Paradox of Time Travel in PoA - Before & After

[davenclaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 137311

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at y...> wrote:
> First, no one is invalidating the Multiple Time Line Theory of time
> travel *in general*, but there is evidence or at least hints in the
> books that tell us that this is simply not the theory the JKR used.
><snip> 
> There are clues in the book, hints that tell us the TT!Harry and
> TT!Hermione were always there. NT!Harry and NT!Herione (NT!=Normal
> Time) heard TT!Harry and TT!Hermione in the Entrance Hall. In the
> second re-counting of the events, TT!Harry and TT!Hermione hear
> NT!Harry and NT!Hermione along with Ron out in the Entrance Hall.
> That's not an absolute statement of fact, but it's a strong enough 
and
> intentional enough hint to settle it for me. They heard each other;
> therefore, they were ALL ALWAYS THERE. Since Harry was there, he 
was
> there to save himself. Simple as that.


You are incorrectly characterizing the "multiple time line theory."  
I AM NOT arguing that the book shows two separate sets of events, 
before they were changed and after they were changed.  I agree that 
the events shown are all the same, from two perspectives.

I think I have pinpointed the reason I disagree with your "single 
timeline" theory: it requires the future to have already taken 
place.  For TT!Harry to ALWAYS have been there shooting stags at 
dementors, it means that the event of going back in time was already 
fixed at the time that Harry was facing the dementors.  THAT is the 
huge unresolveable hole with this entire theory.  There just can't 
be a single timeline because you can't come back from the future 
before you go to the future to come back from.

Now, once the time traveling takes place, then the past self does 
not know that things once happened differently.  One possibility is 
that this immediately alters the memories of the time traveler so 
that even he has no knowledge of a different set of events, so from 
everyone's perspective, there was a single timeline.  But this would 
be perception, not fact: fact would dictate that some series of 
events leading up to the decision to travel in time must have 
occurred without a time-traveler hanging around.

> Anytime you have reverse/backward time travel, you will have the
> effect before the cause. We see the effects of Harry and Hermione 
time
> traveling before we know the cause; effect-Harry saved Harry,
> cause-Harry time traveled. That in and of itself is enough to 
create a
> paradox. However, it's nnly a big unresolvable paradox if you 
insist
> on starting history in the future and working back in time.
> 

NO NO NO!!!! YOUR theory is the one that requires starting in the 
future!! Don't you see?  Your theory depends on the time traveling 
having already taken place before it takes place.  Your theory 
obligates you to look at the entire completed timeline, time 
travlers and all, as always having been that way, instead of 
progressing moment by moment.


> Theory 1- Multiple Timelines - has a huge unresolvable hole in it.

The only hold with this theory is that JKR probably didn't consider 
and certainly never wrote what events took place before time 
traveling changed things.

> 
> Theory 2- Single Timeline - doesn't
> 

Um, yeah it does.  Tell me again how the future happens before the 
past?


- davenclaw