Why a Time-Turner won't work for GH (WasNewbie theory - Harry at Godric's Ho

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 163935

Carol earlier:
> > Suppose that your speculations are correct and Time-Turners exist
in all varieties, distinguishable by size. Suppose that the kids find
a Time-Turner in the rubble at Godric's Hollow, miraculously
undiscovered by the Aurors who investigated the Potters' deaths and
unbroken after sixteen years. Suppose that they figure out that it
must be, say, a weekglass. Hermione, the practical one, calculates
that they'll need exactly 835 turns. All they need to do is stand
there, making sure that nothing distracts the person turning the 
Time-Turner to make him or her lose count, for 835 seconds (roughly
fourteen minutes). That's *if* it's a weekglass and they've identified
> > it correctly. If it's a dayglass, they have to stand there waiting for
> > 5,844 seconds (1.6 hours). Perseverance, luck, concentration,
> > patience. It could be done, I suppose, even by seventeen-year-old or
> > eighteen-year-old kids. But again, they'd have to be sure that it's a
> > dayglass. I'll suspend my disbelief for the moment and assume that
> > Hermione can do that.
> > > 
> 
> Carol I buy your other arguments for why the kids shouldn't and
won't go back in time but the practical aspects you outline in this
paragraph are simply no barrier at all. Hermione's hour glass time
turner was a little hour glass with a ring at the top and a chain that
ran through the ring so she could wear it around her neck and to
define who the time turner acted on by cramming them inside the loop
of the chain when it was used. 
> 
> Is it an hour glass, week glass, year glass, etc? Turn it back one
turn and see. Problem solved, well unless it happens to be a millenium
> glass!!!
> 
> Hold the chain for the time turner in both hands with the time
turner itself between them and twirl the chain, you can get several
turns, perhaps many turns, per second this way. It won't take terribly
long to go back even with an hour turner. 
> 
> You don't have to count. Once you know the calibration of the time
> turner twirl it for a time you guesstimate is much less than needed
> check how far back you've gone and plan the next twirling session
> from that information. Approach your goal slowly as you get close
> and if you overshoot, so what? All you have to do is kill time while
> you wait for your target day and hour to come up. Hermione can 
> spend it studying. <snip>

Carol responds:
I don't think so. First, I think you have the movie version of the
Time-Turner in mind. Book!Hermione's Time_turner is an hourglass on a
chain, not a little glass lens with an hourglass inside. There's no
indication in the books that you can just spin it ("Three turns should
do it" indicates that it's turned precisely and manually, not spun),
and it would be difficult to just try a hit-and-miss method of getting
to the right time. How would they know if they were in 1955 or 1892
without exploring the nearby village to check out the technology and
the clothing? You don't just collar the nearest Muggle and ask what
year it is. Knowing Hermione, she'd want to be precise and get the
time and date exactly right if they went back at all (and without a
neck chain, it would be harder to send all three of them back). 

But it's all moot, anyway. I was just responding to Jordan's point
that Time-Turners aren't necessarily calibrated in one-hour increments
(though Hermione's obviously was). I seriously doubt that they'll find
a Time-Turner of any kind at Godric's Hollow or elsewhere, and, as you
say, the other arguments still hold. And as Raechel pointed out to me
offlist, there may not even be any rubble left at the site of the
house (and if there is, the Aurors would no doubt have combed it
thoroughly for clues).

BTW, I have a tangentially related question for anyone who wants to
respond. Do you think that Voldemort's body disintegrated completely
or were there Voldiebits lying around that could be identified? And,
if so, why would anyone other than Dumbledore and those close to him
(Snape and Hagrid, for example) believe that Voldemort wasn't dead?
And if there weren't any Voldiebits, how did they know who the
murderer was? Why would the MoM take Dumbledore's word for what
happened? The Fidelius Charm could not have been common knowledge.
Just wondering what people think on this point.

Carol, still expecting them to use Harry's memory in DD's Pensieve
helped by Slughorn (who has to have some sort of role in DH though
Probably a small one)