Time-Travel- why Harry *can* save himself (was: POA Dementor Kiss on Harry)

[Talisman]

No: HPFGUIDX 78971

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" 
<sevenhundredandthirteen at y...> wrote:
> Hopefully I won't be getting too deep into the time travel 
theories this time...> 

> Talisman, wearily rolling away her other parchments, responds:

I think you are thrashing around in the shallows and muddying the 
water, dear.
 
 Laurasia: 
> Your premise that we are always stuck with a soul-sucked Harry 
unless  someone else saves him relies on one thing- that there has 
to be a `first time' that time occurs in which no-one has gone back 
in time. 

Talisman: Indeed, every one of your theories acknowledges the same 
premise.  But, let's distinguish time as a dimension versus time as 
an instance or occurance.  

Laurasia:
That is- because you believe that Time happens multiple times 
> . . .<snip> This is a great theory- except that Time doesn't have 
to function multiple times. Instead of  thinking about Time 
occurring many times over, think about time only ever happening once.
> 
Talisman:
You apparently didn't comprehend the post.  If you will re-read  
#78370, you will find that I devote a good deal of time explaining 
how Harry can't save himself in a "one seamless time/multiple 
experiences" scenerio. 

Laurasia:
I agree that soul-sucked Harry can't turn over 
> the time-turner and go back in time to un-soul-suck himself. 
However,if there is no `first time' for time, (that is- time occurs 
only once) then there is no need for `Harry to be saved the first 
time to go back and save himself the second time' because there is 
no second time...

Talisman: Again I think you are slipping between two usages of the 
word "time," without realizing the distinction.  
 
>Laurasia: 
> Time-Travel Theory #3:
> 
> When you turn over the time-turner you get transported back in 
time. 
> Time has not moved backwards, rather *you* have been transported 
> through it. Time occurs only once; it's only people that can 
> experience it more than once.

Talisman: Again, read my post about one time/multiple experiences.  
It's all there.

Laurasia 
> In this version of time-travel there is no loop or step- time 
> occurred only once in a continuous and straight line. 

Talisman:
But listen to yourself, you are describing a loop.  A loop of 
experience, to quote you above "people ... can experience it more 
than once."

Now, when considering the "first time" try to replace "time" 
with "an instance of experience" rather than a dimensional track. 

Laurasia:
> Harry and Hermione are in the hospital wing only once. They 
> *actually* *go* *back* *in* *time* to 3 hours previously. They 
> eventually arrive back in the hospital wing for the _only_ time to 
> hear the people they used to be 3 hours ago leaving to go back in 
> time. This H+H have, naturally, have already gone back in time- 
> they're standing right there outside the door waiting to come back 
> inside. 

Talisman:
Sounds like one time/multiple experiences to me.  And you are still 
showing an accrual of experinces, yet you try to deny the need to 
deal with a first instance of a sucked-if-not-saved Harry experience.

Laurasia:
In this kind of reality there in *NO* `first time' in which 
> no-one went back in time. There was only *ONE* time. For this kind 
of  time-travel to work in PoA there is *NO* *NEED* for someone else 
to  save Harry except himself. So, you see, there need not 
necessarily have been a `first time.'Therefore, it is entirely 
possible that Harry really did save himself. 

Talisman:
You are still confusing yourself with the word "time." And to avoid 
a hopeless reiteration of the mess, just look at the initial step in 
your "great de-bunking" theory, and I quote you:

"When you turn over the time-turner you get transported back in 
time."

Ah, there's the rub, n'est-ce pas? 

When indeed?

Couple that with your admission that soul-sucked people can't use 
time-turners to unsuck themselves, and you defeat yourself before 
you start.  

Really, there is no need to go through the rest of it.

Go ahead and pitch a time-turner through the veil.  Sirius can't use 
it to get out.  Even if, by your reasoning, he could then make it so 
his death never happened,i.e. "save himself."

That is because NOW, in the one seamless time (let's make that 
Time), and his initial experience of it, he is unable to initiate 
time travel.  

Understand that and you understand that someone else saved Harry.  
Couple that with Snape's traditional "save Harry " role, and the 
other points in messages #78215 and 78258, and you've got my view of 
it.

  
> Laurasia
> Okay, so I wasn't trying to discount your theory- you are 
> still free to accept that there is a `first time' time-travel 
thing happening. 

Talisman:
Thanks very much, but I never wait for permission to think for 
myself.  

If you straighten out your jumbled semantics, you'll see that what I 
endorse is rather different than what you attribute to me, and that 
you have not effectively argued against it. 

Talisman, who really did want to avoid the stink-sap of time-travel 
for just this reason, and promises to wash well and not get into it 
again.