Hello friends,
I have a small announcement to make. i have got some other questions on time-travelling and time-turner. I atfirst thought of writing them at the last page but then i thought its better to write in the first page so that everyone can see. So go to the end of this post, u will see the questions😳
(any onr having problwm with font size plz tell me)
Key:
Dark Blue: Important line
Underlined Gray lines: Topics or Headlines
Dark Red (Maroon): Questions that you people need to answer
Dark Pink: My thoughts
Some important things that you need to know before starting reading this: there are actually four questions asked that you people need to answer. Other than that, there are many interesting facts about time traveling/turner that I gave here.
Note that everything written here is actually not only written by me: I have found out these information searching net, many other Harry Potter sites, etc. Some of the things, I directly pasted it, and some others which I wrote it myself.
I will give my final credit to this site from where I got most of the information: www.mugglenet.com
Can History/Past be changed?
Now, the most important and critical question about the TIME TURNER comes: can the past/history be changed?
Some people say that 'what has happened has happened, you cannot change the past'. But by all the theories and indirect statements J.K.R had written, I personally (however no completely) come to the conclusion that past/history can be changed.
I think it is clear from four things JKR says in the POA that under her theory we can change history:
Hermione tells Harry that "Nobody is supposed to change time" when Harry wants to get the Invisibility Cloak. So what does this sentence implies? This sentence means that no-one is supposed to change time, BUT this does NOT mean that changing time/past/history is impossible. She does not say that changing time is impossible; she didn't say: "Nobody can change time." Thus, changing time might be possible, and it might also NOT be possible. Since J.K.R hasn't written the sentence clearly, it can have both meanings. This was the perfect place for JKR to state that "Nobody can change time" but she makes it clear that we can change time, by saying that "no-body is supposed to change time". Also note that Hermione speaks of "breaking one of the most important wizarding laws." That too must refer to changing history because if history couldn't be changed, then there would have been NO NEED of making the time-turner thing illegal. Laws are against only possible actions. It makes no sense to have a law against something you couldn't do even if you wanted to. I haven't checked the hunting laws in state, but I sure they don't say "You cannot hunt dinosaurs" — it wouldn't make any sense to have such a law since we couldn't hunt extinct animals even if we wanted to. And the same applies here: there would be no law proscribing changing time only if such change is possible.
Hermione tells Harry that McGonagall told her that "loads of [time-traveling wizards and witches] ended up killing their past or future selves by mistake". That is definitely changing history: the "earlier" wizards have been eliminated by time-travel events from the history that produced the time-traveling wizards. How can you go back in time and eliminate someone from history without changing the past/history?
Notice that the whole idea of a wizard "killing" his earlier self does not make any sense unless you can change the past. The problem is that there has to be a change in history to say that someone in the past was killed by a time-traveling wizard.
Let me use an example:
Let's say the wizard Boris the Bewildered ("BTB") was born in 1960, had children in the 1980's, and time-traveled in 2005 and accidentally killed his 1970 self. Well, do his children magically disappear? If history didn't change, they still must exist. Do the written records of BTB and the memories of others had of him still remain unchanged? (If history does not change, the historical records would now record that BTB died in 1970, killed by a mysterious stranger, although he kept living to 2005 and had children after he "died" — strange but true.) If nothing changes, then we are in the same time-line and nothing happened. His kids were still born in the 1980's, and so on. And 2005 BTB still exists (even though he is now back in 1970 through his time-traveling).
But then in what sense then did 2005 BTB "kill" 1970 BTB? What does it mean to say that the 1970 BTB "died" if nothing changed? The events remain the same after 1970 (his children were born in the 1980's, and so forth). 2005 BTB would have traveled back in time, but he would still be alive (even though he killed 1970 BTB), and people today would just say that he time-traveled and so that is why he is not around in 2005. (If time-travel forward is possible, he could come back since nothing changed, and his teenage kids would be here to greet him.) So 2005 BTB didn't really kill after all — BTB lived on past 1970, the 1980's BTB still had children, and so forth. Nothing really happened because history didn't change — 2005 BTB just visited the past.
In sum, under the view that "history did not change," nothing really happened when BTB time- traveled and killed 1970 BTB. History just went on as before. But that's the problem: What does it mean to "kill" someone in the past if nothing actually changes afterwards? If nothing really changed, the concept of "killing" some one in the past doesn't make sense. Forget about the problem that time-travel means the past events are somehow still occurring — the problem here is that if history doesn't change, then the idea of "killing" a past person is considered as meaningless.
So saying 2005 BTB "killed" 1970 BTB doesn't mean anything if history didn't change. Therefore, the idea of "killing" your past self only makes sense if we can change history.
Thus, by saying wizards can kill their earlier selves, JKR is committed to saying we can change what happened in the past.
J.K.R had written this sentence, that McGonagall told Hermione "lots of wizards have needed up killing their past and future by traveling through time." This sentence would have been useless, totally useless, unless this sentence has any special meaning and that is: History/past can be changed…
Harry says "There must be something that happened around now that Dumbledore wants us to change". Also notice that time-traveling-Harry wanted to change things by running out of the forest when he and time-traveling-Hermione were hiding there and getting the Invisibility Cloak and getting Wormtail. She had to grab and stop him. She only expressed concern about being seen, but the fact remains that Harry would have changed history. If Harry had stopped Wormtail or had just gotten the Invisibility Cloak, all the events of that evening from that point on would have changed, and he could have gotten them if Hermione had not intervened.
Dumbledore warns Harry and Hermione about being careful because time-travel's consequences are complicated and unpredictable. But if nothing changes, it does not matter whether we are careless in the past or not. If history is unchangeable, Dumbledore's comment about the consequences being unpredictable is wrong: the consequences would be completely predictable because we know precisely what will happen up to the time of the time- traveling. In fact, there is nothing to predict because we already know exactly what will happen and there is nothing we can do about it. Also, we wouldn't have to be careful since we couldn't change history even if we wanted to. For that matter, you could go back with a machine gun and shoot up the place — or you could take a nuclear bomb and nuke the place — and it wouldn't change anything because the past is "fixed" and unchangeable. Thus, Dumbledore's warning to be careful doesn't make sense unless we might accidentally or intentionally change history.
Can the above four points be explained without the past/history being changeable? If so, then how?
How did Harry get into the hospital—when he has been unconscious by the dementors attacks?
Now, another critical question comes. I myself have not been able to find the answer properly, so I hope you people will all help me to do it.
OK, now here is my question: how did Harry get into the hospital wing, when he has become unconscious by the dementors attack?
As far as I can remember, the chapter "Dementor's Kiss" ends like this: that Dementors were surrounding everywhere near them, and that moment Harry realizes that he is seeing someone who looks very much familiar with him, on the other end of the river, and that moment he becomes unconscious. But in the next chapter, we see Harry to be in the hospital wing…
So, now the question comes, how did Harry get into the hospital wing? Was there someone who rescued him? If so, who is it? Dumbledore—?
OK….for the time being let's leave this question….cause we have lots of other questions to discuss!
Now, even if Harry somehow manages to come to the hospital wing, how did he manage to get pass the dementor (I'm talking about the second time, I mean the time-traveling-Harry)?
We know that after came to the hospital wing magically (after being attacked by the dementors) Harry and Hermione uses the Time-turner to go back in time. They go to the same place, and the time-turner Harry himself witnesses the "other Harry" being attacked by the dementors, (and that time he produces the patronus knowing that he had already "done it".)
But how have he done that?
If the dementors are attacking the "real Harry", it means that the "real Harry" is getting pain. So, if the "real Harry" gets pained and become unconscious, then isn't the "time-traveling-Harry" also supposed to get pain and become unconscious?
Because, we know it very well, that, in the Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban movie, it is shown that, when the "time-traveling-Hermione" threw a stone into the "real-Harry", the real Harry gets pain, but along with the real Harry, the "time-traveling-Harry" also gets pain!
So what does the above logic explains? It explains that "Harry" is actually one, whether there are "more than one" Harry in the same place, at the same time. And that is why, when the "real-Harry" gets the pain in the forehead, the Harry who has time-traveled (time-traveling-Harry) also gets the pain.
So, following this logic, does not the time-traveling-Harry supposed to get attacked by the dementors, along with the real Harry (who was attacked by the dementors)? Because if the time-traveling-Harry gets hurt by the stone which Hermione threw to the real-Harry (along with the real-Harry), then, isn't the time-traveling-Harry also supposed to get hurt/attacked by the dementors along with the real-Harry?
But this doesn't happen? Why? What possible explanation can you people give for why the time-traveling-Harry didn't get attacked along with the real one? And not to forget the first question that how, Harry, on the first place reached the hospital wing!
Can someone explain me, that HOW Harry, on the first place, manages to reach the hospital-wing, while he had been attacked by the dementors and became unconscious? Who helped Harry to reach the hospital wing?
And secondly, can someone explain me the other question I have asked that, how did the "time-traveling-Harry" manages to get away and rescue Sirius, when the "real-Harry" or "Pre-time-traveling-Harry" is attacked by the dementors? Because Harry is actually one, so, if one Harry gets unconscious and attacked by the dementors, then isn't the other Harry also supposed to have the same CONDITION?
Weird but Interesting facts: billions of parallel worlds are created by Hermione!
Some people argue that time-turning creates parallel worlds. If I understand correctly, under the "parallel world" scenario, all the different time-lines go on existing and not get replaced by time-travel. In one world Buckbeak is killed, but in the parallel world created by time-travel Buckbeak never died. And both worlds continue to exist.
Notice that it wasn't just one new world created by Harry and Hermione's time-turning that night. New worlds are created every time anyone ever uses a time-turner. Hermione during the school year had to time-turn for each of two classes that met (I think) twice a week for about thirty to forty weeks, depending on how long the Hogwarts school year is with vacations. That's 4 time- turnings a week for let's say 35 weeks, or a total of 140 time-turnings.
And it is not just 140 new worlds that Hermione created by her time-turning — the worlds multiply exponentially. That is, the first time Hermione used the time-turner, a second world was created with its own Hermione. So now there are two Hermiones who each use the time-turner. So the next time the time-turner has to be used for the next class, these two Hermiones create two more Hermiones. So now there are four Hermiones. So the next time the time-turner is used, eight Hermiones result. So by the end of the first week alone, there are already 16 worlds with 16 Hermiones now using a time-turner. So guys can you imagine how many billions and billions of world our little Hermione has created?
Ok, now I have, using computer-calculator found out that 2 to the power 140 is: !!!
So our little Hermione created millions or billions of new worlds all by herself. And that is not to mention all the previous times that others have used time-turners. All that to explain JKR's remark about "loads of time-traveling witches and wizards killed their past selves." And it doesn't even explain the basic problem of how Harry got passed the dementors to time-travel later that evening. All in all, this seems to be a terribly convoluted explanation. I seriously doubt if JKR had in mind more than just one world. I grant that we can supply an explanation for what an author wrote that the author may not have had in mind, but a far simpler explanation involves altering history and just one world.
And the "parallel worlds" scenario does not help to explain the basic problem of how Harry got passed the dementors to time-travel in the first place.
Dumbledore knew everything from the very beginning—? Is he some kind of seer, or he himself is using Time-Turner?
When Dumbledore reaches in the hospital-wing, he knew it very well, that Harry and Hermione have used time-turner and they have even succeeded before even Dumbledore brought the subject to them! Sounds shocking, isn't it? But if you follow proper logic, then this is definitely true! It means that when Harry and Hermione (and the readers of HP) were thinking Dumbledore is telling Harry and Hermione to use time-turner, he actually knew that THEY HAVE FINISHED USING TIME-TURNER!
You all are becoming confused, eh? Ok, let me tell you how this happened….
We all know it very well that Harry and Hermione were attacked by dementors, and that's where the chapter 'Dementor's Kiss' ends. But surprisingly, the next chapter, 'Hermione's secrets' start like this that: Harry and Hermione are inside the hospital wing. But how is that possible?
If the dementors attacked Harry and Hermione, then HOW ON EARTH HAVE HARRY AND HERMIONE MANAGED TO REACH THE HOSPITAL-WING?
The only answer to this question can be that: someone had saved Harry and Hermione from the dementors…now we all know that Harry sees his "father", which is actually the "time-traveling-Harry" on the other side of the river, who PRODUCES the patronus which eventually saves Harry and Hermione (although its not clear how they reached the hospital-wing, it's very much clear that they are saved by the "time-traveling" version of them.
So you people got what I'm saying? All I am saying is that Harry and Hermione were saved by the "time-traveling-Harry".
Now, the main point comes. When, Dumbledore entered the hospital-wing in the chapter 'Hermione's secret', he would, AT FIRST, obviously become surprised that how Harry and Hermione have managed to come here while they were supposed to be attacked by dementors. So, Dumbledore used the logic I gave, that the only way they could survive from the dementors is that the "time-traveling-Harry" saved the other Harry! So in the hospital-wing he could deduce not only that Harry and Hermione had time-traveled but that they succeeded — he knows Harry and Hermione did accept their time-traveling mission and did come out all right even before he brought up the subject to them! Shocking, right? But TRUE!
And all this time we thought that Dumbledore is telling Harry and Hermione to use Time-Turner, HE ACTUALLY KNEW THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE IT, AND EVEN SUCCEEDED!
Now, in the scene in Hagrid's hut, Dumbledore clearly knew there was time-traveling going and that time-traveling Harry and Hermione had successfully removed Buckbeak. But how could he know that? When Dumbledore walked into the Infirmary (hospital-wing), he obviously could see that Harry and Hermione had not been soul-sucked by the Dementors, and that could not be the case unless Harry and Hermione do in fact time-travel (so that time-traveling Harry can save pre-time-traveling Harry and Hermione; and I have already explained that above). But when he was in Hagrid's hut, he (normally speaking) had no information that Harry and Hermione had time-traveled and yet he acted as if they had. So, now another complicated, critical question comes: how did Dumbledore know in Hagrid's hut that there was time-traveling going on? Could he magically see the second set of Harry and Hermione out there? Did he himself time-travel?
How did Dumbledore, in Hagrid's hut know that time-traveling is going on?
Could he see magically see the SECOND set of Harry and Hermione out there?
Or is he some kind of SEER that he, without going any further, knew that time-traveling is going on? (Like professor Trelawney)?
Or is he also time-traveling?!
Here are some THOUGHTS on this matter:
Either Dumbledore is some type of seer or he is perhaps time-traveling. Maybe Dumbledore somehow intervened with the Dementors by the lake the first time? He has told Harry that he doesn't need a cloak to become invisible after all (Sorcerer's stone).
I have read the idea before that maybe Dumbledore saved Harry, Hermione, and Sirius in an earlier time-line we never saw, and that is how Harry got to 11:55 PM to time-travel back and save himself in the time-line created by time-travel that we do see. (In the sequence of events in the POA, pre-time-traveling Harry goes unconscious and then wakes up in the Infirmary — there is a gap where someone finds them by the lake and takes them to the Infirmary.) So who is that person to save them and bring them to hospital-wing? Dumbledore? That first time-line no longer exists (if only one time-line ever exists) but was erased by a second time-line which in turn was erased by a third time-line when Harry and Hermione time-traveled and changed history.
I don't like this idea, however, because, well, we want Harry to save himself, and that is also how JKR wrote the sequence. But however, Dumbledore saving Harry and Hermione and bringing to the hospital wing has got flaws too: if Dumbledore saved Harry and Hermione, why did he bother to send them back in time at all — why didn't he do it himself?
But there is an intriguing comment in 'Harry Potter and the Order of The Phoenix': Dumbledore is going over Harry's earlier years and he says "I watched from afar as you struggled to repel dementors." Granted the context of DD's comments is about Harry's third year as a whole and may not be about that night. But it does show that DD was watching Harry. So it may be that DD saw from afar what happened that night and intervened. But the passage doesn't say he did intervene, and wouldn't JKR have told us if he had? (Of course, DD might be keeping his time-traveling actions a secret and he sent Harry back to fight the dementors so that he would get the experience.)
Perhaps, if Dumbledore went forward in time, to beyond the point where Harry and Hermione had rescued Sirius (when they were back in the hospital wing) he would have known that they were going to rescue Sirius using time travel, so would have known to prompt Hermione to use the Time Turner in the first place. Hermione tells Harry that if you saw yourself (when in the future/past) you would think you'd gone mad.... but if Dumbledore is always using Time Travel, it means he expects to see himself anyway.
(Traveling into a future that (we think) hasn't occurred yet is one of the metaphysical problems with time-travel that is really difficult. We like to think the future hasn't occurred yet and is open (since we like to think that we have free choice in the events that occur) -- so where would Dumbledore travel to? The whole thing is hard to get my mind around.)
Why did DD ask H and H to time-travel? Why did he decide it was necessary? And when did he decide? Had he already visited Sirius before he went to the hospital-wing to ask H and H to time- travel? But Sirius was already saved by then? And again, when he entered the hospital-wing he would have immediately known that H and H had accepted their time-traveling mission and succeeded (or they wouldn't be in the condition they were in).
So, what did DD know and when did he know it?
When DD tells HH that they may save two lives tonight, did he already know that they were successful?
Why was DD in such a hurry in the hospital-wing? With Time-turner you have all the time in the world. No urgency at all. Then?
Can people ONLY travel back to his/her own history?
When thinking of the past & whether or not it exists to be visited, another consideration would be which past? It all seems to come down to what the past really is. We certainly physically experience our lives, in the present at least, and we can participate in events with others which become history & can be recollected (fondly or not) with others, but I wonder if history is truly a fixed event. Every person experiences an event personally. I think we can all think of times when what we've noticed of an event was not what someone else recalled- who was right? Some things can be tied to facts: which horse won the race, that I was the one who scraped my knee climbing out of the tree- these things have consequences that allow them to be tied to physical reality. But how it felt to scrape my knee is part of my own personal experience of reality & becomes part of my own past (particularly if it left a scar), and likely remains a minor & forgettable part of history for anyone else.
It seems to me that history is a set of personal events, of which some become agreed-upon, points of reference for a larger group of people. Even if I was present for an historical event, my experience of it would not be the same as anyone else's. I can report my experiences, & they can become part of the agreed-upon record (or not- since it's the victor's who write history).
What this all leads me to wonder is if time-travel might only be possible if one travels into one's own history- as Harry & Hermione did in POA. If history is so personal, than how could anyone really travel beyond what they know? It's interesting that Harry & Hermione traveled back to events they have both experienced—until the very end when Harry succeeds in conjuring the Patronus, which only he saw the first time around (Hermione had already been overcome by the Dementors) & only he experiences the second time. I wonder if JKR is subtly following just such a rule concerning time-travel.
Some people definitely have this question that: If time-turner can change the course of history, then Harry could have brought her mother and father and make the world get rid of Voldemort...BUT it's not possible. Because I have already written up, that only those history can be changed, which I remember and had experienced myself. If so, then plotlines concerning Harry traveling back to his early childhood to rid the world of Voldemort would not likely be possible (unless Harry underwent hypnotherapy to enable himself to accurately remember his early childhood experiences). Unfortunately, it's hard to draw any conclusions about what JKR's rules about time travel are (except for McGonagall's warnings & DD's words about the unpredictability of the results....) because she hasn't overtly shown us much time-traveling.
So, what I'm trying to tell is that, according to me, I think J.K.R.'s theory on time-traveling is that: people can only travel to his or hers own history....
However, the above theory on 'time-traveling in J.K.R.'s view' has got flaws/problems too...
The problem with trying to limit time-travel only to one's own history is that whatever we do the time-travel will have repercussions for others. For example, Harry and Hermione saved Buckbeak and that is not limited just to their personal histories but will have rippling effects for the rest of the world.
************************************************************
Ok, guys, these are the questions which i will hope u people will answer me:
1) Can anyone explain me this "Hermione vanishing and suddenly comming into the class" thing properly? I mean, what actually happens when Hermy time-travels (uses the time-turner)? Why is Ron and Harry astonished to see Hermione suddenly in the room??? then once ron even asked her "how diod u do that, once u were there and now u r here!" So can anyone explains me this thing properly???
2) In the movie, they finishes recuing Sirius and come back to the hospital wing. Comming back there when they enter it, it is shown that the "real-Harry-Hermy" is just using the time-turner and is vanished and then the time-traveling Harry-Hermy enter there. And that time Ron says in astonishment "how come u r here? i was talking to u there, and now u here?" So what does it imply??? That when three hours have passed in the time-travelling-Harry, only one second or actually no time had gone in the hospital wing!!!!!!
3) There is a contradictory thing. In the book it is stated that when Harry Hermy came back after rescuing siruis, they met DD in ffront of the hospital wing, and DD smiles at their success. But in the movie, when Harry and hermy comes, and meets DD, DD behaved indifferently, as if he doesnt know anything! So which one is right??? the books one or the moviz one? i personally think the book's one, coz since DD knew it from the beginning that time-travelling is going on he wud smile at their success not behave indifferently...
4) In the book DD says this to snape infront of Fudge that "unless u r suggesting that Harry-Hermy were at two places at the same time, i see there is no problem...". and then snape becomes quite, since he havent understood. ofcourse he cant understand since snape might not have heard of this time-turner thing....but Fudge??? he is the ministry of magic, he surely knows about the time tuner, and ofcourse he knew that Hermy is using it because Hermy says it that "Mcgonagall had to write so many letters to the MINISTRY to get this time-turner...". It proofs fudge knows about hermy using it! So that time why didnt fudge suspect it?? and that too after listening to DD's comment???
Plz plz reply to these newly added questions!
Thank You
Kabhi Neem Neem Kabhi Shahad Shahad
Love Friendship Dating and Relationships
Tum Se Tum Tak
Financial markets and global economy
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2
