Science Fiction not Sci-Fi: Saving the Doctor

Can Doctor Who be Saved?

I think it can. The scenario below is the result of a discussion and speculation with a fellow fan.

The Timeless Child, Retconned

The Rogue Doctor was not, in fact, the Doctor but a different Time Lord. This Time Lord has held a grudge, many grudges, against the Doctor for a very, very long time. Time Lords have long memories.

During his many lifetimes, many had tried to kill the Doctor. All had failed. Even a creature whose purpose was to assassinate him had failed. He even ended up marrying the woman!

The enemy Time Lord came up with an insidious plan. Instead of killing the Doctor, he would assassinate the Doctor's identity, his sense of self. An act of revenge so Machiavellian that Master and Rani would be forced to look on with envy. The first part of the plan was to affect the Twelfth Doctor's regeneration. For the first time in his life, the Doctor was female. He wished the Twelfth Doctor's visit with his first incarnation was part of the plan, to see his attitude towards women back then, but that was a happy accident.

Next, he created some clues for the Doctor to find. He knew he could count on the Doctor's curiosity. He created the concept of the Timeless Child. The enemy, too, took on a female form. She thought her plans would unravel after the Master got involved, but no, incredibly the Master bought into it. She could not believe her luck. He had hidden on Earth before, in human form. She did it again. She revealed herself as the Doctor. There were flaws in the plan, but Doctor missed them. The Rogue Doctor's TT capsule was a Mark VI, more advanced than the Doctor's Type 40. She had overlooked that the TARDIS assumed its police box shape after he had supposedly become the First Doctor and fled Gallifrey. Or was that part of the plan to make the Doctor doubt his memories?

After all of this time, he, or rather she, had had his revenge. Mortimus' meddling had prevailed. The Doctor was conflicted and no longer knew who she was. With Gallifrey lost, who was there to put her right?

Unmasking a Bankrobber - A Satire

"All righty, are we all clear on the plan?" Bill studied his gang's faces. He was a little nervous; it was his first time as the leader of a hold-up.
"Plan is simple enough," replied Lefty-Lou, "Piece of cake."
"I'm going to say this again," said Bill, "no screw-ups. No shooting, unless absolutely necessary. They look harder for murderers than bank robbers."
"We hear ya," said One-Eyed-Jake.
"Good!" The word shot out like a bullet from a gun. "Keep it clean."
"Let's rootin' tootin' do this!" Karen's excitement and keenness showed how green she was.
"Rootin' tootin'?" One-Eyed-Jack stared at Karen as best he could.
"What, you don't say 'Rootin' Tootin''?"
"No Karen, we don't," replied Lefty-Lou, embarrassed on behalf of his girlfriend.
"See you all at sunrise. Make sure you bring these masks..."
"Wait, what?" asked Karen.
"Masks, bring them," snapped Bill.
"You didn't say nothin' about masks, Lefty," said Karen.
The rest of the gang glared at Karen creating an awkward silence.
"Erm..." said Left-Lou, shifting on his chair and straightening his hair, "this is a hold-up. We are..." he mimed waving a gun, "...robbing a bank."
"I can't wear a mask!" Said Karen, horrified. "What are trying to do, kill me?"
"Look, little lady," growled Bill through gritted teeth, "We are bank robbers. Criminals. You have to wear a goddammed mask!"
Karen shook her head. "No. No. No. Let me clue you up on masks."
Lefty-Lou covered his face with his hand.
"Masks cover your face so you won't be recognised," said Bill, slamming his fist onto the table.
"No, couldn't possibly wear a mask," Karen persisted, "how do you expect me to rob a bank if I can't breathe properly?"
"If you're recognised, the sheriff will come after me," said Lefty-Lou, "and then Bill and One-Eyed-Jake."
"I wanna spend our money, not get banged up," said One-Eyed-Jake, his bad eye twitching.
"You either wear the mask, or you're out." Bill threw a mask at Karen.
"Oh, I see," said Karen, throwing her arms up in the air, "It's like that is it. I refuse to wear a mask and you're kicking me out? You're persecuting me because I want to breathe!"
The three men stared at her, but she refused to be intimidated.
"Look," she said, calming down, "if you want to cover your faces, go ahead. All I'm saying is, I need my face clear of obstructions. You wouldn't want me passing out, would you?"
"No, no, we wouldn't," said One-Eyed Jack.
"There, you see?" Said Karen, missing One-Eyed Jack's sarcasm. "No one knows I rob banks. How could I be recognised?"
"Change of plan," said Bill, "I'm moving the robbery back a day. Get plenty of rest, Karen. Sleep in as much as you want. Why don't you make us a pot of coffee?"
"I knew you would see sense," replied Karen. There was a skip in her step as she went into the kitchen.
Bill lent forward and whispered to his friends, "A three-way cut it is then."

Science not Pseudo-Science: Research Flat-Earth

"Research flat-Earth!" This is a mantra of the flat-Earth community. So, I thought, why not?

Flat-Earth

So what is this modern phenomenon of the "Flat-Earth"? The first thing that strikes the casual observer is that members of the flat-Earth community spend very little time trying to prove flatness and much of their time trying to disprove the globe. A basic pattern is repeated, a flerf makes a claim based on an observation and a misunderstanding of mathematics or misinterpretation of science. This claim is touted as proof that the Earth is flat. Then, a group of people debunk the claim. This claim then spread to various flat-Earth outlets. The debunkers are then subjected to ad hominem attacks. It is the same basic pattern as any pseudoscience-ideology.

Flat-Earthers (or Flerfs)

From what I can tell, there are three types of flerf in the community. 

There are people at the top, selling the concept and making money. They do not genuinely believe the flatness paradigm but are very good at dreaming up "proofs" that are good enough to fool enough people to build a following. 

Beneath them are the people who buy the concept. Their poor grasp of physics and mathematics means they are vulnerable to the spurious "poofs" of the flat-Earth sellers.

There is a third category, the Poes. These people create deliberately ridiculous content in the style of genuine material. I presume their motives are to discredit the flat-Earth movement from the inside or perhaps it is just mischief-making.

The Flat-Earth Model (or Lack thereof)

As I mentioned earlier, flerfs put most of the energy into attempting to disprove or debunk the globe or the heliocentric model rather than promote a flat-Earth model. The reason for this is simple. There is no flat-Earth model. Instead of one comprehensive model, a series of different models are required to explain astrophysical phenomena.

The Day/Night Model

To explain day and night, the sun tracks around the flat-Earth in a perfect circle lighting up a semi-circle (somehow). Another version has a more circular area lit by the sun surrounded by a crescent shape of darkness.

The Seasons Model

To explain the seasons the sun tracks around the flat-Earth spiralling between the tropic of Cancer and the larger tropic of Capricorn. Somehow, the sun can travel around a larger circle in the same time as a smaller one but still maintain the same speed across the sky. The Seasons model is inconsistent with the Day/Night model because we no longer have exactly half of the Earth illuminated.

Eclipses Model

The usual story is that the Sun and the Moon are the same size and equally far away. Unfortunately, we have eclipses; Lunar eclipses are particularly problematic as they require the Earth to be between the Sun and the Moon. To get around this, a Shadow Object is invoked (sometimes called the Anti-Moon) that passes in front of the Moon or the Sun, depending on the type of eclipse. Unless the object is causing an eclipse, it is totally invisible and undetectable, and has no discernable effect on any other astronomical body.

Gravity

A big problem for the flat-Earth concept is gravity. Gravity draws objects to the centre of mass and, therefore, cannot work on a flat-Earth. What is the solution? Easy, deny its existence.

The most common explanation is density and buoyancy. Objects fall or rise until they achieve a density-equilibrium with their surroundings. To shore up their concept, they cite the gravity-defying properties of helium balloons, etc. Problems that still need to be addressed are explanations for the directionality of the effect and what is causing the medium to remain on the Earth.

Some of the brighter sparks have figured out that density/buoyancy does not cut it to describe the acceleration due to "definitely-not-gravity". The Earth's crust has a very slight negative charge. Aha! Says an imaginative flerf, it is electromagnetism. The electromagnetic force pulls things to the ground. There are still a few things to work out here, for example, why do electrically charged objects fall at the same rate as uncharged ones? Why aren't negatively charged objects repelled? Why do magnetic and non-magnetic materials all fall at the same rate?

An interesting attempt at an explanation is Universal Acceleration. The basic idea is that an unknown force is constantly accelerating the whole (!) flat-Earth system. This draws on the equivalence principle (i.e. it is impossible to tell the difference between being in a gravitation field and being accelerated). The problem with this explanation is that the acceleration we experience diminishes the higher up we get.

Flat-Earth Mantras

Flerfs repeat a stock list of clichés so often that it almost seems like there is an official script.

Ask someone how they joined up and the answer will almost certainly be along the lines of: "When first I read about flat-Earth, like everyone else, I laughed. When I tried to debunk it, I found I couldn't. That is when I became a flat-Earther."

"Water always finds its level." In other words, water always forms a flat, planar surface rather than conforming to the forces applied to it.

"I trust my senses." Considering how easy it is to fool our senses, this seems like a perilous premise on which to build a world view.

"Spinning at 1,000 mph." There are two observations to make from this. Firstly, flerfs cannot get their heads around the concept of angular velocity. Secondly, they cannot cope with modern units. This is a particularly dirty trick that is played here. Moving at 1,000 mph sounds very fast. Rotating at a rate of 1 revolution per day, not so much.

"Water doesn't stick to a ball." To prove it, water is poured over a ball. We are probably deeper in Poe territory here rather than true-believer.

"Air can't resist a vacuum," but high-pressure air at low altitude can resist low-pressure air at high altitude.

"There are no genuine photographs of the globe" and "It's CGI". The technology behind computer-generated imagery is truly impressive. It was used to create pictures of the globe years before it was invented. The only pictures of the flat-Earth, I have ever seen, are drawings.

"We see farther than we should." This phrase is used when a flerf uses a picture to demonstrate a lack of understanding of refraction. They are particularly keen on the so-called black swan photographs. These pictures are always taken over water and while they show a picture of an object well-beyond the physical horizon it is within the apparent horizon explicable by our understanding of the behaviour of light through the atmosphere. While the subjects of the photographs are far away, they are not particularly distant compared with the scale of the Earth. Where is the photograph of the coast of the United States taken from Ireland?

"Research Flat-Earth," by which they mean, "consume our content".

Northern Hemisphere Chauvinism

Our modern civilisation originated on the Northern hemisphere. Our Western culture exists on that side of the globe. It is all too easy to forget that the seasons and the rotation of the celestial sphere are reversed on the other side of the equator. Flat-earth models require that the southern hemisphere behaves differently from the northern.

Crazy conspiracy theories pop up to get around this glaring problem. Who can forget the one that stated that Australia is a hoax? The Antarctic circle experiences the midnight sun in its summer, just as the Arctic does. To get around this, the Antarctic Treaty is invoked. No one is allowed to go there. Apparently, the governments of the world have banded together to militarise (contrary to the treaty) Antarctica. The hundreds of tourists who go there every year must be paid actors. The military sentinels of this part of the planet must have developed highly advanced stealth technology because no one has ever seen and photographed it.

What is in it for the Flat-Earthers?

At first glance, there seems little or no point in arguing about the shape of our planet. A group of people puts a lot of time and effort into it, so they must get something out of it.
It is said there are two types of flat-Earther: those that sell the T-shirts and those that buy them. This supplies one strong motive, money. Google is clamping down on charlatans, pseudoscience and woo practitioners, but there are also books, T-shirts and other merchandise.
The other motive is attention. It is not difficult to find narcissists who hold court over the faithful. They have limited knowledge of physics and mathematics. This is not a problem because, for them, flat-Earth is about their egos and has nothing to do with reality. A normal person, unfortunate enough to encounter one of these individuals, can expect gas-lighting, name-calling and not even a semblance of two-way discourse.

Why is this Dangerous?

There is no doubt that flat-Earth is a hoax. A group of conmen perpetuate it for profit. Does it really matter if my friend who struggled with mathematics at school believes the Earth is flat? Ridicule aside, it is not going to be detrimental to a person's everyday life. The danger lies in it being a step-stone to other, more harmful, hoaxes and conspiracy theories. Our hypothetical friend may find a sense of belonging in the flat-Earth community. It is not a stretch of the imagination to believe that this person may look elsewhere. Our mathematically-challenged friend may join the ranks of the anti-vaxxers, anti-GMO activists, climate change deniers, etc, etc, etc. This person we previously ridiculed has now become a threat.

Flat-Earth Industry

A flat-Earth industry has evolved on YouTube. We have videos promoting flat-Earth and other videos debunking them.
The pattern is consistent. A flerf posts a video that says "Here is an astrophysical phenomenon I don't understand, therefore, the globe/heliocentric model is wrong." A short time later a response video appears explaining the real science and mathematics in the flerf's video, often with a thick helping of ridicule.

 

Debunking Flat-Earth without Equations

1) Stars

There are two hemispheres of stars, North and South. The behaviour of one hemisphere exactly mirrors the other. In the North, they move around the sky in an anti-clockwise direction and in the South, clockwise.

1) Polaris

The angle of the position of Polaris, to a good approximation, gives the latitude of the observer in the Northern hemisphere. It cannot be seen from the Southern hemisphere.

3) Eclipses

Eclipses do not work with a flat-Earth. We are given advance warning of eclipses from astronomers who subscribe to a global Earth and the heliocentric model. We do not get predictions of eclipses from the Flat-Earth Society.

4) Maps

There is no working map of a flat-Earth. All two-dimensional maps are projections that distort the true shape of landmasses and oceans.

5) Sunset and Sunrise

We observe the sun appear from below the horizon in the East, travel across the sky and drop down below the horizon again, in the West. What it does not do is trace a circle above us in the sky, getting larger and smaller as it approaches and recedes.

A Brave New BLM World

We are living in interesting times. An arresting police officer killed a black person precipitating widespread protests in the United States, despite coronavirus restrictions. It did not take long for other countries to join in. It seems bizarre that people should protest in London about the death of a man in Minneapolis. The protests escalated. Infowars got caught planting agent provocateurs, but there is no doubt that the protesters needed little help. A common feature (in the UK, at least) is the defacement of war memorials during protests. If you have to spraypaint a monument to those who fell defending your country to get your message across, you are doing it wrong.

So what of the toppling of statues? I am not in favour of mob rule and mob justice. If a historical person is no longer considered suitable as a subject of a statue, then we should consider this coolly and calmly as a society, and not in the heat of anger as a mob. Having said that, it is perhaps overdue for discussion.

How do we decide who is worthy of a statue and who is not? What about Winston Churchill? He was a great man; his contribution to the war was invaluable. He played a key role in the Allies' victory over the Axis. On the other hand, he was a terrible man. He made some terrible blunders in the First World War, the Welsh miners' controversy and he committed atrocities in Ireland and India. Do we celebrate him? Do we renounce him? Perhaps, we should do both, so that we remember everything he did, good and bad. This is a complex issue and there is no easy answer. The last thing we want to do is whitewash our history.

What of history? The history of the human race is rife with instances of one group of people coming to prominence at the expense of others. What do we do with the Colosseum/Flavian Amphitheatre? Do we marvel at this feat of ancient Roman engineering? Or should we be appalled that it was financed by the spoils and built by the slave labour gained from Rome's subjugation of Judea? Contrary to the meme that is circulating, the pyramids in Egypt are safe; they were built by paid workers and not by slaves.

Let's do this right. Let's make the legacy of George Floyd's death a better world. We need to avoid dropping the ball on this because the Far-Right will pick it and run with it. Now that would be a disaster.