time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules"

[eep17eep17]

No: HPFGUIDX 31018

in Regard to "Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981" "clio44a" wrote:

> There are a lot of questions about the timing when the Godric's 
> Hollow incident is concerned. 
> IMHO they literally meddeled with the time. A time-turner!
> What if Dumbledore sent Hagrid back into the past to retrieve baby 
> Harry, like people have already suggested?
> ...
> The journey with the bike Hagrid and Harry made would then not only 
> be a journey through space, but also through time.
> THis theory is supported by the strange watch Dumbledore uses when 
> waiting in Privet Drive.
> ...
> I, know time travel seems to be a little far fetched, but we have 
> seen wziards travelling in space without effort. Why not travel in 
> time?

Certainly makes sense, but I'm of the opinion that one needs to be 
very, VERY careful when invoking time travel (to tell the truth, I 
was a little dissapointed in JKR for using such a cheap solution).  
For basically this reason:  it's too powerful and too easy and 
there's no way to explain why it's not used, well, all the time.  For 
instance:  if it's okay to use a time-turner to save Sirius in PoA, 
why can't they use one to save Cedric in GoF?  And, if it's okay to 
use a time turner to save Harry on Nov. 1, 1981, why not also save 
James and Lily?  Finally:  if there really is a way to change the 
past, why hasn't Voldemort won already?  He wouldn't be ruled by any 
of the compunctions that would keep the good wizards from messing 
with the past.  For instance:  why doesn't he just keep going back in 
time over and over until there's an army of about 1000 of him?  

Actually this leads to a question that I've been pondering for a 
while.  JKR has mentioned in interviews that there are very specific 
rules that the magical universe follows.  Not laws in the legal 
sense, but laws in the isaac-newton-physical-laws sense.  Anyone care 
to speculate what "the rules" are, particularly in regard to time 
travel?  I had a couple thoughts:

1) "Miss Granger, you know the law -- you know what is at stake ... 
YOU - MUST - NOT - BE - SEEN"  - Dumbledore, PoA.

Perhaps someting peculiar happens if what I'll call "self #1" 
and "self #2" are seen together?  like, I don't know, they explode or 
some such?  I know, I know, this doesn't explain why Harry #2 is seen 
by Harry #1, except that Harry #1 doesn't think it's him, he thinks 
it's his father.

2) Finite magic:

Maybe, if a person lives 2 hours twice, each self is only half as 
powerful during that time.  perhaps Harry #1 can't conjure the 
patronus by himself, but only with the help of Harry #2, because the 
person's magical ... watchamacall it?  energy?  juice? is cut in half 
during that time.

3) Limitations:

maybe moving back in time more than a couple hours requires 
incredible energy.  Maybe this is true for apparating, too (e.g., why 
don't wizards take vacations, I don't know, on the moon?  Not that we 
know for sure they don't, but I suspect . . .) Still, I could see 
Voldemort being able to do a lot with a couple extra hours.

Any other thoughts?  Any ideas what the other "rules" of this 
universe are?  not just relating to time-turners, but, well, 
everything.

-EEP

Who is still wondering how Hermione ate and slept her 3rd year, if 
she was only going to use a time turner for her studies, and why she 
didn't look 3 years older at the end of that book, although that 
would expain the whole Krum things (he's 17.  she's 14.  eww.)