Time-turning

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 167590

---  "Zara" <zgirnius at ...> wrote:
>
>  
> > Dana now:
> > 
> > You are contradicting yourself here. If history 
> > cannot be changed then her future self cannot save 
> > these two innocent lives, because to be from the 
> > future you already must have a past, otherwise ...
> > both Hermione's would not have a recollection of it.
> > You now only  dedicate the past time to be created 
> > by a future self instead of a  present time self in
> > a first run. 
> 
> zgirnius:
> I am not. ...my explanations themselves conform fully
> to a theory of time travel that is internally 
> consistent. 
> 
> What they are not consistent with is your insistence 
> that the cause must precede the effect in time. My 
> view is that time travel is precisely that thing which
> permits the effect to precede its cause in time, 
> however illogical this seems. 


bboyminn:

As to the Cause and Effect issue, this is a point I have
made before, and it is a difficult concept for most
people to wrap their minds around. Since we, or the
characters, are moving backward in time, absolutely
Effect occurs before Cause, but I say the sequence is
irrelevant. As long as there is a Cause, and as long
as it produces an Effect, the time order in which
they occur doesn't matter. 

Again, since we are going backward in time, indeed 
Effect occurs before Cause to the outside observer. 
And indeed, Effect become history before the Cause that
precipitates it occurs. I've already made the point in
a previous post that the Time Travelers do not experience 
time as outside observers do, and we need to make
that distinction.

As to the first issue of 'History' let us remember that
their is a true physical history, and an interpretation
or perception of that history. They say the history is 
written by the Victorious, and they write it from their
perspective.

The Trio perceive that Buckbeak was killed, but their 
perception, while in the moment may document a version
of history, it does not create reality. The reality and
the absolute historical fact is that Buckbeak never was
killed. 

It is only when we gain a new historical perspective that
we see that this is true. The Axe fell on a pumpkin and
Hagrid cried out in joy, and Buckbeak wasn't there. 

The difference between these two perspectives is that
the second time we see 'what' and 'why' of it. We see 
the error of our previous perspective. 

So, it is not history that is changed, but our perception 
of history.

On the issue of Hermione attending class, naturally I'm
in the camp of 'it happened once'. But it is important
to separate how Hermione perceives time and how the
rest of the world perceives time. To Hermione these are
three consecutive classes, but to the 'world view' these
are three simultaneous classes with three Hermiones in
existence. 

In the example given (using slightly different 
nomenclature), Hermione-1 is in CoMC, Hermione-2 is 
in Arithmacy, and Hermione-3 never exists because 
Hermione-2 fell asleep and missed going back to Charms.
Once she missed Charms, it is no longer historical 
perception, it is a historical fact.

In a normal course of three simultaneous classes, at the
end, Hermione-1 and Hermione-2 disappear because they
have gone back in time. Hermione-1 going back to become
Hermione-2, and Hermione-2 going back to become Hermione-3.
Hermione-3 carries on as the normal Hermione and moves 
forward in time. But again, remember that to the 'world
view' that is three simultaneous Hermiones and three
simultaneous classes over a single hour of time.

I'm sure that doesn't really add anything that hasn't
already been said, but I'm having trouble resisting 
the lure of Time Travel discussion.

Steve/bboyminn