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