Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin From: wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) Newsgroups: net.tv.drwho Subject: Re: why does the TARDIS move? Message-ID: <757@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 11:20:27 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.757 Posted: Fri Aug 16 11:20:27 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 13:43:03 EDT References: <965@rayssd.UUCP> <1400@uwmacc.UUCP> Reply-To: wmartin@brl-bmd.UUCP Distribution: net Organization: USAMC ALMSA, St. Louis, MO Lines: 24 The internal effects ofthe TARDIS moving, like the jerking when people are thrown to the floor, or seeming accelleration when they have to strain to reach the control panel, are probably totally unexplainable by any self-coherent system of scientific or pseudo-scientific rationale. It is like the scenes in Star Trek when people on the bridge are jolted out of their seats by some outside effect, like being brought to a dead stop from warp speeds... This ignores that, if ANY fraction of the inertial effect that such outside actions would have was transmitted through to the crew inside, the forces would be so great that they would be turned to a thin red jam instead of just being shaken up. (That is, even if some sort of "anti-inertial" fields protect the crew, the forces acting are so immense that any fractional leakage [no matter how tiny a fraction seeped through] of these forces through such shielding would be enough to completely destroy the stuff inside.) As for the scenes of the TARDIS spinning through space, I have never found them internally consistent either -- if it vanishes from sight when "taking off", why would it be visible during any part of the "transit" period? All in all, just symptoms of poor writing and/or direction, I would say. Will