Twins, time turner, the same person?

[nkafkafi]

No: HPFGUIDX 91099

Lizvega wrote:
> I've been thinking a lot about Fred and George lately. The first 
> time we meet them, at Kings Cross Station in PS- They yell at Molly 
> because she apparently mixed them up, but then just as "Fred" is 
> going through the barrier, he yells that she had it right the first 
> time. But, she didn't know the difference, she just said, "Oh, 
sorry 
> George"- or something like that. I don't understand how a mother 
can 
> mix up her children, even if they are identical twins. I've met 
> twins, loads of them, and after a little while, the differences 
> become apparent. But, Molly couldn't do that after thirteen years? 
I 
> started thinking about how odd that was after re-reading OOP- The 
> scene where Ron gets his prefect badge and Molly says "That's 
> everyone in the family"- and then George and Fred smirk at her for 
> forgetting them. Why do these two not seem like 'real' Weasleys? 
> Their attitude, personalities, goals, etc. all seem different from 
> any of the other hundred Weasley's. The one similarity appears in 
> their treatment and opinion of the 'baddies'- they hate the 
ministry 
> and lv and percy all the same. - and they seem pretty intent on 
> writing percy off- whereas the rest of the family may be up for 
> forgiveness. 
> 
<snip> > I'm re-reading all of the books right now looking for 
evidence and 
> clues about Fred and George's identities. I wonder if there are 
> really two of them. A time Turner could allow a future and former 
> self to interact couldn't it? I'm still forming this theory, but 
has 
> anyone got any theories about what role Fred and George will play 
in 
> the upcoming books? Or, what it would mean if there wasn't really a 
> Fred and George, but just one brother? I don't know what I'm trying 
> to say here. My head hurts. 
> 

Neri now:
Hello Lizvega, I liked that last suggestion for its creativeness. But 
as the self-appointed time-travel expert around here (see the "time 
travel is dangerous" thread several months ago), trying to work it 
out makes my head hurt too. If our single twin is jumping to the past 
every one hour or every one day for at least five years (the time we 
as readers know him/them), then he is living double-time and should 
get older biologically at a double rate. That is, not from 13 to 18 
years but from 13 to 23 years. And that's even before we start 
considering what the future twin knows because he comes from an 
hour/day in the future.

BTW, Hermione also got older biologically because of her intensive 
time traveling in PoA. But in her case it wasn't excessive. If we 
assume that she did it for 8 hrs per day for about 9 months, then she 
only got older by additional 3 months. If, however, you sometime 
think Hermione acts a bit mature for her age group, you are not wrong.

Back to our twin/s, if we assume the twin travels back in time for a 
year, say, or even more, then there should be a detectable difference 
in the biological age of the future twin and the past twin. And the 
future twin would know what is going to happen for a whole year in 
advance. This will make the explanation of the events even more 
difficult.

Regarding the family relation of the twins, I remember Harry thinking 
(sometime before the DoM battle) that Ginny's family resemblance to 
the twins when she gets stubborn is striking. Hey, here is an idea: 
if you add Ginny to this time-travel ploy, it will explain the 
biological age difference. But how would you explain the sex change, 
and why is there only one Ginny and two of the twins??? Nope, I think 
I'm going to quit this while I still have my wits around me. But it 
was fun while it lasted. Thanks!

Neri