Re: Adopted!Harry is Really. TTTR

[alexcukier]

No: HPFGUIDX 57873


TAS wrote:
"If 15-yr-old Harry were Tom Riddle, then Tom wouldn't have been at 
Hogwarts 50 years ago to rat on Hagrid and leave a diary. He would 
never have grown up 50 years ago to become Voldemort. Voldemort would 
not exist.

All this is true as we know the time-turner. And I grant that I am 
building on zero canon when I say that "just because the time-turner 
can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done." But, as detectives like 
to say, to prove murder (rather than death by accident) you need both 
a method and a motive, and the more telling of the two is motive. We 
all know that JKR can create methods aplenty (who heard of portkeys 
before GoF?), so you will surely forgive me if I proceed to proof by 
motive and let her invent a method when the time comes.

I propose that Voldemort himself brought his infant self forward 
using some dark arts which allowed his adult self to continue to 
exist even though his childhood time-line was being disrupted. And I 
propose that he did so for the express purpose of killing his infant 
self. J&L died, but enough is enough for now."

Trisha wrote (and I agree):
"One of the basic theories of time travel across most mediums (and 
sci-fi) is that you can't change the *reason* you go back.

Example:  If someone (let's say Dumbledore) went back a few hours on 
Halloween 1981 to say Lily and James, once he actually *does* saved 
them, his reason for going back no longer exists.  They're alive.  So 
why did he go back to save them?"

Now, Me - Alex Cukier

I believe that TAS theory is very exciting, and most of them doesn't 
have any dificulties to be accept as possible. BUT, the mais problem 
is: haw to deal with Time-Travelling Paradoxes?
As someone point out before (I'm sorry I do'n't remember who was!), 
if you go to the site:
http://www.hogwarts-
library.net/reference/potterverse_faq.html#timelines

you have a wonderful explanation to Time-Travelling rules: "Anything 
that will be done during a Time-Travelling was already done in the 
past, but nobody could explain how it did happened at that time (the 
past)". The example of Trisha (above) is clear. When Harry saves 
Buckbeak, this was already done (but in this case Harry didin't 
know). When Harry do the Patronus Charm in the lake, it was already 
done (and he realizes that he thought it was James, before).

So, if Voldemort went back to 1927 to get little tom M. Riddle/Harry 
Potter, Tom couldn't go to Hogwarts, if you (as I do) accept that 
THERE ARE ONLY ONE TIMELINE (see internet link above).

But I believe that the main line of happenings described by TAS were 
correct, and the alternative plot would be:

- The baby that was brought from 1927 to 1980 was, in fact (and I 
hate not being original, but...) Tom Riddle's TWIN BROTHER, that was 
sent to the same orphanage that was TOM, and missed near 1 year old. 
Of course, maybe only when he was adult (maybe after Hogwarts), the 
people from the orphanage said to him tha he had a missing brother. 
Maybe this explanation can solve the puzzle about Tom disappearance 
between 1945-1970: he was doing black magic to be immortal AND 
LOOKING FOR HIS BROTHER. Maybe Mrs. Trellawney prediction was about a 
Evil Magic Wizard who would be defeated by his Twin Good Brother! As 
we know, their wands have feather from the same phoenix - are twins! 
(Maybe George's and Fred's wands do to!!!). Tthem, Dumbledore/Lilly/ 
James went back to the past as they realized that could be the best 
way to defeat Voldemort (of course, they must do, because the baby 
was missing, kiddnaped by them in the past - only one timeline, 
remmember?).

The main idea of SAME DNA, DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT, DIFFERENT CHOSES, 
could be sustained from TAS theory.

Of course I should develop more this ideas, but I'd like to know what 
you do think about.

Alex Cukier, The Brazilian Huge Fan!