Skip to main content

doctor who - Is Peter Tyler's Death a Fixed Point in the Timeline?


In Father's Day Rose asks the Doctor to take her to when her Father died, so he won't have to die alone. After her Father is hit by a car, Rose is overwhelmed and can't go comfort her Father. Rose pleads and the Doctor takes her back, and they see the first set of the two of them watching her Father. The Doctor tells her, "It's a very bad idea having the two sets of us being here at the same time."


When the car is heading toward her Father, Rose, on impulse, runs out into the street, in front of the earlier versions of her and the Doctor and saves her Father. As she does this, the earlier Rose and Doctor vanish. They don't vanish when they see her, but when she prevents her Father's death.


Then, later when they're all trapped in the church, the car that hit her Father keeps appearing out of nowhere, driving along the road, and disappearing. This is the road near where they're hiding, not the one where he should have died. The car continually appearing and disappearing is like a break in causality, as if it's the start of everything happening at once, like we see in The Wedding of River Song.


Time is only set right with the death of Rose's Father, not with the resolution of the paradox of the earlier Rose and the Doctor disappearing or Rose and the Doctor having been in the same place twice. Much of the situation seems to revolve around Rose's father being alive and not dead, rather than she and the Doctor being in the same place at the same time twice.


Is her Father's death a fixed point in time that, when changed, upsets time?




Answer



The "dead-man-walking" was the paradox, not the (Doctor+Rose)x2.


It seems Peter Tyler's death is an integral part of the natural timeline. Most likely because had he lived, Rose might never have met the Doctor, and Bad Wolf would not have played out the way it did. Had that transpired, the galaxy might have been a very different place. Also, parallel world Peter Tyler played a part in the invasion of the Cybermen, which too, would have changed the timeline drastically had he lived.


So if what you're asking is whether his death is an inelastic point in the timeline, then yes.


Time in the Doctor Who universe appears to be like a rubber band that is anchored to fixed points at certain critical places. You can pull and stretch it, but it'll snap back. Pull too hard and it breaks catastrophically.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.
Post a Comment
Read more

game of thrones - Is Syrio Forel dead?

In the episode 'The Pointy End' (Season 1 Episode 8) when Arya runs from the Lannister guards you hear the sound of a sword being dropped (around 4:56): [embedded content] After that neither Syrio or Ser Meryn Trant is never mentioned or seen in the show again, except when Arya mentions to the Hound that Ser Meryn Trant killed Syrio. Is there any mention in the books that Syrio actually dies?
Post a Comment
Read more

tolkiens legendarium - Difference between elves and dwarves blacksmithing in the Lord of the Rings

Both the elves and the dwarves were famous for their metal work in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but what is the difference between what they made, and which one had the better skill of making amours and swords? Answer James Christopher's answer sums up the second part of your question well, but as to the difference in what they made, a little more detail is needed. Once the Elves learned to forge with steel, the shape of the sword changed, now being able to take on the form of a great broadsword or a light and agile curved sword. Additionally, they took great pride in decorating their swords. As we see in the Lord of the Rings , some swords like Sting had magical properties such as glowing blue when orcs are near. As far as the use of Mithril, lotr.wikia has two contradictory passages: Thus, Elven blades became renowned as great weapons, capable of performing deeds beyond the skill of their handlers and were even more glorious when the use of Mithril was allowed to the Elves. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

How do Pokemon trainers collect their winnings?

According to Bulbapedia , Prize money is the money that a Trainer pays out at the end of a battle. So we know that the money comes directly from the trainer that just lost, and not some third-party committee or sponsor. But how is this done? It can be easy seeing the random trainers who challenge you along the way wanting to wager and then, after admitting defeat, sticking to their word and handing over their hard-earned pokebucks. Then there are the likes of Team Rocket and Giovanni, who also give money once they lose. This doesn't seem like something people in a criminal organization would willingly do. From this it appears that trainers have no say in whether or not they cough up the dough after losing, but I can't find anything on how exactly the funds are transferred from loser to winner. So how do Pokemon trainers receive their winnings?
Post a Comment
Read more