DPhil scientist talk about the cosmology of a franchise

[Oliver_de_jesus]

How should we approach a scientist’s explanation of the science behind a long-running series? especially when he use multiverse terminology (e.g., Type 3–4)?

The book in question was written/posted around 2006–2007 (and a uptade version in 2010), so it cannot be said this dude create it for power scaling proposed. Importantly, the author (he has a DPhil in cosmology) who worked at the company that produced the series, had previously provided official explanations of certain topics, but this book was published unofficially.

Despite its unofficial status, actors and authors from the series have praised the book as an excellent resource for understanding the show. (Since the series itself already contains Type 4 multiverse declarations, I was thinking this book should be seen as supplementary, but don't know if it can be accepted or nein)

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm unsure without further context.

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

I'm unsure without further context.

https://archive.org/details/scienceofdoctorw0000pars_r2u1/page/n1/mode/2up

The Science of Doctor Who (2006 reference book)

The Science of Doctor Who was a Doctor Who reference book written by Paul Parsons and published by Icon Books in 2006 and again in 2007, and later by Johns Hopkins...

tardis.wiki

Okay, I have no idea if we should use this or not, the book explain a lot of behind scene and the nature of the series. Paul Parsons was a member of BBC Focus (the BBC's science and real-world branch; there are a couple of magazines covering Doctor Who, but none like this one). He was part of the team that discussed the physics behind E-Space in-behind scenes in an official DVD and has a DPhil in Cosmology.

Paul created The Science of Doctor Who around 2006 (and another version in 4/5/2007 and other in 2010) unofficially, but he managed to publish it. However, Paul left BBC Focus around October 10, 2007

Like even Stephen Baxter (a writer) and Colin Baker (the Sixth Doctor) said they like it and said it should be a lot copies (the 2007 and 2010 have this reference)

Parsons deftly weaves a fascinating mixture of known fact, possible future development, and scant possibilities from the Who universe into an investigation that will appeal to Who fans and general readers alike. There should be a copy in the glove compartment of every Tardis.

— Colin Baker, the Sixth Doctor
A voyage to the outer limits of Who universe science. Fans of the show will be amazed how much real-world science lies behind the storylines.

— Stephen Baxter, author of Transcendent

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

I'm unsure without further context.

poke

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'm not sure if that book meets criteria as a fictional story suitable for advertising.

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

maybe we should target other staff for their opinion? also wdym "suitable for advertising"

I'm not sure if that book meets criteria as a fictional story suitable for advertising.

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

Bump

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

bump^2

 

[ThyNotAskQuestions]

Despite its unofficial status, actors and authors from the series have praised the book as an excellent resource for understanding the show. (Since the series itself already contains Type 4 multiverse declarations, I was thinking this book should be seen as supplementary, but don't know if it can be accepted or nein)

In some sort of way(?), doesn't this look like us when making a CRT for a cosmology of the verse to know what tier to place them at? Though the difference here is that one is an actual professional, while we, well... Us.

Just saying.

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

In some sort of way(?), doesn't this look like us when making a CRT for a cosmology of the verse to know what tier to place them at? Though the difference here is that one is an actual professional, while we, well... Us.

Just saying.

Yeah, is kinda weird, hece why asking, unsure what to do

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

I cast ressurection!
BUMP

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/archiveservic...written documents,check for any rights issues.

So according to BBC, you must have a licensing for posting about them otherwise they will shutdown the book, give Paul seems to have for posting his stuff in place such as Johns Hopkins University

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

bump?

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

so, i found that the Official magazine 372 (which are licensed by BBC)

Present Paul´s books

 

[Oliver_de_jesus]

bump

 

[Doxten_]

I agree. As additional information, Paul Cornell stated that, as long as the material is professional, it can be considered valid, since Doctor Who does not have a canon in the same sense as Sherlock Holmes.

Canonicity in Doctor Who – Paul Cornell

 

[Doxten_]

bump

.

 

[Planck69]

Neutral, since I'm unsure about our canonicity standards in this situation.

 

[Doxten_]

bump

Could someone, like an Admin or mod, comment here? This CRT is open since 2025.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I'm unsure. I suppose it can be used as supporting material at the very least.

 

[Doxten_]

Closely related, the book Doctor Who and Philosophy: Bigger on the Inside could already enter the level of authors' notes level, in a certain way, because it had two official writers as revisors and one official voice actor. It is an academic book published in 2010. It will be useful for the cosmology, and as previously mentioned, as supportive material along statements we already have:


1. I would also like to offer a huge thanks to Mark Trotman and Aled Williams for their help making sure the Doctor Who references were accurate. Any errors will be mine and not theirs.

2. Thanks to Ian Potter for pointing out that even the Carrionites couldn't do without numbers, and to Matt Kimpton for the discussion of the Doctor and numbers in general.


It was also recommended by Lynne M. Thomas as an informative piece for understanding the philosophy of Doctor Who:

3. This dimensionally transcendental volume explains what the Doctor never gets around to until later: the basics of Gallifreyan philosophy and ethics, as translated through Earth’s philosophers. A fun, informative volume for folks interested in an introduction to philosophy through the vortex of Doctor Who.

LYNNE M. THOMAS, co-editor of Chicks Dig Time Lords: A Celebration of Doctor Who by the Women Who Love It


(https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Ian_Potter)

(https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Mark_Trotman)

(https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Matt_Kimpton)