Problem with time travel in PoA

[slurm3001]

No: HPFGUIDX 31561

Thanks for taking the time to elaborate on an explanation, Stacy. I 
agree with most of what you wrote. However, I'm still not convinced 
regarding the problem I meant.
My comments are given at the appropriate sections below:

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Stacy Stroud <deadstop at g...> wrote:
> At 04:02 PM 12/12/01 +0000, slurm3001 wrote:
> 
> >Harry1 could only have been saved by (time-travelling)
> >Harry2's Patronus if Harry1 had survived the dementors in a 
different
> >way in order to travel back in time and become Harry2. But in the
> >book it is completely illogical:
> >Harry1 survives because of Harry2 AND Harry2 only exists because
> >Harry1 survived
> 
> 
> Let me give a try at explaining this, since the PoA time-travel 
episode is 
> a type of time travel situation I particularly like -- the self-
reinforcing 
> loop, as seen in the first Terminator movie.  This is a very 
different 
> situation from the truly messed-up self-negating loop, like the 
classic 
> grandfather paradox.  A self-negating loop is inherently 
contradictory, but 
> a self-reinforcing loop is perfectly consistent, as long as you 
don't get 
> caught up in issues of "before" and "after."
> 
> Let me ask you a question: Do you believe that Buckbeak was 
actually 
> executed "before" Harry and Hermione used the Time-Turner to change 
> things?  I don't.  I think that only one sequence of events 
actually 
> happened the whole time -- we just didn't know about all of it 
until 
> later.  When the kids heard that axe-blow, and Hermione1 started 
whimpering 
> about how "they did it," they hadn't done it at all -- Harry2 and 
Hermione2 
> had already gotten Buckbeak safely away, and the swish-thud was 
just 
> Macnair letting off steam at not getting to kill something.
> 

I totally agree with you here, but bear in mind that, as you say, 
Harry2 and Hermione2 had to travel back in time to rescue Buckbeak. 
Otherwise there wouldn't have been anyone to create the situation 
that we already read about the first time round (although 
misinterpreted by Harry1 and Hermione1).

> Similarly, things don't have to have been different "before" Harry 
traveled 
> back to save himself.  Harry1 and Harry2 are at the lake at the 
same time, 
> and it is perfectly possible for Harry2 to save Harry1.  Yes, 
Harry1 had to 
> survive in order to become Harry2, but he DOES survive -- no 
contradiction 
> there.  The causality is a little odd, but the sequence is 
*consistent*.

I don't question the sequence, I question the causality which brings 
it about. Harry1 does survive, but in this case it is important to 
realize how he survives. 
> 
> You're looking at things as "time goes along one way without the 
> time-turner, and THEN Harry2 and Hermione2 go back and fix 
things."  But 
> that's not it, as we see from the Buckbeak situation.  Going from 
past to 
> future, there's only one sequence of events, and it includes three 
hours in 
> which two versions of Harry and Hermione are running around 
> simultaneously.  

Again, I'm aware of that.

>There is no need for Harry1 to have survived a different 
> way without Harry2 -- indeed, if he had, Harry2 would have 
remembered 
> *that* and would have had no need to save Harry1 himself. 

And that would have been a logical solution. Harry2 could have 
concentrated solely on rescuing Buckbeak and Sirius - after all, 
these are the reasons given for him and Hermione to go back in time. 
(Remember Dumbledore saying that they could save two lives - as it 
stands, Harry2 is actually saving far more lives, including his own).
 
> Yes, IF 
> something bad had happened to Harry1 or Hermione1, we would have a 
hard 
> time explaining where Harry2 and Hermione2 come from -- but nothing 
like 
> that happened.  

Nothing bad happened BECAUSE Harry2 saved them. Otherwise, the text 
suggests, he would have suffered the dementor's kiss. 

> The timeline is perfectly consistent. 
> It just *looks* odd 
> to normal expectations because there are people jumping backwards, 
which 
> doesn't normally happen.

I perfectly understand that two Harrys and Hermiones are present at 
the same time, that the effects of their time travel already creates 
the situation we read about at first (misunderstood by Harry1 and 
Hermione1). I like this treatment of time travel, too - compared to 
other time travel situations. The only problem I see, which I think 
is a vital mistake, is the causality surrounding their survival (see 
quote from my original post above).
Of course, if they'd been rescued in a different way, Harry2 wouldn't 
have to rescue them - but that's only getting rid of a very dodgy 
part of the book. As i suggested, JKR could have let Harry conjure 
the Patronus the first time, albeit with immense 
difficulty/exhaustion, which could still get him hospitalized. It 
still would have given her the opportunity to write about his 
feelings towards the shape of his Patronus/father.

I hope this clarifies what I meant.

slurm

> 
> Stacy Stroud (deadstop at g...)
> Hex Entertainment, Inc. (http://www.hexgames.com)