Time Turners and Lupin's apparent premature ageing

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 157006

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jordan Abel" <random832 at ...> wrote:
>
> Steve/bboyminn:
> > I hestiate to get into this, but what if you died 
> > during your year of time travel, there would be no
> > you to take over for you at the instant you time 
> > traveled. You will never come back.

> Jordan/Random832:
> 
> I can't see any basis for a requirement to take over 
> for yourself at the end like you're describing. It 
> may be "compulsory" to do so according to the 
> regulations governing time turners, but failing to do
> so does not actually cause a paradox.
> 

bboyminn:

You seem to have missed my point, which admittedly was 
a small point. When you travel back in time, you vanish 
from the present as Harry and Hermione did in PoA. Three 
time traveled hours later, Harry and Hermione arrive 
back at the hospital at roughly the instant they time 
traveled. If they hadn't come back, then they simply 
would have vanished from the present and that would be 
the end of them. If they intend on having a future then 
they must return and take over for their earlier time 
traveling selves, or assuming they don't die, come up 
with some excuse to explain why they vanished from 
Hogwarts and never returned.

True, dying while time traveling in and of itself does 
not create a paradox, but it is the end of your life 
and that is not a good thing. Again, if you want to 
have a future, then you have to come back from the past, 
and that is all I was saying. That and the fact that the 
longer the time, the greater the risk.

> > bboyminn originally said:
> > 
> > I would also like to point out that while time 
> > traveling, you must be very careful not to alter 
> > time/history in any significant way, or the furture 
> > you were in when you time traveled may not be there 
> > when you get back. (The Butterfly Effect)


> Jordan/Random832:
> 
> You can't really cite an unrelated movie for stuff 
> about how time travel works because there are so many 
> ways of writing it. ...
> 

bboyminn:

I used 'Butterfly Effect' to illustrate the dangers of 
altering history. The books very clearly through Hermione 
warn us of the danger of making changes to history and 
creating time-paradoxes. So, I'm not using an obscure movie 
to define time travel in JKR's books, I am using it to 
illustrate a point that was very clearly made in the books.

> Jordan/Random832:
>
> The events of POA, ... follow the Novikov self-consistency 
> principle ...
> 
> ...
> 
> One problem is that people will often assume one of these views is
> "how it works" and no others are considered
> 
> -- 
> Random832
>

bboyminn:

I think the principles are very clear in the books. There is a danger
of substantially altering history. There is a danger of killing your
future or past self, which could create a huge paradox. Further, the
events in PoA are consistent with these precautions. Nothing was
really changed, once we see ALL the facts, we see that things happen
the same both times. It's just that when we see it the second time
from a different perspective, we are given details that we didn't
originally know. But, it is our knowledge of events, not the events
themselves, that changed. I think JKR has create a very consistent
account of time travel.

Though I tend to agree with others, that card has been played, and I
don't see it being played again in any significant way. I generally
reject all time travel or polyjuice solutions to the story. They seem
like cheating. If that is the best JKR can do, then I will be
disappointed. I trust her to come up with twists and turns that I
never could or would have imagined. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn