Time turner theory

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 161858

---  "Lana" <unicornspride at ...> wrote:

> Lana Wrote:
> >
> > But.. Had the kids not gone back in time, Buckbeak
> > would have died. Hermoine even saw herself, so we 
> > KNOW that this is why he didn't die. They had already
> > taken him.
> 
> >Sarah wrote:
> >Uh oh, this argument again. :)
> >Hermione saw herself? I think that the trio heard both
> >Harry and Hermione under the cloak, but they didn't 
> >know who it was at the time.
> > 
> >Harry also saw himself cast the Patronus Charm, and 
> >likewise didn'trealize who it was.
> 
>   Lana writes:
> 
>   I understand exactly what you are saying.  What **I**
> am saying is that "it" ... has to have happened a first
> time in order for it to continue repeating itself. A 
> ball will not bounce until someone bounces it first... 
> 
> At some point, there had to be a "first" trio that 
> changed the original death.  Buckbeak had to have died
> at some point or there would have been no need for them
> to "save" him.  ...
> 
> This goes back to the...  It had to have happened at 
> some point or there would have been no need to "save"
> him. ...
> 

bboyminn:

You are free to keep thinking that, but I guarantee you
that that line of thought will bring you nothing but
headaches. It creates impossible to resolve time-loops
and paradoxes. Time travel already creates massive
paradoxes, our goal is to minimize them not complicate
them.

It is not so much that you can't go back in time and
change things as it is that you SHOULDN'T.

TT!Harry and TT!Hermione (TT!=Time Traveling) did not
alter history, the created it. History in this incidence
never changes, only our knowledge of that history is 
is altered.

Why did Harry and Hermione time travel if Buckbeak and
Sirius had already been saved? Why? Because at that
point in time, they do not know that either had been
saved. They act on the knowledge they have, and it is
only after they have time traveled that they understand
history as it truly unfolded. 

Time, events, and history are not changed here only our
knowledge of the hows, whys, and details is altered. 

To literally change history is a very dangerous thing
because it forces the entire universe to shift to a new
previously non-existant timeline. "Back to the Future"
and "The Butterfly Effect" are good examples. Small
seemingly insignificant events are changed in the past
that over time create huge massive changes to the present
and future. In the case of Marty McFly, he simply keeps 
changing the past until he finds a future he can live 
with. Yet, he gives no consideration to the emensely 
negative effects his preferrred future has on other
people. 

So, once again, TT!Harry and TT!Hermione didn't alter
history, they created it. They created the one and
only history that ever existed. 

Harry can't save Sirius because he didn't. It is a
documented fact of history that Sirius went behind
the Veil, and changing that could have mammoth
consequences in the future.

Now again, I remind you that our preception of history
is not alway accurate. Example, Harry and Hermione 
time travel back to save Sirius and Buckbeak because
their preception of history was inaccurate. They had
assumed Buckbeak was dead, but were not at that time
aware that they had travel back and saved him. It
is not history, but our knowledge and preception of
history that changes.

Keep in mind, that through all this, Harry and Hermione
experience linear time. Three hours of life plus three
hours of time travel to them are six continuous hours.
To the rest of the universe, it is three continuous 
hours.

I believe if Harry or one of the other characters time
travels it will either be to gather information that
can be used in the present, or it will be to create
history as it already exists.

As an illustration, Harry may travel back to the top of
the Tower, and just as Snape casts the AK, Harry will 
cast a spell to throw Dumbledore over the precipice and
float him gently to the ground. Snape's Killing Curse 
simply hits thin air. From that point on, Dumbledore
will cooperate in the deception of his death to lure
Voldemort out into the open.

That doesn't change history. There is no first history
were Dumbledore died and second history where he lived.
There is only one history that we the observers have
a distorted view of, and once all the information is
made available to us, we will understand history for 
what it was.

Now, if Dumbledore truly died that night, then there is
no changing it, or it would be immensely unwise to try 
to change it. 

In the example above and in the Sirius/Buckbeak incident
we have falsely assumed history that characters base their 
decisions on, and later we have the true knowledge of
history as it actually occurred.

In the case of Sirius's death, he can't be saved because
he wasn't saved. Several people including Harry saw him
go through the Veil, and there is no 'trick of the light',
smoke and mirrors, or mispreception of history that can 
alter that.

In Dumbledore's case, he most likely is dead, but we can't
be certain that that isn't our misinterpretation of 
history. There is room for Dumbledore to be covertly 
saved. There are enough inconsistencies in that event that
an alternate more accurate interpretation of history is
possible. Though very very unlikely.

So, wise time travelers do their best to be merely 
observers, if they do anything, it must be to create 
history as it is or will be known to exist. They can't 
or shouldn't meddle through time spawning endless new 
timelines, the long term consequences of which can never
be fully understood until it is much too late.

You are certainly free to continue to believe that time
happens twice, but I tell you that this way lies madness,
or at least a good headache. I really believe that the
path of least resistance is to accept that time only 
happens once. 

But again, you are free to hold to your theory.

Steve/bboyminn