slant
1st Incarnation
Posts: 5
|
Post by slant on Jan 11, 2010 0:24:48 GMT
Okay, so what exactly is considered the normal life span for a Time Lord? Granted, the Doctor probably goes through regenerations quite a bit faster than a Time Lord who doesn't put himself in mortal peril on a regular basis, but I can't help thinking that at 900+ he's elderly even for a member of his own species.
If I recall correctly, the Doctor once indicated (somewhere near the Tom Baker era) that he was "just middle aged." So if he were middle aged at around 750, what would 900 make him? Romana, who debuted at 120, was just finished with her formal schooling at the academy, making her the equivalent of, say, an 18 year old human. If Romana and the 4th Doctor did indeed have some form of romantic relationship as is usually implied, would that be the equivalent of a first year university student shacking up with her 50 year old professor?
And on a related note, how often does a Time Lord normally need to regenerate? Would a Time Lord living an academic life on Gallifrey be able to go hundreds of years before regenerating?
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 11, 2010 0:42:01 GMT
Okay, so what exactly is considered the normal life span for a Time Lord? Granted, the Doctor probably goes through regenerations quite a bit faster than a Time Lord who doesn't put himself in mortal peril on a regular basis, but I can't help thinking that at 900+ he's elderly even for a member of his own species. Don't be too sure of that. Each individual regeneration of a time lord can live for an extremely long time. Witness Dobbie the House Gallifreyan in season 3. He was aged, what, 900 years? And he didn't die, though he was pretty messed up  Let's be generous, and third that. Let's say that each regeneration only lasts 300 years before the body starts to wear out and they start turning into CGI-creatures 300x12 is still 3,600 years. That's quite a bit more than the Doctor. If we were to say 500-1000 years, that's quite a bit longer. I can quite see safety-minded timelords lasting thousands of years. Prior to the Time War (and perhaps even during) the time lords were a pretty sedentary race who rarely ventured outside their Citadel. I have no doubt that, barring bizarre accidents, or perhaps Gallifreyan illnesses that even their medical technology hasn't dealt with, each regeneration would last for a very, very long time. I wonder what's considered 'middle aged' for a Gallifreyan ... is it X years or X regenerations? |
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Jan 11, 2010 17:17:36 GMT
Also remember that during the Tomb of the Cybermen, The Doctor claimed to be 'over 400 years old'.
Since there isn't a significant gap between the end of the Hartnell era to the Tomb of the Cybermen, we might be able to assume that The First Doctor was 400 years old at the time he regenerated.
Since the Doctor was much more active than others of his species, but even he says 'he's wearing a bit thin' toward the end, I would guess 500 years per regeneration would be normal upper end for the sedentary, unadventurous Time Lords of Gallifrey.
I think its curious, however, that The Fourth incarnation should claim to be 'middle aged'. That statement has always bothered me, because it doesn't seem to be the case, in either years OR regenerations, UNLESS he means the relative age of that particular incarnation. Somewhere, he gained 350 years between the second and fourth doctors.
As for Romana, her regeneration has always raised more questions than its answered. I would assume she's lying about being 120 years old... a simple case of vanity.
|
|
|
|
Post by allivingstone on Jan 11, 2010 19:19:32 GMT
The BBC's summary of in-series references to the Doctor's age is here. |
|
|
|
Post by Kit on Jan 11, 2010 21:41:54 GMT
The BBC's summary of in-series references to the Doctor's age is here. Thanks for the link! What confuses me is that the 9th Doctor himselfclaimed to be 900. He has aged in real-world aging since as the last age the Tenth Doctor gave was 906. All interesting since the 7th Doctor was 953. to say nothing of how much time passed between indicatign that age and his regeneration to the 8th Doctor and whatever amount of time the 8th Doctor is active before regenerating into the 9th Doctor. |
|
|
|
Post by Rel Fexive on Jan 11, 2010 22:21:24 GMT
As with pretty much everything else in the series (such as, say, the UNIT dating thing - damn that's complicated!) the best bet is to take the ones that make sense to you and use those and ignore or somehow explain away the ones that don't fit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 11, 2010 23:11:11 GMT
Rassilon, for example, is immortal. I think that's mentioned in the Five Doctors?
One possible explanation as to why the Doctor says different ages at different times could be that he's had his brain probed, invaded and psychically attacked so many times - he's suffered permanent damage and can no longer remember his correct age.
|
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Jan 11, 2010 23:28:46 GMT
Rassilon, for example, is immortal. I think that's mentioned in the Five Doctors? One possible explanation as to why the Doctor says different ages at different times could be that he's had his brain probed, invaded and psychically attacked so many times - he's suffered permanent damage and can no longer remember his correct age. You are correct sir, Rassilon is immortal, and willingto share! After a fashion... Another option is intentionally using *different* years for his age... for example, perhaps the Gallifreyan year is different from a Earth year, which is in turn different from a Mars year, which is different from a Calufrax year... He could just be messing with people like that... |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 11, 2010 23:37:21 GMT
Rassilon, for example, is immortal. I think that's mentioned in the Five Doctors? One possible explanation as to why the Doctor says different ages at different times could be that he's had his brain probed, invaded and psychically attacked so many times - he's suffered permanent damage and can no longer remember his correct age. I think, for timelords, age is like the original stardates in Star Trek. It's ... complicated. It's not just a question of years, there's some calculation involved and the Doctor just sucks at Maths when he's not busy saving the world Time Lords, with all the travelling through time and space they do, and the fact that somebody who 'looks' middle-aged could actually be much younger than somebody who looks to be about 19, probably have a much more advanced method of calculating relative ages and 'middle aged' and whatnot, so every time the Doctor has to tell somebody how old he is is probably doing a fair bit of math to convert it to 'normal' years. Sometimes he probably forgets to carry the one, or divide by regenerations and multiply by relative chronal drift I can imagine a timelord being asked that question ... 'How old are you?' 'What a rude question! Do you often ask complete strangers how old they are? Well, if you must know in Earth years I'm ... hang on, just got to carry the one ... Yes, I'm 906. No, hold on, 905. Maybe ... darn, I misplaced the decimal point ... um, does 923 sound good? That sounds about right. Well ... whatever it is I'm definitely probably in my 900s ... give or take a century. I think.'  The Doctor just likes to give definitive answers, even when he's not 100% definite |
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Jan 11, 2010 23:46:48 GMT
Rassilon, for example, is immortal. I think that's mentioned in the Five Doctors? One possible explanation as to why the Doctor says different ages at different times could be that he's had his brain probed, invaded and psychically attacked so many times - he's suffered permanent damage and can no longer remember his correct age. I think, for timelords, age is like the original stardates in Star Trek. It's ... complicated. It's not just a question of years, there's some calculation involved and the Doctor just sucks at Maths when he's not busy saving the world Time Lords, with all the travelling through time and space they do, and the fact that somebody who 'looks' middle-aged could actually be much younger than somebody who looks to be about 19, probably have a much more advanced method of calculating relative ages and 'middle aged' and whatnot, so every time the Doctor has to tell somebody how old he is is probably doing a fair bit of math to convert it to 'normal' years. Sometimes he probably forgets to carry the one, or divide by regenerations and multiply by relative chronal drift I can imagine a timelord being asked that question ... 'How old are you?' 'What a rude question! Do you often ask complete strangers how old they are? Well, if you must know in Earth years I'm ... hang on, just got to carry the one ... Yes, I'm 906. No, hold on, 905. Maybe ... darn, I misplaced the decimal point ... um, does 923 sound good? That sounds about right. Well ... whatever it is I'm definitely probably in my 900s ... give or take a century. I think.' The Doctor just likes to give definitive answers, even when he's not 100% definite Seems logical. And like the Doctor says "Logic is just a way of going wrong with confidence!" |
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 11, 2010 23:56:03 GMT
I figure brain damage, because the new series establishes that Time Lords are able to innately feel the turn of the universe. So they should be like Godfather Morlock about matters of time - be able to tell the true age of anything innately.
|
|
|
|
Post by christhes on Jan 12, 2010 22:22:08 GMT
900 is the Time Lord equivalent of 39. It's a big enough number to make impressionable young women go 'gosh,' but not so big that they stop thinking of you as potential boyfriend material. The Doctor is incredibly vain, after all.
The NAs suggested 12,000 years as a respectable age for a Time Lord.
|
|
|
|
Post by allivingstone on Jan 13, 2010 17:48:59 GMT
What confuses me is that the 9th Doctor himselfclaimed to be 900. He has aged in real-world aging since as the last age the Tenth Doctor gave was 906. All interesting since the 7th Doctor was 953. to say nothing of how much time passed between indicatign that age and his regeneration to the 8th Doctor and whatever amount of time the 8th Doctor is active before regenerating into the 9th Doctor. IIRC, the 7th Doctor mentioned 953 as being the Rani's age (which she used for a password/combination) and mentioned that they were the same age as each other. I can't see any reason why the Rani wouldn't use Gallifreyan years for this purpose, and a common reference point is pretty much the only way the Doctor would be able to guess the code. Therefore my take on it is that the Gallifreyan calendar is significantly shorter than 365.25 days. |
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Jan 13, 2010 18:14:19 GMT
I figure brain damage, because the new series establishes that Time Lords are able to innately feel the turn of the universe. So they should be like Godfather Morlock about matters of time - be able to tell the true age of anything innately. This doesn't discount them deliberately lying or playing games however. They could tell the true age of something, and still be coy about their TRUE age. |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 13, 2010 18:50:14 GMT
Therefore my take on it is that the Gallifreyan calendar is significantly shorter than 365.25 days. Our calendar is also shorter than 365.25 days, as it happens |
|
Rassilon
Administrator
Grand Administrator
Posts: 751 
|
Post by Rassilon on Jan 13, 2010 19:32:34 GMT
The BBC's summary of in-series references to the Doctor's age is here. Good find. This deserves a sticky on its own. |
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 13, 2010 19:53:55 GMT
Therefore my take on it is that the Gallifreyan calendar is significantly shorter than 365.25 days. Our calendar is also shorter than 365.25 days, as it happens If you want to be completely accurate - our years vary, as do the lengths of the days. We're affected by all sorts of gravity (mostly the moon). |
|
joe2001
2nd Incarnation
"Geronimo!"
Posts: 42
|
Post by joe2001 on Jan 13, 2010 20:28:02 GMT
Rassilon, for example, is immortal. I think that's mentioned in the Five Doctors? One possible explanation as to why the Doctor says different ages at different times could be that he's had his brain probed, invaded and psychically attacked so many times - he's suffered permanent damage and can no longer remember his correct age. This makes sense to me - though you'll never know, maybe one of the TV writers may sort this out once and for all - which could make quite a funny scene... |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 13, 2010 21:08:24 GMT
Our calendar is also shorter than 365.25 days, as it happens If you want to be completely accurate - our years vary, as do the lengths of the days. We're affected by all sorts of gravity (mostly the moon). Gravity may affect the astronomical year, but the Gregorian calendar pays it very little attention |
|
|
|
Post by allivingstone on Jan 15, 2010 1:49:25 GMT
Gravity may affect the astronomical year, but the Gregorian calendar pays it very little attention I'm sure there's a plot idea in there somewhere....just wish I could think of it! |
|
|
|
Post by da professor on Feb 17, 2010 18:13:42 GMT
The only way I can think to sort out the apparent contradictions is to first decide who he's speaking to when he gives his age. In all except the case of 7 and the Rani, he's probably talking in terms of years on the home planet of whoever he's speaking to. Also far future civilisations, even if human, might not use the Gregorian calendar anymore if it's been many generations since Earth was relevant.
|
|
