Transportation Duplication

[General Zod]

What I don't understand is how they can reproduce a human with a transporter, but seem to use an entirely different technology for manufacturing. To make matters worse, its stupidly limited by comparison.

I can only remember one instance of them actually making another human, and that was a freak accident due to some weird planetary environment. (The Will Riker clone).

Ghetto edit: there's also the fact that the molecules that make up the human body are common virtually everywhere. Some funky unobtanium metal they wouldn't likely have extra components of on hand.

[BountyHunterSAx]

General Zod, I don't think you got the crux of my issue. Even if you did, I feel the need to re-state it so humor me.


Premises:

1.) We *have* seen the transporter intentionally jury-rigged for non-conventional uses:
--* Stasis-effect to keep Scotty and "Franklin" in the TNG episode "Relics" (successful)

In each case, I cannot recall the jury-rigging ever being recorded, annotated and used even though there certainly was application to do so. The reason I say each such case is because it is true of other ST episodes' "one-episode-wonders" as well.

2.) The transporter *routinely* performs "quantum-level replication" and destroys the original. According to DW's technology page (iirc), the original matter is *not* used to re-create the person being transported.

3.) We have seen specialized equipment transported to a planet's surface and back successfully in cases where it is unlikely that the metal was found in the area being transported to. (Phasers going to beam sites, boxes of gear, etc.)

4.) We have seen the transporter UNintentionally clone a human being.


Here's my argument:

Point2 shows that transporters are capable of performing quantum-level replication either without 1-bit errors or with a low enough rate as to be deemed safe. Point3 shows that the 'abundance of man-making material in the vicinity' is irrelevant, as we've seen machines being beamed into areas where stock-material was likely *not* available (any known case of latinum transport, btw?). Finally, Point4 shows that transporters are not *forced* to discard the original, as in Riker's case that was not done. Taken together i argue SF transporters are probably capable of replicating any and everything we've ever seen transported.

Of course the next logical wonder is 'why doesn't SF do this en-masse in the several situations they've had trouble with replicators?' Point1 shows that SF routinely ignores useful jury-riggings, ideas, and inventions and so it should come as no surprise that this has been ignored as well. Clearly in the case of a fight against the Empire the method would be useless as virtually no research has been done for it. The argument, then, is about the capabilities of their technology - regardless of whether or not they know that capability exists.


-AHMAD

[BountyHunterSAx]

OK, wait - nevermind; I was mistaken. Premise 2 is wrong entirely, I misread the tech. page where DW says that it proves the *original* is not transmitted. He clearly also states that it's a disintegration-cloning cycle, and says that the constituent particles are moved.

Sorry - ignore that argument; i'd delete it if i was allowed to.

-AHMAD

PS: *doesn't* rule out transporter-mediated replication; just means this isn't a valid argument for it.

[General Zod]

Point2 shows that transporters are capable of performing quantum-level replication either without 1-bit errors or with a low enough rate as to be deemed safe. Point3 shows that the 'abundance of man-making material in the vicinity' is irrelevant, as we've seen machines being beamed into areas where stock-material was likely *not* available (any known case of latinum transport, btw?). Finally, Point4 shows that transporters are not *forced* to discard the original, as in Riker's case that was not done. Taken together i argue SF transporters are probably capable of replicating any and everything we've ever seen transported.

If it was that easy why did Starfleet need to disassemble Data in order to figure out how to make more androids like him? They could just use the transporter to replicate copies. Same for the Doctor's holo-emitter.

Of course the next logical wonder is 'why doesn't SF do this en-masse in the several situations they've had trouble with replicators?' Point1 shows that SF routinely ignores useful jury-riggings, ideas, and inventions and so it should come as no surprise that this has been ignored as well. Clearly in the case of a fight against the Empire the method would be useless as virtually no research has been done for it. The argument, then, is about the capabilities of their technology - regardless of whether or not they know that capability exists.

Even if they were somehow able to replicate something, what makes you think they'd understand how it works? Being able to duplicate it on an atomic/subsatomic level doesn't mean they're going to have the slightest clue how to operate or repair something.

[BountyHunterSAx]

If it was that easy why did Starfleet need to disassemble Data in order to figure out how to make more androids like him? They could just use the transporter to replicate copies. Same for the Doctor's holo-emitter.

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again. The Enterprise shows that it is capable of producing a sentient hologram with the capability to outmaneuver the entire Enterprise crew and staff, and yet we don't see this ability used again...ever. The closest we see is with Leah Brahms.

Even if they were somehow able to replicate something, what makes you think they'd understand how it works? Being able to duplicate it on an atomic/subsatomic level doesn't mean they're going to have the slightest clue how to operate or repair something.

Well, that's true to a point, certainly true in the sense of repairing. That said one look at a blaster in SW and I defy anyone who claims that the hard part of reverse-engineering the technology will be to understand how to use it. Further, in the context of my proposition, we were dealing with objects that we have seen transported - phasers, people, SF-registered equipment, etc - and so understanding of the operating characteristics is something of a non-issue.

-AHMAD

[General Zod]

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again. The Enterprise shows that it is capable of producing a sentient hologram with the capability to outmaneuver the entire Enterprise crew and staff, and yet we don't see this ability used again...ever. The closest we see is with Leah Brahms.

In other words, they can't do it.

Well, that's true to a point, certainly true in the sense of repairing. That said one look at a blaster in SW and I defy anyone who claims that the hard part of reverse-engineering the technology will be to understand how to use it. Further, in the context of my proposition, we were dealing with objects that we have seen transported - phasers, people, SF-registered equipment, etc - and so understanding of the operating characteristics is something of a non-issue.

If they don't understand how to operate it what use will it be to replicate it even if by some miracle they can?

[Terralthra]

Don't forget the TOS split-Kirk. cf. The Enemy Within.

[Darth Servo]

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again.

Are you talking about the trick he used in 'Relics'? Whats the point of immortality if you only exist as bits in a computer, can't move around, can't experience all the things that make life worth living?

[Ryan Thunder]

What I don't understand is how they can reproduce a human with a transporter, but seem to use an entirely different technology for manufacturing. To make matters worse, its stupidly limited by comparison.

I can only remember one instance of them actually making another human, and that was a freak accident due to some weird planetary environment. (The Will Riker clone).

Ghetto edit: there's also the fact that the molecules that make up the human body are common virtually everywhere. Some funky unobtanium metal they wouldn't likely have extra components of on hand.

Yes, but they can transport said funky unobtanium metal, can't they? Would this not imply that the transporter must first destroy it and then recreate it at the receiving end?

[Ryan Thunder]

What I don't understand is how they can reproduce a human with a transporter, but seem to use an entirely different technology for manufacturing. To make matters worse, its stupidly limited by comparison.

I can only remember one instance of them actually making another human, and that was a freak accident due to some weird planetary environment. (The Will Riker clone).

That's not actually what I meant; any time they transport somebody, they're destroying them at one end and recreating them at the other. Which would imply by observation that they in fact do have the technology to create random shit like that.

Or have I missed something?

[General Zod]

Yes, but they can transport said funky unobtanium metal, can't they? Would this not imply that the transporter must first destroy it and then recreate it at the receiving end?

There have been instances of materials being unsuitable for transport due to their instability. So not everything can be beamed around.

That's not actually what I meant; any time they transport somebody, they're destroying them at one end and recreating them at the other. Which would imply by observation that they in fact do have the technology to create random shit like that.

Only if they have the raw materials on hand. If they lack the materials to replicate it they wouldn't be able to make any more than the original copy. Apparently it's also possible to store someone's entire consciousness and memories in their computers (DS9), but doing so takes massive amounts of space. So even if they feasibly cloned someone's body, copying their memory exactly should be difficult if not impossible for them to do.

[Ryan Thunder]

Ah, ok. I see.

[BountyHunterSAx]

Well, that's true to a point, certainly true in the sense of repairing. That said one look at a blaster in SW and I defy anyone who claims that the hard part of reverse-engineering the technology will be to understand how to use it. Further, in the context of my proposition, we were dealing with objects that we have seen transported - phasers, people, SF-registered equipment, etc - and so understanding of the operating characteristics is something of a non-issue.

If they don't understand how to operate it what use will it be to replicate it even if by some miracle they can?

No use at all. But the time it takes to learn to operate a user-friendly device like a blaster, lightsaber, phaser, etc; is significantly less than the time it takes to understand how to repair it or construct it from scratch.

-AHMAD

[Androsphinx]

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again.

Are you talking about the trick he used in 'Relics'? Whats the point of immortality if you only exist as bits in a computer, can't move around, can't experience all the things that make life worth living?

You mean, being put into storage? Trillians of people throughout the Culture.

[Androsphinx]

Edit: trillions. Trillians is from quite a different SF universe

[General Zod]

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again.

Are you talking about the trick he used in 'Relics'? Whats the point of immortality if you only exist as bits in a computer, can't move around, can't experience all the things that make life worth living?

You mean, being put into storage? Trillians of people throughout the Culture.

Too bad Star Trek technology isn't anywhere near Culture level yet.

[Androsphinx]

Too bad Star Trek technology isn't anywhere near Culture level yet.

I was just pointing out an example of a society where people are stored electronically as a life-style choice. It seems like a viable extrapolation from the principle Scotty used in Relics

[General Zod]

I was just pointing out an example of a society where people are stored electronically as a life-style choice. It seems like a viable extrapolation from the principle Scotty used in Relics

It's like comparing cavemen using slingshots to turbolasers in terms of technological scale.

[Batman]

Especially as that technology didn't work all that well (small wonder as Scotty had to MacGyver it on the fly)-Scotty was the ONLY survivor from that and apparently even HE wouldn't have lasted much longer if the E-D hadn't found him.

[Darth Servo]

Because SF brass are idiots. Seriously. Montgomery Scott comes up with a way for a person to indefinitely cheat death (ala cryogenics) and that jury-rig is never seen or heard from again.

Are you talking about the trick he used in 'Relics'? Whats the point of immortality if you only exist as bits in a computer, can't move around, can't experience all the things that make life worth living?

You mean, being put into storage? Trillians of people throughout the Culture.

The "Storage" is just to see what the future is like. During that time, they aren't "alive" in any true sense of the word. They even call it "suspended animation". Its like hitting the 'pause' button on your life. Notice, Scotty didn't experience the passage of time from his little stunt.

[BountyHunterSAx]

Especially as that technology didn't work all that well (small wonder as Scotty had to MacGyver it on the fly)-Scotty was the ONLY survivor from that and apparently even HE wouldn't have lasted much longer if the E-D hadn't found him.

Well; to be fair to Scotty - it held up for 75 years, and he was only 0.003% degraded. Since none of the other bridge-officers gave any indication that he was likely to deteriorate (read: die) any time soon I think give the miracle worker credit where it's due.

And Franklin only died because one of the emitters fried...he became 53% degraded; presumably 50% of that was due to a lost emitter. With a fully functional set of equipment in a non-crash landed ship I'm sure he could have done better. Certainly there's no reason given to assume that it *wouldn't* do better.

-AHMAD

[Batman]

Especially as that technology didn't work all that well (small wonder as Scotty had to MacGyver it on the fly)-Scotty was the ONLY survivor from that and apparently even HE wouldn't have lasted much longer if the E-D hadn't found him.

Well; to be fair to Scotty - it held up for 75 years, and he was only 0.003% degraded. Since none of the other bridge-officers gave any indication that he was likely to deteriorate (read: die) any time soon I think give the miracle worker credit where it's due.

I suggest you look up the meaning of 'indefinitely'.

And Franklin only died because one of the emitters fried...he became 53% degraded; presumably 50% of that was due to a lost emitter. With a fully functional set of equipment in a non-crash landed ship I'm sure he could have done better. Certainly there's no reason given to assume that it *wouldn't* do better.

Presumably because-you say so. Oh, and are you aware about how this place generally feels about you asking people to prove a negative?

[Darth Servo]

Well; to be fair to Scotty - it held up for 75 years, and he was only 0.003% degraded.

"Only" 0.003% degraded? You obviously have no clue how little the body can tollerate. Far less "degrading" of one's DNA can be quite fatal.

[Androsphinx]

Calm it guys! The question was asked about the theoretical utility of the theoretical application of a never-repeated ST technology! I never said that it was a "practical" or even "viable" technique.[/i]

[General Zod]

Calm it guys! The question was asked about the theoretical utility of the theoretical application of a never-repeated ST technology! I never said that it was a "practical" or even "viable" technique.[/i]

You know, it helps to at least not make such an obvious contradiction.

I was just pointing out an example of a society where people are stored electronically as a life-style choice. It seems like a viable extrapolation from the principle Scotty used in Relics