Law of Elemental Transfiguration suggests that magic follows laws of some sort.

Well, magical laws, yes, I agree, and it's one thing I find intriguing about the magic in the HP universe. I do like magic to have a scientific aspect to it.

However, no energetic laws are ever explained, and there does not seem to be any quota of 'magical energy' or anything. It is just mental exertion in terms of concentration.

But you just said it’s magic and energy is not conserved. How can you then use the first law of thermodynamics to refute my example?

I guess that, not for the first time, I wasn't clear enough. Basically, I meant that I don't find that real-world physics really applies, but if, for a second, I was to allow that possibility, I still find issue with the points being presented.

Although I don’t believe Portkeys to be chemical in nature (I was thinking more along the lines of a spring) and you wish to invoke thermodynamics (which I’m not seeing as relevant) I think I can adapt somewhat to your perspective. How about a rechargeable battery? Although the charging operation is exothermic (blue glow and trembling) and the discharging operation, for the battery, is endothermic, we use such batteries to perform tasks such as powering cars that have headlights. (Portkey transports people, glows blue.) Still works as far as I can tell.

I'm not sure I follow this at all, but I had no intention of viewing the Cup as a chemical (though strictly speaking of course, it is composed of chemicals, I would have to assume). We can discuss it privately, if you like, but I don't think it really belongs here.

I think the books are replete with examples of magical energy. In OotP LV blasts an Avada Kedavra curse at DD but misses, hitting the security guard’s desk which bursts into flames. In that same chapter:Seems quite a bit of magical energy to me.

Quite frankly, the energy shown there is energy in a very real world sense (light, heat, etc.), but that only enhances my point. Energy is being produced by the wizards, but there is no source which is in turn becoming energy-depleted.

My point is that energy conservation is missing from magic, not that energy doesn't exist in magic. I have no issues with the fact that magical curses carry momentum and energy, just like all jets of light in the real world.

Well, DD was dead by the time of DH, so he didn’t do it. And, if you're trying to keep your destination secret, why put a bright blue glow on a Portkey that can be seen from a distance near that destination? And multiple ones to boot?

The Seven Potters schemers had no intention of hiding the Burrow, they'd already given it as much protection as they could muster. Once inside, they were safe.

Or JKR added the info later to clarify operation. I’m not comfortable with the multiple versions of Portkey operations that have to be invented to explain one spell. I don’t think spells work that way. We’re up to what? A dozen different ways that Portkeys could work? Not quite buying that.

It isn't at all what I'm suggesting. Rather, I approach this much differently; not as one charm which has a discrete number of different effects, but as one charm which creates a certain category of object, with the design imparted by the casting wizard.

To me, this is just a natural way to look at it, similarly to the Summoning Charm, which is useless without input from the caster, or the Hover Charm, for which all of the effects are caster-determined, or the Imperius Curse, which is completely open to the intent of the caster. Similarly, I would look at the whole range conjuring charms; Dumbledore conjures himself a luxurious chintz armchair in the courtroom of the DoM- are we to suggest that a different charm would have brought him a rocker, another would have brought him a leather loveseat, and yet another would bring him a special gaming chair with built in joystick?! I don't believe so. I think that we are given plenty of examples of magic which provide one spell but allow for customization to fit the desires of the user.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by willfitz

Well, magical laws, yes, I agree, and it's one thing I find intriguing about the magic in the HP universe. I do like magic to have a scientific aspect to it.

Ditto!

Originally Posted by willfitz

The Seven Potters schemers had no intention of hiding the Burrow, they'd already given it as much protection as they could muster. Once inside, they were safe.

Since keeping the place secret would increase security, I don’t see why they wouldn’t do that. It seems the whole set up with decoy Potters going to decoy homes were precisely calculated to keep the final hiding place secret.

DH: The Seven Potters ”So, we’ve given a dozen different houses every protection we can throw at them. They all look like they could be the place we’re going to hide you, they’ve all got some connection with the Order: my house, Kingsley’s place, Molly’s Auntie Muriel’s — you get the idea.”

I think they were definitely trying to hide Harry.

Originally Posted by willfitz

To me, this is just a natural way to look at it, similarly to the Summoning Charm, which is useless without input from the caster, or the Hover Charm, for which all of the effects are caster-determined, or the Imperius Curse, which is completely open to the intent of the caster. Similarly, I would look at the whole range conjuring charms; Dumbledore conjures himself a luxurious chintz armchair in the courtroom of the DoM- are we to suggest that a different charm would have brought him a rocker, another would have brought him a leather loveseat, and yet another would bring him a special gaming chair with built in joystick?! I don't believe so. I think that we are given plenty of examples of magic which provide one spell but allow for customization to fit the desires of the user.

And then there are charms that are simple and don’t require much user input at all: Stunning, Disarming, Killing, Cruciatus, Impediment, etc. Most seem to be of this kind and even those that need user input don’t require much (Imperius being the exception.)

For Portkeys, we know there has to be input as to place and time, minimum. If your theories are valid, type (timed, touch-activated, voice-activated) and warning lights (?) have to be added. I’m just not seeing that.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Since keeping the place secret would increase security, I don’t see why they wouldn’t do that. It seems the whole set up with decoy Potters going to decoy homes were precisely calculated to keep the final hiding place secret.I think they were definitely trying to hide Harry.

Sure, but it seems to me that if they were going to realize that Harry was staying at the Burrow based on the blue glow, they would need to have someone actually stationed at the Burrow to see it, which would also allow them to see all of the Harrys arriving in order. So I see it as a pretty moot point.

And then there are charms that are simple and don’t require much user input at all: Stunning, Disarming, Killing, Cruciatus, Impediment, etc. Most seem to be of this kind and even those that need user input don’t require much (Imperius being the exception.)

For Portkeys, we know there has to be input as to place and time, minimum. If your theories are valid, type (timed, touch-activated, voice-activated) and warning lights (?) have to be added. I’m just not seeing that.

Sure, but consider the fancy chintz chair. If my idea of things is false, then the alternative is that there are different charms for every possible type of chair, or else there are several, distinct spells for several standard issue chairs. I mean, assuming Dumbledore's chair was custom-designed to his own specifications, which makes the most sense to me, then he had to conjure it with his own idea for design of the arms (or lack there of), colour and material of upholstery, height of the seat, height of the back, and on and on and on. Or, on the other hand, exactly one type of chintz chair could have been available with a specific incantation. Personally, I see this as preposterous, so, in Holmesesque fashion, I eliminate it and deal with what's left.

Technically speaking, of course, we know for a fact that the hover charm requires a constant (and thus infinite) stream of input from the caster, so I am extremely satisfied with the few, small sources of input to create a Portkey to one's own specific tastes. And as I said before, the summoning charm needs at least one input in order to work at all, so I'm not sure what the problem is with one more.

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

For Portkeys, we know there has to be input as to place and time, minimum. If your theories are valid, type (timed, touch-activated, voice-activated) and warning lights (?) have to be added. I’m just not seeing that.

Actually, I disagree that "we know there has to be input as to place and time, minimum". Because we have 2 examples in the books of non-timed portkeys -- touch and countdown.

[horcrux4]

When you create a Portkey, you must be able to specify somehow its destination - otherwise you could end up anywhere! Yet the spell is just "Portus" judging by the Portkey Dumbledore created to take Harry from the Ministry to his office, not "Portus to my Office". It must therefore be possible to put specifications on a Portus spell, and I don't see why that shouldn't include "Portus at 8.15 precisely", "Portus in 10 seconds", "Portus when touched" and so on (including a destination).

I've been trying to put together all the occasions when Portkeys are used, but I'm frustrated by the fact that my copy of OotP is out on loan. If I'm not mistaken they are : the Portkey to the QWC/ the Portkey back to Ottery St Catchpole/ the Cup Portkey to the graveyard/ the Cup Portkey back to Hogwarts/ the Portkey Dumbledore creates to take Harry & the Weasleys to Grimmauld Place/ the Portkey Dumbledore creates to take Harry back to his Office/ the Portkeys that take the 7 Potters to the Burrow. Have I missed any?

Of these the only ones we actually see created are Dumbledore's. Does anyone have the quote for when he creates the one that takes them to Grimmauld Place?

[mirrormere]

DD again just says Portus for the 12GP Portkey. It's possible the specs are non verbal.

There was mention of a Portkey Bathilda Bagshot arranged for her nephew Gellert Grindelwald as well as the one the Delacours used when they came for the wedding. No other details were given, though.

And here's another place JKR indicates that the blue glow is intrinsic to Portkey operation, Ron was explaining how the deluminator brought him back:

DH: The Silver Doe "It was a ball of light, kind of pulsing, and bluish, like that light you get around a Portkey, you know?"

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by horcrux4

Of these the only ones we actually see created are Dumbledore's. Does anyone have the quote for when he creates the one that takes them to Grimmauld Place?

Dumbledore says they'll be going by portkey & indicates a black kettle on his desk; he asks if they've all used one before, and then says they just need to wait for Phineas to return; then he says "on the count of three, then...one...two...three". So it appears he made the portkey before they got to his office. Perhaps he's using the "default" or basic Portus charm, which needs a count of three by the caster to activate it. Maybe the timed ones have a custom aspect to them to set the time & the warning glow...I don't think we see anyone make a timed portkey.

[mirrormere]

Here’s some more fodder for our thread: Possible supporting information pertinent to security at Hogwarts.

Portkey access to Hogwarts
Pottermore says that before the Hogwarts Express had been set up (apparently it was stolen Muggle technology) and after the imposition of the International Statute of Secrecy in 1692, the Ministry was trying to find a way to secretly transport students to the school. They tried Portkeys...

Pottermore: Portkeys were therefore arranged at collecting points all over Britain. The logistics caused problems from the start. Up to a third of students would fail to arrive every year, having missed their time slot, or been unable to find the unobtrusive enchanted object that would transport them to their school. There was also the unfortunate fact that many children were (and are) 'Portkey-sick', and the hospital wing was frequently full to bursting for the first few days of every year, while susceptible students overcame their hysterics and nausea.

This seems to suggest, although it’s not conclusive, that Portkey travel was allowed in and out of Hogwarts. Whether the Headmaster had to arrange a change of security for that to happen is still not addressed specifically.

As for the Floo Network...

Pottermore: While admitting that Portkeys were not an ideal solution to the problem of school transportation, the Ministry of Magic failed to find an acceptable alternative. A return to the unregulated travel of the past was impossible, and yet a more secure route into the school (for instance, permitting a fireplace that might be officially entered by Floo powder) was strongly resisted by successive Headmasters, who did not wish the security of the castle to be breached.

From what I understand the fireplace has to be connected to the Floo network in order for it to work. But there seems to be some conflict here.

We later see Harry and the Weasley’s arriving back to school after Christmas holidays by a one-off connection to the Floo network in HBP (A Sluggish Memory.) They end up in McGonagall’s office, though the verbal destination is simply “Hogwarts,” suggesting at this time there is only one fireplace available for such travel.

HBP: A Sluggish Memory Late in the afternoon, a few days after New Year, Harry, Ron, and Ginny lined up beside the kitchen fire to return to Hogwarts. The Ministry had arranged this one-off connection to the Floo Network to return students quickly and safely to the school. .... Harry stepped into the emerald fire and shouted “Hogwarts!” He had one last fleeting view of the Weasleys’ kitchen and Mrs. Weasley’s tearful face before the flames engulfed him; spinning very fast, he caught blurred glimpses of other Wizarding rooms, which were whipped out of sight before he could get a proper look; then he was slowing down, finally stopping squarely in the fireplace in Professor McGonagall’s office. She barely glanced up from her work as he clambered out over the grate. “Evening, Potter. Try not to get too much ash on the carpet.”

But in OotP, it seems like all the fireplaces can be used, but are being watched by the ministry, except for Umbridge’s:

OotP: Career Advice “Well,” said Ginny slowly, helping herself to a bit of egg too, “if you really want to talk to Sirius, I expect we could think of a way to do it . . .” “Come on,” said Harry hopelessly. “With Umbridge policing the fires and reading all our mail?”

Here it sounds like all the fires are connected to the network and are being surveilled.

In GoF, Sirius can appear through the fireplace as well.

In HBP, security was tightened, but, except for the info from Pottermore suggesting the headmasters feared for the security of the castle, it appears travel by the Floo network was permitted in GoF and OotP.

[willfitz]

It also can't be ignored, though, that thins could have changed from one year to the next, with regards to the portkeys and Floo networks and their use at Hogwarts. I don't know how much we can read into this information and apply it to the 'present.'

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by willfitz

It also can't be ignored, though, that thins could have changed from one year to the next, with regards to the portkeys and Floo networks and their use at Hogwarts. I don't know how much we can read into this information and apply it to the 'present.'

Agreed. The generally accepted mode of travel to Hogwarts for a long time has been the train. Also, as we have no information about the actual creation of the portkeys used by students long ago, it doesn't further the discussion at hand.

[MrSleepyHead]

Originally Posted by horcrux4

When you create a Portkey, you must be able to specify somehow its destination - otherwise you could end up anywhere! Yet the spell is just "Portus" judging by the Portkey Dumbledore created to take Harry from the Ministry to his office, not "Portus to my Office". It must therefore be possible to put specifications on a Portus spell, and I don't see why that shouldn't include "Portus at 8.15 precisely", "Portus in 10 seconds", "Portus when touched" and so on (including a destination).

I like this theory. To me, it seems similar to the Imperius Curse: all one has to do is say the incantation "Imperio!" but further control requires nonverbal direction from the mind. I do not see why the Portus charm could not work in a similar way. Or, another similarity may be the wand movement of Sectumsempra: if the wand is just jabbed, a more centralized cut appears (assuming Snape used it on James in Snape's Worst Memory), whereas waved wildly it causes multiple slashes. To me, I think we are shown enough variation in incantations, wand movement, and willpower to leave the possibilities of the Portus charm more or less open-ended. Just because we do not specifically see a touch-activated Portkey made does not mean they do not exist (as I am predisposed to thinking the Triwizard Cup Portkeys were certainly activated by touch and not timing).

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by MrSleepyHead

I like this theory. To me, it seems similar to the Imperius Curse: all one has to do is say the incantation "Imperio!" but further control requires nonverbal direction from the mind. I do not see why the Portus charm could not work in a similar way. Or, another similarity may be the wand movement of Sectumsempra: if the wand is just jabbed, a more centralized cut appears (assuming Snape used it on James in Snape's Worst Memory), whereas waved wildly it causes multiple slashes. To me, I think we are shown enough variation in incantations, wand movement, and willpower to leave the possibilities of the Portus charm more or less open-ended. Just because we do not specifically see a touch-activated Portkey made does not mean they do not exist (as I am predisposed to thinking the Triwizard Cup Portkeys were certainly activated by touch and not timing).

Well, Crouch Jr.'s "...which would take the first person to touch it to my master" is pretty much a statement of fact, IMO.

And yeah, I agree. I think the examples I put forth before were the Hovering and Summoning Charms. In both of those cases, the mental input of the caster is responsible for all of the charms' respective effects after the incantation.

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by willfitz

Well, Crouch Jr.'s "...which would take the first person to touch it to my master" is pretty much a statement of fact, IMO.

And yeah, I agree. I think the examples I put forth before were the Hovering and Summoning Charms. In both of those cases, the mental input of the caster is responsible for all of the charms' respective effects after the incantation.

Although I believe that the summoning charms we see usually include the name of the object to be summoned. The only time we actually see Harry summoning practice items with Hermione, he says "Accio dictionary", and of course in the tournament "Accio Firebolt". But I completely agree that many other charms/spells are given details by intent and/or wand movement. It makes perfect sense with portkeys as well, in my opinion.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by HedwigOwl

Although I believe that the summoning charms we see usually include the name of the object to be summoned. The only time we actually see Harry summoning practice items with Hermione, he says "Accio dictionary", and of course in the tournament "Accio Firebolt". But I completely agree that many other charms/spells are given details by intent and/or wand movement. It makes perfect sense with portkeys as well, in my opinion.

I refer more to Molly Weasley's "accio, accio, accio, accio, accio" of the tonne-tongue toffees from her own house in GoF, and also Harry's "accio!" which is all he uses to summon the cup. I thought that it could be simply a point and shoot thing when one doesn't specify the target, but in Molly's case, she is summoning the toffees from behind other movable objects, so it seems more likely to me that the target is simply being considered non-verbally. Either way, spoken or unspoken, it is undoubtedly further caster input into the spell, as you say.

[mirrormere]

I think Flitwick summons all the parchments during the O.W.L test in Snape's Worst Memory by just saying "Accio" as well.