Talk:The End of the World (TV story)

Dating
I get confused about this story. Near the beggining the Doctor says they're 5 billion years in Rose's future (making the year 5,000,002,005 CE) but later he says they're in the year 5,000,000,000 CE. He just forgot about 2005 years. --GingerM 16:37, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, when you're talking on the order of billions, a paltry two thousand and five isn't really worth mentioning. I mean, if it is the year 5,000,000,000, So either date is possible. I can't see the Doctor saying "we're four billion, nine hundred and ninety-nine million, nine hundred and ninety-seven thousand, nine hundred and ninety five years into your future." That's overly complicated.


 * On a related tangent, don't the British figure billions differently than North Americans? I was under the impression that a "billion" was equal to "a million million," what we over here would call a trillion. IanWatson 17:32, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * Granted, when the Doctor first takes Rose 100 years into the future, he tells her it's the year 2105. Then he takes her 10,000 years into the future, and says it's 12,005, so 5,000,002,005 makes sense from that standpoint. On the other hand, the general consensus is that when year amounts greater than 1000 are being used, the person giving the date is probably rounding up. As for the meaning of "billions," as I understand it the definition of "a million million" is the old usage, and today the term usually means the same as it does in North America, what used to be called "a thousand million" in the UK. At any rate, I'll add "circa" to the year in the infobox, and note the dating controversy in the story notes.

--Freethinker1of1 18:19, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * That was my impression too; in any event, in the real world the Sun is supposed to expand in 5 thousand million years, not 5 million million. Ben Standeven 22:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)