Long post on old time-turner threads

[a_silmariel]

No: HPFGUIDX 82274

Amanda:
> Because I *did* promise, I have gone back and read the time-travel 
> posts Silmariel indicated (79045, 79099, and 79635). Commentary 
> follows for each.

And I thank you.

> 79045--A post by Laurasia. Eloquent and in my opinion, absolutely 
> correct and spot-on. (raises glass to Laurasia, forgets self is a 
> geist, pours butterbeer through self onto floor)
> 
> 79099--Silmariel's response to Laurasia. In general, I get the 
> same "feeling" from Silmariel's logic as I do (no offense, Pip, Wolf, 
> Melody) from the Magic Dishwasher. 

Hey thanks, but I don't think if they are going to be offended by the
comparation.
 
> A few specific comments on 79099:
 
> Silmariel: Why would Hermione use the tt when she has been caught? 
> What for? To get a class? Even if she had not been lectured, it 
> wouldn't be a sensible thing to do. 
> 
> Amanda: Are you kidding? When she missed a class that was on 
> something she is *certain* will be on the exam?

A good reason to give her a lecture and convince her she can't change
time, if she is able to go back in time only to assist to that class.
I suppose the usual way, asking for class work to a classmate, or
asking later to the teacher, is too easy for Hermione. Better convince
her time is inmutable.

> And if you are correct, it wouldn't matter if she'd been caught, as 
> soon as she went back and changed time, that future would have been 
> altered and the boys would no longer remember she had ever missed 
> Charms.

And if you are correct --> it wouldn't matter.

Since when admitting time can change results in time being an easy
thing to change? A lot of things can go bad, and she wouldn't remember
how were before.

> (Laurasia:) Who cast the Patronus the first time?
>  
> Silmariel: Snape.
> 
> Amanda: ROFLMAO!!! Wow, I'd never seen this proposed. Seriously. I'm 
> sorry. There's not a shred of canon to support this. Nowhere, never 
> anyplace, *ever* in canon has it been even *remotely* hinted that 
> either Harry or James resembled Snape in the slightest. Yet the 
> caster of the Patronus looked so much like James that Harry believed 
> it *was* James. Who have we been told resembles James to an amazing 
> degree? Harry.

Snape casts the Patronus. Snape is to the side of Harry. Snape does
not need to fly or resemble anyone. Harry was blinded by dementors, so
Snape could be doing the seven scarf dance and Harry would not notice.
The first time there is no one by the wood, Snape just invents it, or
someone plants that seed in Harry's mind, so after travelling back in
time, Harry  goes there, automatically changing the fact no one was
there, so altering memories of Harry A from the point in the timeline
where the figure can be seen, that now include someone by the wood
resembling James.

So: he is there pretending to be unconscious 

> I defy *anyone* to float unconscious while a hundred  dementors
approach as closely as they do

*pretending* and *he did not float*

> Nor is there a shred of canon to indicate that Snape even knows how 
> to cast the Patronus charm; there was a lively thread (before OoP, I 
> believe) as to the likelihood of his even being able to, given that 
> it requires a happy memory and Snape doesn't seem to be too gifted in 
> that area.

So this point depens on if Snape has a good memory or not? I'm not
trying to convince you if you think he hasn't. I think he has. 

Here you might also read Talisman responses. The point is she reasoned
Harry couldn't have saved himself, in more than one post, so better
look for her posts. The basic line was: if Hermione gets the
advantages of accrued experience, Harry also does, in his case he has
to accrue with dementorization, so someone saved him.

But here every option for saving Harry applies, you don't need Snape,
it's just he was  there, so it seemed the obvious target for a
simulated reconstruction of the first sets of events that were changed
till we get PoA as is.

> Amanda: I find this a bit hard to follow--but Snape does not speak to 
> either Harry or Hermione after the attack; they are unconscious. He 
> could not have fed them a lie.

I'm sure a little obstacle as making that information leaked to Harry
once he is awake is something DD can manage without developing a
headache at the difficulty of the task. Ok, maybe a little harder than
defeating Gringewald, but only a little.

> Silmariel: It has to be refined, but it is a good starting point.
> 
> Amanda: It doesn't hold water. It's not just a bad fit to canon; 
> canon contradicts it.

We're at the same point, aren't we? So fitted to canon, the sequence
of events ends being the novel itself. As in your explanation. Both
are possible.
 
> Silmariel: Because he has been lectured on what you can and can't do 
> in time travel, and believed explanations?
> 
> Amanda: Harry has NOT been lectured on time-turners. Harry had never 
> even *heard* of time turners until about an hour and a half before 
> that instant. All he knows of time-turners is the hurried explanation 
> of Hermione.
 
Please Amanda, don't yell to me, I'm not deaf. Ok, he has not been
lectured. Hermione has been lectured and transmitted the information.
Hermione has the time-turner, isn't she who decides what and what not
can be done, so we get the same result, that Harry's actions are
restricted by a lecture? 

> 78635--Talisman's highly entertaining and well-constructed refutation 
> of Laurasia, and another post by bboy which I didn't read. I *love* 
> her (her?) model with the marker and the action figures.
> 
> Her interpretation of the flow of time--singular for those outside 
> observing, multiple and serial for those doing the time-jumping--
> absolutely agrees with mine.

Perfect. That means now we are using the same model, only you don't
allow time to change and I do.

> I am intrigued by her statement that Harry had to survive the 
> dementor encounter, in order to exist, in order to be in place to 
> cast the Patronus spell. It bears weight. However, I have read more 
> than one science fiction story which comes down to the fact that 
> fooling around with time involves paradoxes, and it may be that JKR 
> simply didn't think this deeply about the ramifications of Harry 
> saving himself.

...fooling around with time involves paradoxes... don't tell me,
paradoxes multiply when you allow time to change. You just can't say
Sirius survived to the attack, then someone traveled back in time and
did the famous second shot to effectively murder him, that implies a
paradox.

But you might be referring to that plot trick that involves a paradox
necessary and ever present for the events to develop as they should
be/have ever been. It was a fresh idea a hundred of years ago, but know?

Let's face it. The it-happened-once version of story is a cake at time
travel. I've also have read a lot of time-travel stories, they are so
fun to nitpick. 

And she may have written  something that apears to be easy and hides
complexity. She uses to do that. Neville's character, for example. I
like logic exercises of how to explain a time novel with different
sets of axioms, and it happens that with PoA it can be done, till
know. We still have two novels to go.

I'll stop here, I don't have more time, just to say I consider they
idead of bringing Sirius back with a tt isn't practicable even in you
include changes. 

silmariel