Howling:River / Rory

One thing is intriguing me. It is confirmed that River Song will appear in Series 6. and Rory is now travelling with the doctor along with Amy. So Rory and River are supposed to meet. Moreover, River told the doctor in the end of "The Big Bang" that soon he will find out who she is, so what happens in series 6 already happened in River's timeline. So why didnt she recognize Rory when she saw him in "Pandorica Opens"? Does this mean that Rory won't last during all the series? but he's Amy's husband so the only way he will leave her is that he dies.. Would Moffat kill him again?

P.S. Please no one starts talking about River being Amy or Rose or whatever.. River is River she's a new character..63.216.116.9 19:10, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, we don't know how long or how many adventures River had after the universe was reset but before she visited Amy's wedding. Her timeline could easily be:
 * 1) Pre-Pandorica events
 * 2) Pandorica Opens (not knowing Rory but meeting him)
 * 3) Resetting of universe and series 6 events (she would now know Rory)
 * 4) Crash of the Byzantium
 * 5) Picnick/Singing towers/Library etc.

Also, it could just as easily be that Rory leaves the TARDIS and visits family etc... The Thirteenth Doctor 19:28, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

Your timeline part doesn't answer the question at all: as what you labelled "pre-Pandorica events" is going to happen very soon according to what 63 said. --222.166.181.144 19:37, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

Please quote your source, I highly doubt we know she had 30 adventures with the Doctor before she visited the wedding...especially when she said the Doctor doesn't know her yet before launching him into the exploding TARDIS and the fact that she needed the Vortex Manipulator to leave afterward...I'm so sick and tired of people like you who just keep speculating and assume things without supports. --[[Special:Contributions/203.168.176.42|203.168.176.42 20:16, July 31, 2010 (UTC)]]
 * It makes perfect sense. All we know is that the River at the wedding had already lived the series 6 events. We don't know when or where River came from. For all we know she had 30 adventures with the Doctor before she visited the wedding. The Thirteenth Doctor 19:42, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is the howling. We're allowed to speculate here... that's the whole point of it. If you're sick and tired of speculation then go to one of the other forums.
 * I never said she did have 30 adventures. Both times I have made sure not to say that anything is definite; "Her timeline could easily be" and "For all we know". And yes, the Doctor wouldn't know her yet, in his timeline... they meet at different points where each knows a certain amount of information about the other. The Thirteenth Doctor 20:18, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * There are speculations that are helpful because they are based on what we know...and there are speculations that are not helpful because they contradict what we know:
 * The Doctor doesn't exist following Big Bang 2
 * River's blue book was blank because the Doctor never existed
 * River's blue book was blank when she gave it to Amy
 * according to your timeline, River's adventure with the Doctor happened during the time when the Doctor didn't exist...how does it make perfect sense? Stop throwing in random comments without thoughts --203.168.176.42 21:09, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * according to your timeline, River's adventure with the Doctor happened during the time when the Doctor didn't exist...how does it make perfect sense? Stop throwing in random comments without thoughts --203.168.176.42 21:09, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's right, the Doctor could never ever travel back in time to when he didn't exist could he? That's ridiculous. He'd need a time machine for that, wouldn't he? Trust me. I have thought it through. You obviously haven't.
 * Are you saying that the Doctor, after he returned, couldn't go back in time, meet River who had just experienced the big bang 2, have several adventures with her, then drop her off at the wedding? That's impossible is it? --The Thirteenth Doctor 21:13, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

During the series 5 finale Rory had been sucked into the crack, so he never existed. Since he never existed he couldn't be in series 6 so River never met him. Now that Rory exists again, an alternate timeline has been created where River would recognize Rory.Icecreamdif 00:24, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Thirteenth, the thing is not that he could or couldn't drop her off at the wedding...the thing is how could he drop off a River with a blank blue book at the wedding? The River with a blank book is on a timeline without the Doctor. The River that arrived in the wedding comes from a timeline without the Doctor so how could she have your "30 adventures with the Doctor"? If she's dropped off by the Doctor, then her books need to be filled. Can you just think before you type? --222.166.181.146 05:22, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

The basic thing the thread starter is saying is that it is a problem, having series 6 (pre-Pandorica Opens) River meet Rory because she has no idea who he is in thes series 5 finale, she hadn't met him before. Rory would need to be absent during any points of series 6 featuring pre-Pandorica Opens River. River at the end of The Big Bang noted that the next time the Doctor will meet her, he learns who she is, as she already experienced whatever that event was. This will be in series 6, the series that reveals River's story and identity.

But because Rory is in series 6, pre-Pandorica River musn't meet him. However, as they say, time can be rewritten. Maybe she ends up meetng hi earler than we originally saw because of rewritting time. Delton Menace 06:23, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Delton Menace, we all understand it...you're moving our discussion backward...the only point you are proposing has just been proposed by Icecreamdif already...can't you people bloody read before posting? --222.166.181.38 07:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

222, River said everyone goes back to where they belong. For her it would be in the future. In the future, the Doctor did exist as Amy had brought him back by then. Then River could have the adventures with the Doctor, before he drops her off at the wedding to a time his past self didn't exist and the writing disappears, much like with the photograph in Back to the Future, or Amy in City of the Daleks. It's simple time travel really. The Thirteenth Doctor 14:10, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

You oversimplified it way too much:
 * 1) The Blue Book records the Doctor's adventures in the past and the future
 * 2) River stated explicitely that following Big Bang 2 the Doctor would be on the other side of the crack and he would never have existed


 * The Doctor didn't exist until he was remembered by Amy in the wedding...so before then, there is no future Doctor that could bring River Song to the wedding...
 * If the Doctor does exist in the future, then the blue book should record all the future adventures of the Doctor and only the past adventures should be gone...
 * Moreover, do you know how irrational it is to suggest a non-existing Doctor could pop up in the past to cause himself into existence? If such were the case and a non-existing future Doctor simply dropped off River Song at Amy's wedding with a non-existing TARDIS...then shouldn't he just have shown up at the wedding...Amy will definitely remember him if just pops up for a brief second then leave....
 * I fail to see how this ties in with the City of Daleks, as it's stated explicitly that Amy was protected by the TARDIS in City of the Daleks...and the TARDIS is gone in the Big Bang.--203.168.176.42 15:25, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * The TARDIS was protecting her, yes, but couldn't protect her forever. It's the same paradox as the book. At that point in time, Amy came from a time where she didn't exist. She began to fade. The book would fade because it was going back to a timeline where the Doctor didn't exist.
 * This is all to do with multiple timelines. Before Amy remembered him, it was a straight timeline where the Doctor didn't exist. When she remembered him another timeline was caused to go off at a tangent from the first, one in which the Doctor existed. In the timeline where he existed, it is simple enough to return back to a time in the timeline where he hadn't. It's simple time travel. --The Thirteenth Doctor 17:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * God...just how thick can people get? You failed to explain anything, you are just repeating your flawed argument over and over again:
 * You acknowledge that it was the TARDIS that protected Amy...and you go on to assume that the same thing would happen without the TARDIS?
 * Why would the book fade? You are not making any sense.
 * I'm asking why all of the texts are gone if River is bought to the wedding by a future Doctor? Part of the texts record the adventures of future Doctor.
 * Right now, according to your argument, River Song would just be there for the sake of it...Your non-existing future Doctor could materialize in the current timeline...the book and River Song are just there for no reason...they would be the most ineffective/inefficient method of reminding Amy when he could materialize right in front of Amy's eyes at any point before he comes into existence to remind her...


 * Are you saying that a non-existing Doctor comes from a timeline that doesn't exist and brings himself into existence by by bringing a physical existing person to a different time in the existing timeline to bring himself into existence? You can bring anything into existence if you think that is logical. --222.166.181.136 17:56, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * It does make sense. And it is possible. Did you watch the Big Bang? The Future Doctor came from a timeline when he was released, but only by him coming back it was that he was released. It's a paradox.
 * And as the Doctor received River's diary and gave it back to her, he would have made sure that it was her to make Amy remember, not his future self. If he reminded Amy, even though in his own past he knew it was River that reminded her, it would cause a paradox. The Doctor tries as hard as possible to keep timelines intact and not to cause paradoxes.
 * As for the whole Amy/protecting thing, forget the fact the TARDIS was protecting her (and by that I don't mean "pretend it wasn't" I mean that it is not important). The point I originally made was that Amy came from a timeline that, because of the course that timeline was on, her own timeline didn't exist any more, so she began to fade. The same would happen to the book. If the book went back to a time when the timeline was on the course for the Doctor never existing, it would begin to fade as well, removing all the writing. Then, when Amy remembered, causing the course of the timeline to go off at a tangent creating a timeline where the Doctor does exist, it would return, as then it's future would exist again, just as happened to Amy in the City of the Daleks. --The Thirteenth Doctor 18:12, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * In the Big Bant, an existing Doctor from the future came to the past to release a past existing Doctor...How is that even relevant to what you were saying? You are talking about a non-existing character bringing himself into existence by physically influencing existing things as if he exists
 * You said the doctor caused a paradox in the first paragraph and said he tries as hard as possible not to cause paradoxes...Can you read through what you've typed first? There is no reason to associate a case where the Doctor time travelled to another instance to a case where a non-existing Doctor physically appearing and playing around the Universe to bring himself into existence...
 * According to you, shouldn't almost every impossible object, scenario, entity be possible to suddenly come into existence?
 * As for Amy...HUH?!? What happened? Did you fell down from your chair and have your brain damaged while typing that?
 * The Doctor said Amy existed ONLY because the TARDIS protected her
 * You acknowledge that it's true...and then you go on to say it's not important...and just ignored it....
 * How exactly can you get the conclusion that "Amy was existing ONLY because the TARDIS was protecting her" can essentially be simplified to "Amy was existing"...You are saying the only reason for her existence is not important and that in a situation where there is no such reason the same thing would happen for no reason?????
 * You are essentially saying we know A + B = C, we can forget B for now because there is no B here, and we'll label B "not important" which means we can ignore it...and now A = C just because....--222.166.181.61 18:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Is it really that hard to grasp the concept? City of Daleks and the case you discussed are not just different, they are the polar opposite of each other...one is a scenario where the time traveller is protected and other where the time traveller isn't protected...you can't fit pieces of the timeline where the time traveller isn't protected onto one where the time traveller is protected and saying the protection is both crucial and not important....


 * Look. If you don't understand the concept of time travel and paradoxes, I suggest you read up on them. I'll draw you a diagram if that helps.
 * As for the "every impossible object, scenario, entity be possible to suddenly come into existence", no, they didn't exist in the first place. The Doctor did which is why Amy had memories of him.
 * You're not understanding what I'm getting at with Amy. Had the TARDIS not protected her, she would not have existed, yes? Why? Because she was on a timline where the future that she came from did not exist. The same theory works with the book.
 * The Book (like Amy) was on a timeline (let's call it timeline X) where the future was missing the Doctor (like the Humans not existing in CotD). Amy remembered the Doctor (like the Doctor fixed the timeline in COTD) which returned the timeline to the real one (timeline Y) and the future of the book existed (like the Humans then existed in CotD) so the writing returned (Amy was no longer going to not exist). Does that help you?
 * And this is the last time I'm going to ask you to stop insulting. If you do so again, I'm going to ask for you to be blocked. --The Thirteenth Doctor 18:51, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't just type things for no reason, can you re-read this: "Had the TARDIS not protected her, she would not have existed, yes? Why? Because she was on a timline where the future that she came from did not exist. The same theory works with the book."...and then your argument goes on to ignore the TARDIS...The premise you said is that "Had the TARDIS not protected her, she would not have existed, yes?"...and now the TARDIS does not protect the Doctor...you can't ignore the premise and say the method worked with the premise...so we can apply the same method in a situation where such premise doesn't exist...
 * You still failed to explain how a Doctor on timeline Y exist on timeline X...it has nothing to do with CotD in that
 * You said the Doctor in TBB is equal to the humans in COTD, the humans in COTD are all gone, so should the Doctor then. There is no future Doctor travelling with River Song according to your model. What you are saying is the opposite of what you originally proposed.
 * COTD's plot involves a TARDIS-protected Amy, as opposed to non-TARDIS-protected humans...as your model says and what you've been saying up to this point, the Doctor in TBB is the non-TARDIS-protected humans...
 * It wasn't simply "Amy remembered the Doctor", it's "Amy remembered the Doctor due to the Doctor's physical manipulations", which you have already forbid by saying that the Doctor no longer exists like the other humans in COTD.
 * The texts would not have returned according to your model because there would be no Doctor.
 * Your timeline is still ignoring the TARDIS, what you keep missing is the bloody TARDIS part...In your Amy example, you clearly said Amy would not have existed if the TARDIS had not protected her...then how do you come up with the conclusion that a future non-existing entity not protected by TARDIS exists in the future?
 * --222.166.181.18 19:28, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * The Y and X timelines are like a fork on the road, one way is Y, the other X, if you choose to go down X, you can go back change the direction you take and go down pathway Y. In the same way, if you go down pathway Y you can go back and make someone else also choose pathway Y instead of pathway X.
 * And I'm drawing you a diagram since you can't understand the time travel aspect of it. --The Thirteenth Doctor 19:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thirteenth, can you just stop ignoring the part about the TARDIS? You acknowledge that the TARDIS is the reason Amy exists...and then keep ignoring it everytime it's brought up...and you're ignoring everything else that's brought up and keep on talking about the model without the flaws...this is very tiring. --222.166.181.101 19:55, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * And no, it's not the time travel aspect that's problematic...it's the fact that you've still failed to provide your rationale for a non-existing Doctor physically influencing the current timeline and keeps on referring to a case that explicitly forbids what you propose...the humans who are not protected by the TARDIS didn't go back to the past to influence the timeline like you've said...Amy did...and Amy is protected by the TARDIS....Your analogy is completely invalid...In your two arguments, your conclusion either comes from the middle of nowhere or you based your argument on a rejected premise that you explicitly state you know is invalid--203.168.176.42 20:07, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * And no, it's not the time travel aspect that's problematic...it's the fact that you've still failed to provide your rationale for a non-existing Doctor physically influencing the current timeline and keeps on referring to a case that explicitly forbids what you propose...the humans who are not protected by the TARDIS didn't go back to the past to influence the timeline like you've said...Amy did...and Amy is protected by the TARDIS....Your analogy is completely invalid...In your two arguments, your conclusion either comes from the middle of nowhere or you based your argument on a rejected premise that you explicitly state you know is invalid--203.168.176.42 20:07, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * If you'd waited for my diagram, then you'd have had it explained. The TARDIS can protect the Doctor as well. Why not? It's psychic link to the Doctor is most probably stronger than the one with Amy. Anyway, the diagram is here. Hopefully that'll explain it to you. Oh, and if you'd like to make a list of things I'm ignoring, there's so many you keep bringing up and I keep correcting. --The Thirteenth Doctor 20:02, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * GREAT TIMELINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a perfect reflection of your intelligence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 * In your diagram, where does your River in 4 comes from? River is already in 3 before any instance in 2....There are 2 potential Rivers from 2 alternative timelines on your top timeline until 5.
 * This diagram contradicts with your original idea that you can just "forget the fact the TARDIS was protecting her"
 * Where does the TARDIS in 4 comes from? TARDIS is already destroyed or no longer exists following 1, how does it offer protection in 4? This is the opposite of COTD where the TARDIS protected Amy, in here, the TARDIS is gone in 1.
 * Your diagram falls apart at 2 since there is no such TARDIS...
 * The book is not on a timeline where its future would not exist if you were trying to say that the timeline is supposingly led toward the bottom timeline...the book could only have no texts if it didn't come from the bottom timeline or led to a timeline different from the bottom one.
 * The alternative timeline in COTD exists because the TARDIS protected Amy...The TARDIS is gone in TBB, you can't just deliberately say the TARDIS is here or ignore the TARDIS's effects/consequences for no apparent reason. TARDIS: no explosion (1). No TARDIS: no bottom timeline. --222.166.181.151 20:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * The alternative timeline in COTD exists because the TARDIS protected Amy...The TARDIS is gone in TBB, you can't just deliberately say the TARDIS is here or ignore the TARDIS's effects/consequences for no apparent reason. TARDIS: no explosion (1). No TARDIS: no bottom timeline. --222.166.181.151 20:37, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Look, you obviously can't understand it, and you obviously don't even want to, so I'm not going to bother any more. The theory is sound. --The Thirteenth Doctor 20:41, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * You still failed to answer anything about the TARDIS and you keep saying you will answer it...This is stupid...Your diagram falls apart since the very beginning because your TARDIS exists and doesn't exist at the same time....and you try to fit it into a case so completely different that it's explicitly stated your scenario can't exist....That's the way to go! Abandon all rationality...We should have some sort of Hall of Fame with a corner specifically dedicated to you. EVERYTHING will forever exists because out of an infinite amount of non-existing timelines, something will guarantee to bring them into existence in your model...You essentially removed the restriction of TARDIS' protection since your TARDIS, for whatever odd reason, has a continued existence even after it has been destroyed or negated....--222.166.181.173 20:57, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Umm.. i can see the discussion is getting a little too tense. Thirteenth thanks for starting a new thread about your discussion. Both you and 222 are discussing one answer about the original question, and expanded it to the laws of time travel, which is worth the new thread. Going back to the topic of this thread, and regardless of which of you is right, i dont think in this case the explanation is River living series 6 between the reset and the doctor coming back. I'll go now to the other thread to give my humble opinion :) but please guys we are here to discuss different opinions.. so no need for being rude or undermining others' opinions even if we dont agree with them! 63.216.120.87 22:14, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bloody hell, do you still not understand time travel? After the Doctor and the TARDIS are brought back' (ie they exist) they pick up River in the future, bring her back to the wedding, the writing in the book fades because it's future doesn't exist any more in that time-line, Amy remembers and brings back the Doctor and TARDIS who then go to the future to pick up River and the cycle starts again. It's so simple. You know, you're the only one who is complaining. I'm gonna start another forum and see if anyone else really thinks like you. The Thirteenth Doctor 21:05, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now the book shouldn't fade...because it's at a point where both it's future and past are on a timeline where the Doctor's adventure are guaranteed to exist...neither is this timeline what's depicted on screen. This is not time travel neither...this is something that doesn't exist on a timeline physically bringing itself into existence. You're using cases where a physically existing Doctor travelled to a past point to ensure the timeline travels toward 1 direction to explain a case where the Doctor never existed and just magically shows up to influence events to create his existence...What you saying is that if Amy faded in CotD and the Doctor failed, a Doctor from a timeline where he is successful would magically show up this timeline and things would still work that way....--222.166.181.132 21:19, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * My other suggestion was that Rory simply visits family when the Doctor and Amy meet River. --The Thirteenth Doctor 22:20, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

It could be because when River saw auton Rory for the first time, Rory was already absorbed by the cracks and brought out of existence.. even Amy when she saw him she didnt recognize him so why would River? But after Big Bang 2 everything is back to it's place and Rory is back into existence.. That's why she didnt recognize him in the PO.. Unless in series 6 we find out that River is somehow immune to the cracks like the doctor (she did show up in Amy's wedding so she somehow remembered the doctor. how?)94.187.77.178 11:43, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

It's simple really. Provided that River Song is the same version from pre-Big Bang 2, then she would simply know who he is and everything that will happen to him, as she does with The Doctor. Knowing what will happen, she knows he mustn't say or give anything away, again - like The Doctor. But only if she *is* the same version of herself before Big Bang 2.

Ignoring everything except the very first paragraph of this thread, I also do not understand why River seems to keep forgetting that Rory is her father. From Let's Kill Hitler, we learn that she can regenerate and it is not unreasonable to assume she may have other time lord qualities, like remembering alternate time lines. But in the Pandorica Opens, she does not recognize Rory in the picture found in Amy's bedroom. I understand the arguement about Rory never existing at that moment (because he passed into the crack in time) but River is a complicated time traveller. The second time is near the beginning of A Good Man Goes to War. Rory goes to recruit River, and she looks at him as if it is the first time knowingly meeting her father - and knowing but regretting that she cannot mention it yet. Maybe it is a stretch to interpret her emotions in this scene, but that is how I see it. So - in Big Bang 2, how does she know to show up at Amy and Rory's wedding - know to give the blank diary to Rory, all the while not knowing who Rory is? (I will leave it to another thread to discuss why River exists at all in a universe in which there is no Doctor)ANone 06:04, September 6, 2011 (UTC)

She can exist in a universe where there is no Doctor for the same reason that Amy can exist in a world without her parents. She forgot about Rory for the same reason that Amy remembered the clerics but forgot about Rory. As her father, Rory is an important part of River's life, so he is more easily forgotten.Icecreamdif 15:45, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I just came into this thread and was going to say the same thing. River didn't remember Rory for the same reason Amy didn't remember Rory. However before Rory was erased they both remembered him and after he was restored they both remembered him, it isn't exactly hard to get. The Light6 07:14, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I need to think awhile longer on icecreamdif's answer regarding Amy. My orignal thought on River in a universe without the doctor had gone like this: River could not exist in a universe that did not ever have the Doctor, because, as she only exists in her present form as a result of regeneration, if there is no Doctor, then Melody could not be conceived on the Tardis (with her "time head"), so she could not have DNA that is part Time Lord, so she cannot regenerate into River Song. But icecreamdif has a possible arguement that if Amy can exist after her parents fell thru the crack then I can see her trying to extend that arguement to hold even after Big Bang 2 which reset the universe. But after Big Bang 2 Amy's parents came back so that she could exist in the new universe. Not sure just because Amy continues to exist in the old version of the universe after her parents fall into the crack, that it applies to the new universe.

Okay - having read thru this, I now understand that the Pandorica held the information of the original universe which included River - so icecreamdif is absolutely correct - River can exist after Big Bang 2 without the Doctor present.

But back to my main problem. Amy is only human yet she still remembered Rory again just before he shot her. As to River, I think my arguement is, and sorry in advance if I am just repeating myself, if River is a complicated time traveller who can exist in various time streams with her memory intact, she should be able to remember Rory is her father - at least remember him after seeing him in the picture in Amy's room at the end of The Pandorica Opens. The Doctor had no problem remembering Rory (albeit a comical rememberance).--ANone 17:02, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

The Doctor can remember Rory for the same reason that Amy can remember the clerics. The Doctor is a time traveller, and Rory iss not an important part of his life. The Doctor llikes Rory, and they've travelled together, but ultimately they've only known each other for less than anothher year. Riverr, on the other hand is Rory's dauhgter, so he is an important part of her life, thus making it easier for her to forgeet him. Also, keep in mind, Amy didn't recognize Rory as soon as she saw him. Even after he saved her lfie she didn't recognize him. He had to actively try to get her to remember him. River basically saw him as somebody who Amy had once known who the Nestene had created a duplicate of. If Amy, Rory, or the Doctor had known that River was Rory's daughter at ttha point, they probably would have put more effort into jogging her memory.Icecreamdif 20:14, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Icecreamdif hit the important bit there. It's not like non-time-travelers never remember things that were erased history, but time travelers always do. There are some restrictions on what you can remember, like the "important part of your life" thing. It takes some effort or external reminders to do it (and probably more effort the more an important part of your life they were, etc.). And it's not an all or nothing thing; you can have vague subconscious memories, or you can retain memories of the old history only to lose them later. And some time travelers are more special than others; Amy could do this better than Rory (or presumably various former companions) because she wasn't just a time traveler, but a time traveler who grew up with a crack leaking time energy in her bedroom. We saw all of this going on with Amy in Cold Blood and the following episodes.

Maybe for a Tharil or an Eternal or something, it really is as simple as "It's still there somewhere in the many dimensions of space-time-history, therefore I can see it". But a Time Lord is probably somewhere between Amy and an Eternal, and River herself is probably halfway between Amy and a Time Lord, so whether or not she should remember Rory isn't going to be a definite thing that you can figure out from first principles. --12.249.226.210 22:40, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

That's certainly true. Both Amy and River, for different reasons, are unique in that respect. Amy grew up exposed to the leakage from the crack in her bedroom wall and that had a drastic effect on her memory. River was conceived in the TARDIS while the TARDIS was travelling in the vortex. For all we know, Amy's exposure to the leakage from the crack may also have affected her daughter. We can't compare River with anyone conceived in the TARDIS in the vortex but with a mother who hadn't had Amy's exposure to time energy because (so far, at any rate) no other woman has managed to get herself pregnant in those circumstances. Unique cases can't be understood by extrapolating from others. --89.242.72.177 23:24, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

I think I have to disagree with icecreamdif in regard to the Doctor's memory, and actual diametrically oppose 12.249.226.210 statements when talking about this specific case. The 10th Doctor clearly says in The Fires of Pompeii that a Time Lord can see all time streams, "everything that could be and what should be" (maybe not an exact quote) and they can recognize a fixed point in time. And we have other episodes that support this. So the Doctor can remember Rory because he remembers all of the time streams that he has seen. Or perhaps more accurately, he never forgets Rory (after all he always knows what that engagement ring is that he has been carrying around). And humans, and probably most species cannot remember alternate time events, with the notable exception of Amy because she lived so long near a crack in time (unless we learn more later in this season). And that is how I got to the problem with River not remembering Rory. I guess I want her to be so much like a Time Lady, that I want there to be a really good reason why she cannot remember who Rory is. But I also agree that this is the story as it is told, and I am enjoying these past several seasons, and really looking forward to the next episodes, so I will stop beating this topic. I really do appreciate all of your comments.--ANone 05:51, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

A Time Lord can usually see past changes in the time line like that, but not if it is someone who is an important part of their life. The Doctor had known Rory for less than a year at that part, so his Time Lord senses allowed him to remember Rory, but if someone more important to him, like Susan or the Master, fell into a crack, then he would forget them. Same goes for River. If most people fall into a cracfk she will remember them, but not someone important to her like her father.Icecreamdif 19:23, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Just because the Doctor can see that all these other timelines exist doesn't mean that he experiences everything that occurs on them in the same way he experiences what's happening on the one he's on. He clearly distinguishes present from past and future, and in at least the same way, he clearly distinguishes the current timeline from other ones. And in fact, he seems to be even more limited in that direction. Whenever he's on an alternate timeline, he gets a vague sense that something is wrong, and he can sometimes see what's different from what it should be when he consciously looks for it, but that's not at all the same as directly seeing what's in front of his face. --70.36.140.19 13:18, September 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * If you think about it, a Time Lord simply wouldn't be able to walk around unless the current environment was easy to distinguish from all the rest. He/she would constantly be trying to go through doorways that were there once but aren't there any more, or could have been there but aren't, or will be there in the future but are solid walls, now. Never mind crossing a bridge before you come to it; try crossing a bridge that won't be built until a century from now! --89.242.69.152 08:00, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe in Happy Endings, a Tharil apologizes for walking through a wall because he didn't realize it had already been built in this time zone, or something like that. (It might be a different novel, and maybe even a different "time-native" species…) You've hit on exactly the difference I was getting at when I said that Time Lords are somewhere between us and the truly time-native species (and described it much better than I did). --70.36.140.19 01:38, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * I can agree with 70.36.140.19 that the Doctor would not know all of the intricate details of every time stream that could exist, but he does remember in every detail all of his personal experiences in every time stream that he has lived in. How else in A Good Man Goes to War could he recite Rory's history both before and after Big Bang 2, including the bit when Rory did not exist? Or remember that he rebooted the universe and then stepped through the crack in time? (Hey, what happened to him while he was waiting for Amy to bring him back?) So I modify my comment to say that Time Lords always remember thier experiences in any time line that they spend time in, except when those black suited aliens that are part of the Silence Movement are around. ANone--24.16.246.233 04:25, September 19, 2011 (UTC)


 * Does that really require anything more than the same rule that applies to human time travelers? Normally, Amy automatically remembers any timeline she spent time in. When a change is "too close" to her, like Rory being erased, she _can_ still remember the old timeline, but only if she concentrates hard on it. Presumably Time Lords (especially 910-year-old Time Lords with extensive experience with alternate histories and changing timelines) are much better at that kind of thing than humans (especially 21-year-old humans who only recently stepped into a time machine for the first time). And Amy almost pulled it off anyway—she remembered Rory up until the TARDIS shook, and even after that, she retained some kind of subconscious memory, which Auton Rory was able to awaken. So, couldn't that be enough to explain why the Doctor seems to remember all timelines histories, whether or not the change was something close to him?


 * I feel like that Time Lords ought to have some abilities beyond what human time travelers have in this regard (again, somewhere between humans and Tharils), but I can't think of any evidence for that, so maybe I ought to drop that idea. (Maybe if we could ask both the Doctor and Rory what happened to them during the times they didn't exist, we'd get different answers?) --70.36.140.19 04:49, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

Then either River was lying to avoid spoilers, or River doesn't have all of the abilities that normal Time Lords have.Icecreamdif 06:35, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

the doctor cant sense all possible timelines or he would never make a mistake, as he would know what to do to get the best outcome. but as we know, the doctor often makes mistakes like everyone else, so he mustn't be able to sense everything Imamadmad 08:03, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

To answer 70.36.140.19, I think it does require more. As a virtue of being a Time Lord, the Doctor is able to remember his experiences in any time line, even time lines that no longer exist - he remembers all of his personal experiences before and after Big Bang 2, even after he passes through the Crack in Time himself. This should be evidence that Time Lords have some ability greater than the common time traveler.

Regarding Imamadmad's comments, I think the Doctor being able to sense all possible time lines would not necessarily mean he knows any more about those time lines beyond his personal experiences. He would know something was not right (as the 9th Doctor did in the second visit to the space station) but he would not know if he was making a mistake or not. --24.16.246.233 05:00, September 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * But Amy remembers her experiences in any timeline that she visited since becoming a time traveler, even timelines that no longer exist. That's exactly what the Doctor explained to her. How is that different from the Doctor remembering his experiences in any timeline that he visited, even timelines that no longer exist? (It's quantitatively different in that the Doctor has visited dozens or hundreds of timelines over 700 years, while Amy has visited a handful over 2 years, of course.) Sure, the Doctor remembers his experiences from before Big Bang 2 even though that universe doesn't exist anymore, but so does Rory, and so does Amy—in fact, the Doctor wouldn't even be here if she didn't. --70.36.140.19 05:23, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

So being able to tell when your timeline haschanged isn't a time lord ability but a time traveller ability. That doesn't diminish the Doctor's status asa Tim Lord. He still has plenty of abiliies that average time travellers don't have. For example, time anomolies don't seem to affect him (The Lodger, City of Death, I think there was also a Third Doctor episode that showed this). Being a Time Lord is not why he can tell when his time line has changed, and it is not why he can remember ohther time lines. The fact that River forgot Rory proves that Time Lords are no better at this than other time travvelling species.Icecreamdif 05:34, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

But if you extend 70.36.140.19's arguement, if Amy remembers her experiences, then River, who is also a complicated Time Traveler should remember Rory in The Pandorica Opens as she looks at the picture of Rory and Amy in Amy's bedroom. I do not see how it can be both ways. River does not remember Rory even though she has spent so many years as Mels near him, and all of her time lines as River knowing Rory is her father. So if River cannot remember all of her experiences in all of her time lines, but the Doctor can, there must be an inherent Time Lord difference. And we still have the tenth Doctor's statement in The Fires of Pompeii that as a Time Lord he can see all that could be and should be - and be able to sense a fixed point in time (which he repeats in The Waters Of Mars).--ANone 06:26, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not aiming this comment at Anone, but his statement  I do not see how it can be both ways is one of the common and annoying attitudes of fans. It seems to imply infinite intelligence on their part. I have my own answer to that. It's far more complicated than that. Of course there are slips and gaps and just plain errors on the part of the people who run these things, but the reason that it happens is that this is the story that Moffat wants to tell and given any set of facts a theory can be arranged to fit them. I have some gaps in my understanding of superstring theory, but I don't consider that a valid reason for dismissing it. My basic theory is that that the universe is far more complicated than I can understand and the Doctor is actually a lot smarter than I. I think that a lot of people around here have trouble believing that -- at least, while they have little trouble believing that the Doctor is smarter than I am, the idea that the two statements might apply to them is nonsense. Boblipton 11:25, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

ANone's reference to The Fires of Pompeii is worth supplementing by pointing out that, very shortly after the Doctor made that statement to Donna, he realised he'd been mistaken about Pompeii: "It's not just history, it's me. I make it happen." Imamadmad's remark about not being liable to make mistakes if he really could sense "what could be, what must not" etc. seems to depend on confusing perception and interpretation. Humans are subject to optical illusions, for example, but that's not because they can't see, it's because they misinterpret what they're seeing. That a Time Lord can sense all the possibilities and so on doesn't guarantee he/she will always have a perfect understanding of what he/she is sensing.

Boblipton: I've no problem believing that the Doctor is smarter than I am, either. Something else that seems occasionally to be missed is that the Doctor quite often has more information than the audience does. After all, according to the TARDIS (in the body of Idris) in The Doctor's Wife, it's about 700 years in the Doctor's timeline since the events of An Unearthly Child and we've seen only a tiny fraction of those 700 years -- not to mention having seen nothing from before that and never having studied at the Academy on Gallifrey. There must be times when the Doctor understands a situation because he's encountered it, or something very like it, before -- but we have not. --78.146.178.98 14:25, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

A-none, River doesn't remember Rory for the same reason thhat aAmy doesn't remember Roory. Amy didn't remember him until they'd spent some time togethere with Rory saying "why won't you remember me," and having recently found theengangement ring and trying to figure out its significance. River just saw the photo of Rory, figured he was somebody who Amy knew who the Nesten duplicated to mess with her, and moved on. If Rory had known that he was River's father at that point he probably would have tried to help her remember him, but he didn't so River was left believing that Rory was some guy who Amy and the Doctor knew.Icecreamdif 18:42, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

on a side note to 78: idris/the tardis didn't say it was 700 years since the unearthly child but since he stole her in the first place. although i agree that most of those 700 years have been since UC, it seemed to me that in UC, the doctor had been traveling for a while before then, which would explain why he was so surprised when he found out the chamelion circuit was broken as it had always worked for him up until that moment, amoung other evidence. 124.179.26.126 11:43, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

ok, i have no idea why my username didn't work just then, but that was me Imamadmad 11:57, September 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you're right. Well, the novels, audios, and comics tell us explicitly about other adventures he had before landing at Foreman's Yard, but even on TV, it makes sense. It seems like the default (when they're not deliberately controlling it) is that adult Time Lords age like humans, but at a slower and less consistent rate (the 4th Doctor aged about 7 human years over decades of his life, the 10th aged about 4 human years over 8 years of his life, etc.). Since we know he looked young earlier in his incarnation (like a 9-year-old at 9, like a young man somewhere around 90-120), it doesn't seem likely that at 211 he'd already look like the old man we met. But it's not impossible. And the fact that he had to set his TARDIS down for repairs for 6 months prior to UC could just as easily mean that he'd just recently stolen her out of the decomissioning yards and hadn't really had the chance to get her working yet, as that he'd just had some disastrous adventure . So, if you choose to ignore everything but TV, I agree with you that it's less likely that UC was at the very start of his travels, but you can't be sure. --70.36.140.19 16:54, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

Imamadmad: "on a side note to 78: idris/the tardis didn't say it was 700 years since the unearthly child but since he stole her in the first place". Sorry, but she did say 700 years since An Unearthly Child, although she didn't say it directly. She told the Doctor he'd been opening the police box doors the wrong way for 700 years (pointing out that the sign says, "Pull to open," and adding, "Police box doors open outwards!"). It was only when the TARDIS left 1963 Shoreditch that both the Doctor and Susan were surprised to see the TARDIS had retained the police box appearance and Susan gave a few examples of other disguises the ship had used previously. Admittedly, it's probably not all that much more than 700 years since the Doctor and Susan left Gallifrey in the stolen TARDIS -- it was implied they'd been travelling together for a few years but only a few. Nevertheless, 700 years of police box doors means 700 years since An Unearthly Child. --89.241.70.70 00:00, September 23, 2011 (UTC)