[HPforGrownups] Re:Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function

[Carolina]

No: HPFGUIDX 80134

Laurasia:
>But this explanation of events works exactly the same!!

Only you just travel in time because you want, not because you are 
bound to do it, even if you are not aware.  

> In other words, the very things you
> don't like about the internally-consistent version of events
> appear exactly in your own.

Oh, no. The thing I don't like about the "internally-consistent 
version of events", I'll call it static timeline for short, is that 
every explanation I've seen so far comes to: 

"why? 
because it has to be static. 
why? 
because Harry saves himself
but he couldn't, could he?
yes, because the timeline is static
but why?
because he saves himself."

ok, that seems an axiom, something I have to buy because the author 
says that, I've already bought magic and time travel, but then, 
I've read a lot on time travel, and if I have to buy a 
"self-fullfiling" sequence of events for such a simple travel, 
well, for me is the cheapest trick you can use in Time Travel. You 
don't have to deal with broken physic laws, as "you have to be 
alive in orther to activate a time turner, and not, once you are 
dead an older version of you can't save you, you were dead, 
remember?". You are the author. If you say the character is alive 
because he is his own father, we readers buy it. Why? It happened 
because it happened. 

I roleplayed a year lasting game with eight travels in time along 
one thousand years, and the author used that trick, but then, it 
was just for a game, a consumible, nothing that will be re-read by 
millions. I think Jo is far more intelligent than that, but that's 
IMO.

I wanted an explanation that only required the usual axioms for time 
travel, went fine with Talisman an the Uber-Kitchen.

If the text can be read and explained both ways, is fantastic.

Silmariel said:
<< By the 'it happened twice' theory, as you both point out, if 
memory  records only the facts the 'victim' knows, because the 
first set is erased, you'd better be careful when you Time Travel, 
or you will  erase your own memory, not speaking of unexpected 
changes.>>

Laurasia replied:
But you would never remember doing it! And the new version of events 
would explain everything perfectly, hence, as Corinth said <<it 
doesn't exist, and never did exist, in the dimension we are 
concerned 
with.>>>

Talisman added:
>I don't hold the opinion that memory is erased or modified in 
>time-travel.  I have proffered the accruing of experience, which 
>would  include memory, from the outset. Hermione remembers what 
>she is  taught in each lesson, etc.

The first mistake is mine, if I understand Talisman. One thing is 
static-dynamic timeline and other is supposing memory is erased. I 
did a reference posts ago wich said more or less "unless the 
author's rules include an static bubble for the people using the 
timeturmer to retain their memories", wich can be done, of course, 
there are nice tt histories in wich the characters retain memory.

But Hermione here has nothing to do. Why wouldn't she remember each 
class? she didn't change the fact that she had gone to them. I 
don't say memories change, I say memory records what 
sees/feels/whatever for the individual. If the facts that person 
has lived have changed, the person's memory will change at the same 
rate the user is recordindg it, so hermione retain both memories. 
Unless the author includes the rule (the axiom) that changes physic 
rules for memories. I didn't knew the Uber-Kitchen theory included 
an axiom for preserving memories of deleted set of facts, but I 
will not use it unless its clear from canon.

Then, experience accrue, of course, Hermione lives twice in the same 
period, and by appling laws, she remembers both instances. They 
don't conflict.

Now if Hermione 2 goes back in time and steals the text book for H1, 
that's changing what H1 did, so why memories of H1 shouldn't 
reflect the book has been lost? 

Not only that, H2 going to another class only works if the memories 
of her classmates are modified, because there was a point in the 
sequence when she didn't attend to class, then H1, at 10:00, jumped 
to 9:00 and went to class, altering the fact that she didn't go 
previously, so that is what her classmates remember (the second 
time). 

Talisman:
>Perhaps he only had to say, "stop." 

But then, why should Harry even try to stay by the lake, he knew 
everything went ok, why the patronus if his experience didn't 
include one? He was lectured not to change things, and he did have 
nothing to change. Dementors just came and then flied. Harry even 
might deduct they went after something, Fudge has call them, or 
anything. Why cast a patronus?

>And then, because Harry lived to go back as Harry2, his Patronus 
>was "always" a part of the experience.  Nothing needs to be erased. 

Oh, no. It was erased the fact that the patronus wasn't part of the 
experience.

Laurasia:
<< That is, change but not experience the effects of the change. So, 
effectively it *doesn't* give us the ability to change time at all! 
Rather, it gives us the eternal *possibility* of changing time, but 
never actually *allows* us to change it and remember it.>>

No memories. Tricky, isn't it? What is the minumun change required 
for you to achieve your objectives and in a way that it won't mind 
later if you remember it? Isn't DD fantastic?

But are two types of changes, there is nothing bad with going to the 
past and change something, as far as the result of this change 
isn't incompatible with you remembering it. Hermione uses it for a 
whole year, changing things that were not incompatible with her 
memory.

silmariel