(no subject)
Two of the many several things I enjoy: Math and Dr. Who.
Post located firmly within the intersection of that Venn diagram: Here.
The TL:DR version: It looks like that, with the exception of the Fifth (aka the "Young Doctor"), the ages of the various actors that play the Doctor fit a fairly steady linear function, f(x) = -1.89x +51.53, where X is the specific Doctor's ordinal position. In other words, each actor playing the Doctor is, on average, roughly 1.89 years younger than the last.
Wow. This post was extremely nerdy, even for me.
Post located firmly within the intersection of that Venn diagram: Here.
The TL:DR version: It looks like that, with the exception of the Fifth (aka the "Young Doctor"), the ages of the various actors that play the Doctor fit a fairly steady linear function, f(x) = -1.89x +51.53, where X is the specific Doctor's ordinal position. In other words, each actor playing the Doctor is, on average, roughly 1.89 years younger than the last.
Wow. This post was extremely nerdy, even for me.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I have always been trying to figure out if successive doctors become slightly physically younger than the age they were at regeneration, or if they become slightly physically younger than they were at the age when the previous doctor regenerated.
For example, the 10th Doctor, in episode 167, I was under the impression that he generated as a physical age relative to the 9th doctor's age in episode 166, not 157 or whenever the hell it was that Eight regenerated into 9. But, this article indicates that 11 is 10's age at episode 167 minus 1.89 years.
I think one could come up with a second equation for the first idea, but it all it would prove is massive geekdom. Yes, I could sit around and try to plot that same chart as well, but I have to get my tax papers straightened out, which is a better use of my cruddy math skills.