Time-turning

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 167538

> > zgirnius:
> > Harry and Hermione are unaware of the rules, yes. This is not 
> because
> > they do not realize they are fictional characters. It is because 
> they
> > are residents of the Potterverse who happen not to know (or fully
> > understand) all of the natural/magical laws that govern that
> > universe.
> 
> Magpie:
> Yes, that too. But if they had known the rules of the universe and 
so 
> thought they couldn't change anything, and had not gone back in 
time 
> because of that, they would not have been there to save anyone. 

zgirnius:
If you agree with me that that laws of nature and magic in the 
Potterverse show that the past cannot be changed, a different 
decision by Harry or Hermione would mean the following:
1) Bucky would have escaped the headsman, (Dumbledore witnessed the 
non-execution).
2) Harry and Sirius would have survived the Dementor attack by the 
lake (since by the time the decision faced Harry and Hermione, that 
moment was in the past).
3) The sentence of Dementor's Kiss on Sirius Black would have been 
carried out to the great horror or Harry and Hermione.

This last, is the only point at issue, as it is the only event 
occuring in a hypothetical future after Harry or Hermione chose 
differently. The first two events had *already happened* at the time 
the choice was made. Odd though it may seem to you, Harry and 
Hermione's decision does not matter in a universe under those rules.

Fortunately for Sirius, Hermione took Dumbledore's suggestion, and 
Harry went along with it.

Now, if Rowling had written them making this choice that leads to a 
sadder outcome in PoA, she would have owed us explanations of how 
Bucky got away, and (especially) what the white light was when the 
Dementors retreated. Happily, she didn't, so we got to enjoy (or 
execrate, as our preferences dicatate) Sirius's scenes for another 
two books, and learned that Bucky was saved by the duo, and Harry and 
Sirius were saved by Harry's Patronus.

> Magpie:
> Similarly, on the days Hermione forgets to use the Time Turner to 
> attend a class, she has skipped that class for the day. She's got 
to 
> spin it to be in it.:-) 

zgirnius:
If I am right, the High and Mighty Creatrix of the Potterverse 
says, 'spin it all you like, you will *still* not be in it' in this 
case. If Hermione knows this because someone has endeavored to 
explain the laws of time in her universe to her prior to equipping 
her with a Time Turner, it is an alternate explanation for why she 
does not bother. (One I find convincing - had I half her obsession 
with classes, I would have gone back several hours - after all, in 
the hours after that she could grab some much needed sleep).

> Magpie:
> If 
> everyone just said "we can't ever change the past" there would be 
no 
> use for Time Turners. 

zgirnius:
First, the inventor could have believed in the Potterverse equivalent 
of the "Many Worlds" interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, only to 
discover, much to her chagrin, that her learned colleagues whom she 
believed to be dunderheads for their belief in "Consistent Histories" 
were actually right.

Second, I mentioned in an earlier post an alternate use for travel 
into the past - to find out what really happened then. Pensieve 
memories can only be used if you know of a witness, and the witness 
is willing and able to share the memory. (Not to mention that the 
only Pensieve we have ever met belongs to Albus Dumbledore).

> Magpie:
> The people who really believe you can't change 
> the past are Muggles. Wizards seem to kind of say that, but 
sometimes 
> interfere with the past while calling it not changing the past 
> because eventually it will all be remembered as one time stream.

zgirnius:
Ah, so we do disagree. I really think that wizards *cannot* change 
the past, that it is a physical and magical impossibility of the 
unoverse in which they live (just as they cannot, for example, bring 
back the really dead, per Rowling). I further suspect that some of 
them even know this, as I discussed upthread.

I would certainly insist that we have *never* seen a wizard change 
the past. And noone and nothing wiped our memories. <g>

> Magpie:
> Odd, given this was Hermione, though. Especially because she's not 
> exactly wrong. I mean, Buckbeak is savable if she uses the Time 
> Turner to save him. If she doesn't use the Time Turner to save him, 
> there's a good chance to be dead. 

zgirnius:
If I am right about the rules, and about Hermione knowing them, then 
she ought to have believed there was no way to save Bucky, because 
she thought she had heard him die (which was upsetting enough, 
especially with all else going on, that a failure to think logically 
would be credible). Unless she understood DD's hint to mean that 
Bucky had survived (as I understand it in light of the rules I deduce 
from canon). In that case, she might have made her choice in the same 
hope with which Dumbledore offered it, namely that she rescued him 
while somehow getting Sirius free too.