u/brief-interviews

Have just seen the trains are fucked. Is anyone planning to drive and have two spare seats? Me and a friend also have tickets but the train sitch is a nightmare.

Remind me, why could Ruby play the piano?

And what purpose did this have in the show?

… what the fuck was the point of ‘bow ties are cool' ?

No payoff, no explanation… it drove me loony trying to work out where it was leading to. Turns out, nowhere.

Any theories? What would you have done with the concept?

Please don’t attack me in the comments if you disagree I know it’s a controversial opinion but I really hope that in the wake of RTD2 we can FINALLY agree that Moffat was good — the best even — and that Davies was only popular and not good but actually bad (as well as David Tennant).

For literally years I have had to keep this brave and some would even say heroic opinion to myself across fan spaces for fear that a rabid and deranged David Tennant fan might belittle me for my highly unpopular opinion that Moffat is the only writer who really gets the Doctor and that Peter Capaldi is the definitive Doctor.

Upvote if you agree with this brave and controversial opinion, thanks.

obviously the worst thing that can happen to doctor who (1963-2026?) is that some new people come in from a television background who don’t know the first thing about how to make television

I propose that us the fans put in our own bid to the bbc to continue making the show ourselves, because nobody knows better than us the fans how to make the show great

I thought we could use this thread to brainstorm ideas to take forward

here are my ideas to start with:

- 30 to 40 episodes a series
- less budget
- first episode establishes that twice upon a time was the end of doctor who and there was no doctor who afterwards
- gallifrey

post your own proposals below, together we can create the ultimate doctor who and the best tv show ever

So I think I have the layman understanding of Hawking radiation just about down. An external observer sees radiation emanating from a black hole, and since the radiation is being created by the gravitational field, the black hole must lose mass as the energy of the gravitational field is converted to particles outside the event horizon. Physicists also worry that the information that falls into a black hole can't be lost, so they're trying to work out how the Hawking radiation contains the information of the stuff that fell in.

But I haven't quite grasped why it's specifically the Hawking radiation that has to contain the information about the stuff that went in. Is it because the mass of the stuff that fell in is what causes the gravitational field to exist, so in some sense the energy of the gravitational field that is creating Hawking radiation is already related to the matter inside the event horizon? I can't quite make sense of this because I had thought that the gravitational field doesn't care about any properties of matter except its stress-energy-momentum. But I might be completely barking up the wrong tree here and am happy for anyone to clear up any total misunderstandings.

https://preview.redd.it/lp1e2foiaz1h1.jpg?width=370&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d65b7a1e0ef4d8eeb79d8aa7552065ad102c8ab3