He didn't die, Harry saved him!

[Mint]

So if u go to the past - something will happen to contradict what u r about to change - so that future will stay the same. How about that?

May be Harry would be in the situation he was in - if he wouldn't try to go to the past to change it.


...........this time stuff is waay too confusing...

[Violet]

lol, i know what u mean. i think it's difficult as JK hasnt put any definition on it. She hasnt distinguished between when an event is supposed to happen, and when it isnt. or why sometimes u're allowed to go back and change things and why other times you arent.

[Meg Boyd]

perhaps you can save people from dying, but you can't bring people back from the dead. In POA, Harry goes back in time and prevents Sirius from being in a situation in where he could be harmed. At that moment, Sirius had been alive, and was about to be administered the Kiss from the dementors. He never died, see, so when they saved him they were merely rescueing him from harms way. In OotP, Sirius died. If Harry should go back in time to save Sirius it would involve changing something incredibly permenate (sp). If it was so easy to save someone with a TT, Harry just might have his family. I am sure there are things dealing with TT that are extremely forbidden since they can drastically alter the past, present, and future. One of these probably being situations dealing with death, such as going back in time and killing someone, or saving someone from a death that has already happened. Lets say if they did go back in time and killed LV when he was a baby, LV's family would be alive, countless wizards would be alive, and even muggles. In theory such an addition of lives to the present would incredibly alter time. Death can change worlds at an instant, and I am sure the ministry (as lax as it is) has laws to prevent usage of TTs in situations dealing with death. If you ever want a good example of the slightest effect on time the many parallel universes invloving time one ought to view The Back to the Future films, especially the second one.

[menotyoo]

Back 2 the Future 2 is a perfect example, but I didn't see using the timeturners like that. It seemed like everything that happened when they went back, they had already done. Hagrid screams and they heard the axe chop. But really that was a scream of joy and macnair was angry so he had chopped the fence. So whatever they changed, they weren't really changing, they were completing the past.
Please don't assume that I am inside JKR's head on this one, b/c it is really complex....
I just don't want sirius to be dead. Any way to present his murder would please me. The fact that she just says that a spell hits him- not saying red or green- when she had taken the time to say that hermione was hit with a purple flame spell or w/e, makes me wonder.
Either way, I wouldn't expect harry to alter the past, just complete it by pulling sirius into the veil w/o people seeing him. Since his parents actually died, and all that---changing the past wouldn't work, in this case, he would be making the scene look exactly the same, so it would look to everyone like he died. If that makes any sense.
Sirius cannot be dead!

[pinky p]

it wouldn't be much of a series, would it, if everytime something didn't go harry's way he went back in time and fixed it?

[Mistress Siana]

Maybe there is a limit, so you cannot go back in time for more than...maybe ten hours or so. Can't remember how far they went back in PoA.

[Iluvatar]

Harry CANNOT use a timeturner to save Harry I explained this once in the Book 5 theories section so I won't expain it again here because it quite longwinded. I'll try to put a link to the page. Just scroll through the thread until you find my post (It was my very first post by the way)

http://www.broomsticksandowls.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1627&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

If the link doesn't work then look on the second page of the Book 5 theories section for a thread called TimeTurner Problem. My reasoning is on the first page of the thread

Iluvatar Allmighty Ruler of Ea

[Jotomicron]

Harry CANNOT use a timeturner to save Harry I explained this once in the Book 5 theories section so I won't expain it again here because it quite longwinded. I'll try to put a link to the page. Just scroll through the thread until you find my post (It was my very first post by the way)

http://www.broomsticksandowls.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1627&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
(...)

I read it, I understand it... I still think there is some way of saving him...

You say that when someone is already dead and you go to the past and save him, your incentive vanishes. I agree... But what would happen if:

*Harry begins the sixth year in September;
*Hears someone (DD, for instance) explaining this theory;
*In October goes back in time and saves Sirius (we don't know what happens when somebody gets through the veil, so it would be possible, at least I think it is...);
*Says Sirius to hide until November. About that time, Harry would already have gone to the past and saved Sirius, so, Sirius could show up and say he is alive even without making the incentive vanish!

It is very hard to explain it better (and yet I took so much time to write this post... ), but I hope I have made myself clear!

However, and dispite my theory, I do think Sirius is really dead

[menotyoo]

that is mostly my point(I think) Jotomicron.
Harry thinks he saw Sirius die as we see, so if in the future he goes into the past and saves Sirius without himself seeing (as I've said, by pulling him through the veil w/o others seeing that he does so) he will still have incentive to save him in the future.

[Athena Appleton]

Face it, Sirius is dead. Not every story ends with a Happily Ever After. If you don't believe that, think about this. Sirius spent the entire book 5 feeling upset that he was sitting around Number 12 Grimmauld Place doing nothing. He died in the heat of battle. He would not take it well if Harry went back and made it so that he got to be out of danger's way again, would he?

[Meg Boyd]

I totally agree...its kinda like the code of honor that samurai had (forgive me if I am incorrect) where it was kinda like one is better of dying with honor than losing and staying out of harms way. Sirius would have liked knowing that he died fighting evil, it is proper

[Jotomicron]

I'm with you: Sirius's dead!
And Meg and Athena explained it so well, I'm not able to contradict!!


Nevertheless, it's so funny to discuss time travel theories!!!

[Ferrus]

well, we dont actually KNOW what is behind (through) the veil, everyone assumes that whatever it was, it killed Sirius, but did it?
Its a question worth considering...

[Phaerie]

i know we've kinda got over the time travel theory, but (and i haven't) if you actually sit down and calculate the number of times you'd have to turn the timeturner over to get back i time to save sirius purely by the end of book 5 it is rather a large amount. Plus they don't actually have a time turner anymore.

Think Sirius died to teach harry a few lessons
1. there is stuff in life worth dieing for
2. to be less stubborn and proud- it was harry's stubbornes which ultimately lead to sirius's death, like if he'd learnt occlumency.
3. Kind of leading on from 2 to take resposibility for his actions.

[Meg Boyd]

Well said Phaerie. I agree with you completely that Sirius needed to die (as sick as that sounds) so Harry could fully realize the need for a higher standard of focus to ultimately achieve his goal