In the Potterverse, it would appear that a prophecy is a pronouncement, made from within a trance, that reality is aligning conditions such that a particular event is about to reach a high probability of occurrence.
Hmm, I guess you people are right. I have been thinking about it for some time now, and my brain hurts.
First, I cannot see a problem with an additional me suddenly materialising, and then sometime later using time travel to get back to the point where the other me materialised.
ok, now suppose Im dumbledore, and I have access to a time travelling device. At some point I use a lot of time creating something (writing a paper or similar), which I have to do, but I don’t learn anything from. Then it would seem obvious to me that it would be clever to travel back, and give the other me this thing, so that the old me can use the time constructively. But this would create an inconsistence (perhaps), and as such I wouldn’t do it in that universe. So in conclusion, I would both do it and not do it. Contradiction.
If on the other hand it doesn’t create an inconsistency, then I don’t see a reason not to do this all the time.
I hope this all makes sense
Heck, there are hundreds of weaker uses than this in literature and film. Superman: The Movie is all by itself the ten worst.
But he actually made the earth spin the other way! I know it’s true because I could hear it slowing down.
Always in motion the future is.
There would be little point in a prophecy that couldn’t be changed, would there.
All ten? Certainly you’ll agree that Star Trek: Generations should get at least one spot on that list.
From the last page of Book Seven, Harry Potter and the Deus ex Machina:
*“It ends here, Voldemort! Today the prophecy will be fulfilled!” Harry shouted.
The wizard smiled faintly. "I suppose it does. I presume you’re familiar with the principle behind the time-turner? It’s possible to travel into the past as long as your actions don’t alter past events. So when I learned of the prophecy, I immediately took steps to determine the results of this final battle. It took some time, of course; but when you have a time machine to hand, that’s not really a problem, is it?
"I could never kill you because of the protection that Lily Potter’s sacrifice gave you… so I used the time-turner to go back to before she died-- to before the protection was in effect-- and kill the infant Harry Potter in his crib. I then used the carcass to craft a special homunculus of my own design, indistinguishable from the original child, yet beholden entirely to me. Using the time-turner yet again, I placed my creation in the crib, and the Potters never knew the difference.
“You’ve grown up exactly as the real Harry would have; made all the same decisions, felt the same emotions, so the flow of time hasn’t been altered one whit. But now the prophecy is at hand. One of us has to die, and I constructed your brain specifically to compel your surrender. Drop your wand, Harry.”*
Then Longbottom rides in on a unicorn or something and saves the day, I guess. Or not.
Honestly, these people have magic powers and a time machine, and somehow they still have no idea what’s ever going on, or how to avoid it. Wizards must be dumber than invertebrates.
Terrifel…STOP IT. Please?
Sorry.
But remember, it’s not a cheap plot device at all because Trelawny’s auditing session on page 293 should have awakened prenatal memories in the real Harry, but not in homunculus-Harry who never occupied Lily’s womb, and so careful readers should pick up that his lack of response to her enchantments is due to his being a reanimated corpse created by Voldemort after going back in time to change history. Also, he has a previously unknown Scandinavian twin, the existence of whom was also hinted at several times throughout the book, who nicely fills in further plot holes.
Well, just as long as the last word is “scar,” I guess anything goes, huh?
Thank you. I thought I was going to have to go in for counseling. 
OP, are you kidding? The important part is not that the device is Deus Ex Timetravela, which it may be, but at least its the PREPLANNED kind which makes it far more interesting. It’s that the device is used for a brilliant and almost heartbreaking twist in the drama. Harry thinking that his father had come to save him, only to find out that, in fact, that person was himself (and yet also in that sense, that he is the spirit of his father) is a very powerful device that wouldn’t have been possible without the time travel. Note also that the series is not over. Repercussions from this event do carry on into the other books (though in case youa re just reading them now, I won’t spoil them) and suffice to say that not everything from that night worked out for the best.
But the ending of Book 3 is probably one of the major reasons why its a fan favorite. Yes, it uses time travel. But it’s far from a bad use of it. It might strain credulity a little that it’s not used at other times, but the logic and the restrictions (which are hinted at but never fully explained) seem to constrain it quite a lot. You cannot go back in time and save someone that has died. The effect of Time travelers is already built into history: they are a necessary part in events, but they themselves cannot actually change things, from their perspectives.
Come on. We’re talking about the same people who pay for candy that might taste like vomit or earwax, and think it’s a thrill. :rolleyes:
Integrity in a universe is not Rowlings strongpoint. Her limits on magic are arbitary - although she is smart enough to try for consistance, she writes herself in corners. It reminds me of The Tick - who is nigh invincible (except when being vulernable furthers the plot).
I can easily see Neville’s battle cry being “Not in the Face!”
Nah-Neville will invent a new, deadly poison and help off Voldy with it.
I just don’t want Neville to die.
Please?
I have to say I’m kind of chuckling at this, because you make it sound like time traveling is a true real thing that people do, and finally there’s someone out there who’s written about it correctly.
I agree with Dangerosa that you shouldn’t look for perfect logic or consistency in J.K. Rowling’s universe, otherwise you can start wondering many things. Why do wizards have money, instead of just conjuring out of thin air anything they might need? How is it that wizard children, even born of Muggles, seem to have no interest in television, computers, the internet, iPods, or many other things from the Muggle world? I could go on and on.
As has been said with other posters, J. K. Rowling cleverly wrote the ending of Prisoner of Azkaban to make the use of the Time Traveller logically consistent with the events in the book, avoiding any “time paradoxes”. In fact part of the pleasure of the book, for me, was re-reading the final chapters (staring from 21) to pick up the clues about future events intruding upon past events.
However, I don’t think we can say that, in the wizard universe, it is expected that Time Travelers will prevent time paradoxes. In chapter 21, Hermione’s secret, we lear from Hermione that:
and
If one were to try to defend what I call the “internally consistent temporal logic” view of time travel, and explain why, in the wizard world, it cannot be used, I could think of a couple of explanations:
[ul][li]The teachers have used a white lie to convince Hermione not to fool around with her Time-Turner: if she used it foolishly, it would be possible to change past events, but the consequences would be severe;[/li][li]If a wizard does change the events in the past, then wizards from the Ministry of Magic would be in charge of undoing the damage, in the same way that wizards from the Ministry successfully camouflage all evidence of the existence of magical creatures and people in modern-day England.[/ul][/li]However, those explanations are not stated explicitly in the text.
To answer the OP, if Harry could change events in the past, I would hope he would go back before the beginning of book 3, and save the lives of his parents by warning Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix that Voldemort has found out where his parents are hiding. Or go back to the time when the Chamber of Secrets is first opened, and proclaim the innocence of his friend Hagrid. Or drop in on Albus when, in his snazzy outfit, Dumbledore is on his way to visit young Tom Riddle in the orphanage, and inform the Hogwarts teacher of the future in store for the potential student who will become Voldemort.I agree with Dangerosa that you shouldn’t look for perfect logic or consistency in J.K. Rowling’s universe, otherwise you can start wondering many things. Why do wizards have money, instead of just conjuring out of thin air anything they might need? How is it that wizard children, even born of Muggles, seem to have no interest in television, computers, the internet, iPods, or many other things from the Muggle world? What prevents the parents of Muggle-born Hogwarts students from telling all and sundry about the existence of wizards? I could go on and on.
As has been said with other posters, J. K. Rowling cleverly wrote the ending of Prisoner of Azkaban to make the use of the time-turner logically consistent with the events in the book, avoiding any “temporal paradoxes”. In fact part of the pleasure of the book, for me, was re-reading the final chapters (starting from 21) to pick up the clues about future events intruding upon past events.
However, I don’t think we can say that, in the wizard universe, it is expected that time-turners will prevent temporal paradoxes. In chapter 21 (Hermione’s Secret), we lear from Hermione that:
and
Of course, if one were to try to defend the point of view that temporal paradoxes are impossible through the use of a time-turner, I could think of a couple of explanations:
[ul][li]The teachers have used a white lie to convince Hermione not to fool around with her time-turner: if she used it for extra-curricular purposes, she would not be able to change history, but the consequences would still be severe, including at least imprisonment in Azkaban;[/li][li]Temporal paradoxes are possible, but if a wizard does change the events in the past, then employees of the Ministry of Magic are in charge of undoing the damage, in the same way that wizards from the Ministry successfully keep secret from us Muggles all evidence of the existence of magical creatures and people in modern-day England.[/ul][/li]However, those explanations are not stated explicitly in the text.
To answer the OP, if Harry could change events in the past, I would hope he would go back before the beginning of book III, and save the lives of his parents by warning Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix that Voldemort has found out where his parents are hiding. Or go back to the time when the Chamber of Secrets is first opened, and proclaim the innocence of his friend Hagrid. Or warn the young Albus that the young Tom Riddle that he is about to meet in an orphange will end up at the top of the DMLE’s Seventeen Most Wanted list.
I agree with Dangerosa that you shouldn’t look for perfect logic or consistency in J.K. Rowling’s universe, otherwise you can start wondering many things. Why do wizards have money, instead of just conjuring out of thin air anything they might need? How is it that wizard children, even born of Muggles, seem to have no interest in television, computers, the internet, iPods, or many other things from the Muggle world? What prevents the parents of Muggle-born Hogwarts students from telling all and sundry about the existence of wizards? I could go on and on.
As has been said with other posters, J. K. Rowling cleverly wrote the ending of Prisoner of Azkaban to make the use of the time-turner logically consistent with the events in the book, avoiding any “temporal paradoxes”. In fact part of the pleasure of the book, for me, was re-reading the final chapters (starting from 21) to pick up the clues about future events intruding upon past events.
However, I don’t think we can say that, in the wizard universe, it is expected that time-turners will prevent temporal paradoxes. In chapter 21 (Hermione’s Secret), we lear from Hermione that:
and
Of course, if one were to try to defend the point of view that temporal paradoxes are impossible through the use of a time-turner, I could think of a couple of explanations:
[ul][li]The teachers have used a white lie to convince Hermione not to fool around with her time-turner: if she used it for extra-curricular purposes, she would not be able to change history, but the consequences would still be severe, including at least imprisonment in Azkaban;[/li][li]Temporal paradoxes are possible, but if a wizard does change the events in the past, then employees of the Ministry of Magic are in charge of undoing the damage, in the same way that wizards from the Ministry successfully keep secret from us Muggles all evidence of the existence of magical creatures and people in modern-day England.[/ul][/li]However, those explanations are not stated explicitly in the text.
To answer the OP, if Harry could change events in the past, I would hope he would go back before the beginning of book III, and save the lives of his parents by warning Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix that Voldemort has found out where his parents are hiding. Or go back to the time when the Chamber of Secrets is first opened, and proclaim the innocence of his friend Hagrid. Or warn the young Albus that the Riddle boy he is about to meet in an orphange will end up at the top of the DMLE’s Seventeen Most Wanted list.