Paradox - Time Travel - Side Note

[davenclaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 136606

> bboyminn:
> 
> Well, the fact that we are still discussing this is a pretty strong
> indicator of a paradox. The fact that an essentially dead subject
> which has been explained to the doubters again and again, he been
> revived and is now generating another dozen posts, again, is a pretty
> good sign that some people, despite my clear and concise 
explanations,
> refuse to accept my view of things [folds arms, pouts lips, and 
scowls
> ;)]. Further, despite my one-and-only-one timeline explanations which
> are supported by the books, some people still cling to the
> two-separate-independant timeline theory; "How can Harry be saved if
> he hasn't yet traveled back in time to save himself?".


There is a good reason for this.

Unless I am mistaken, your "one and only one" argument stipulates that 
events occured as they did BECAUSE they time traveled.  And if they 
hadn't time traveled, different events would have occurred.

That means that time-traveling alters events.

And yet you contend that time-traveling doesn't alter events.

Once time-traveling takes place, no one is aware of any other series 
of events.  But here we diverge.  I argue that before the decision to 
time-travel takes place, some series of events takes place which can 
be altered by the time travel, and this new version of events is 
basically all that anyone is aware of.  You seem to want to take the 
actions of the time-travelers as a foregone conclusion before the 
original characters decide to time travel.  

To me, if they ONLY EVER experience events as they occurred with the 
time travelers involved, then there can't be any free choice in 
deciding to go back in time, and what to do once they've gone back.  
To me, if they have free choice, then whatever is experienced by the 
original characters can be changed.  But in your view of time travel, 
the future has basically already occurred - Harry has already traveled 
in time BEFORE he actually travels in time!!!  The "single timeline" 
explanation requires a timeline that has already played itself out.  
The timeline which you contend is the only timeline that ever exists, 
is to me simply the "finished" timeline after the travel occurs, and 
is only perceived as the only timeline that ever existed.  And this 
requires some series of events leading up to the act of time-travel, 
which took place without any time-travelers involved.

Furthermore, you cannot reconcile your explanation with the words that 
JKR puts into McGonagall and Hermione's mouths.

- davenclaw