Time-turning

[Dana]

No: HPFGUIDX 167482

Dana before:
> >No time isn't linear, time is relative; 

Bart:
> The two are not mutually exclusive. Time can very well be a vector, 
which makes it linear AND relative. At least, that's how it works in 
Einsteinian physics.
<snip>

> That has NOTHING to do with time being relative; in fact, the 
effects of relativity in time are sufficiently small for humans that 
the wavelength is smaller than our senses' minimum bandwidth. 
<snip>

That is not what Einstein said he never said time is linear, he said 
time is relative. 

This is his perception on time travel:

"The relativistic analogy can be carried to its logical end. Since 
time begins to slow down with higher speeds, it can be shown that at 
the speed of light it stops totally and beyond that begins to run 
backwards". 

That is why how one perceives time is relevant because the clock is 
not what makes time move, it is the speed of the earth in relation to 
space. 

Most of you live in America but I live in the Netherlands and 
therefore someone living in New York is 6 hours behind me in time. 
Does this mean someone living in New York lives in my past? No, it 
doesn't and when I would travel to New York would this mean I can 
relive the same time twice? No it doesn't not even when I chance my 
clock to local time, it just means I can enjoy a longer day because 
the Sun will set 6 hours later from the place I started from but if I 
do not adjust my clock then it still is the same time. 

Why is this relevant to the story because the perception of time by 
the reader and the way he or she lives with time messes with the 
logic of the timeturning in the story. We think we cannot change time 
once the clock has passed a certain point and events therefore can't 
be changed but time is relative meaning that every action the 
timetraveler takes will effect the same time the original person was 
living in. It is not a linear line time follows therefore there is no 
time loop. It is not time that travels back but the person and he 
perceives the same timeframe at the same moment. When the 
timetraveler goes back in time he does not take the time with him, it 
is not a parallel universe he just co-exists with his past self (or 
at least in the Potterverse)   

A paradox would only occur if you would change history to much 
because every event that occurred because of these events will change 
the future. People will vanish as the event could have been the 
reason their parents met, people suddenly be alive because the events 
was the cause for their deaths. If you change too much you find 
yourself in an entire new world right after you changed the events. 
Therefore time isn't linear it is relative and events are not linked 
to time. People link events to time. Time actually does not exist, it 
is only events that exist and events CAN be changed if you would be 
able to go to a point before the event takes place. 

That is also why time travel (in the Potterverse) is dangerous 
because if wizard2 kills his first self then he stops to exist at the 
same moment because if the first can't live to the jump point, then 
the second self cannot exist either and if wizard1 kills his second 
self, he has no future because his first self, jumps back in time 
every time he reaches that point, he would therefore just experience 
the same time over and over again, with no chance to get passed that 
point. Only when both, the original and the time traveller, come to 
that specific point in time, can they both pass the point as one 
again. 

Both Harry's can change things within the same time frame and both 
have effect on the end time and thus why Harry2's actions change the 
end time not because it is a new time but because it takes place in 
the same timeframe. Harry1 just can't change what has not yet 
happened while Harry2 can because he has more knowledge then Harry1 
not because he is living on a separate time line. 

Dana