Replactiors: What is/isn't valuable?

[Darmalus]

For the purposes of this thread, replicators cannot make new atoms (aka cant take hydrogen and make carbon) or new molecules (take carbon and hydrogen and whatnot make new proteins). Replicators can't do chemistry, no reactions happen until it appears outside the replicator in the output slot. Replicators can make new intermolecular bonds and mix things around at will in whatever orientation desired.

With those limitations, what things would become cheap/common that are currently difficult or valuable to make? What would still be difficult? Assume normal manufacturing methods are needed to make the molecule stock (farming, chemical refineries, etc.).

[Crazedwraith]

From the rules you gave. I think you should be able to feed in any kind of carbon and get any kind out. So easy to make diamonds. Maybe carbon nanotubes?

[aussiemuscle308]

From the rules you gave. I think you should be able to feed in any kind of carbon and get any kind out. So easy to make diamonds. Maybe carbon nanotubes?

to which, diamonds become worthless and latinum becomes the new base value monetary exchange?

[SCRawl]

Just to go outside the discussion for a moment: your premise is flawed. The replicators have to be able to do chemistry, or else they'd have to draw upon stock tanks of thousands of different ingredients.

[Ted C]

Gotta agree with SCRawl. Replicators can apparently do limited chemistry, although they fail when "the molecules are too complex". What they can't do is elemental transmutation, fusing hydrogen to make carbon or the like.

[madd0ct0r]

well he also says they can make new intermolecular bonds - which IS chemistry.

confused here.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

The Wikipedia article describes Replicators as rearranging matter at the subatomic level, using 'bulk matter' to create required items. This is described as working on the same principle as the Transporter, except that Replicators store patterns only at the molecular rather than the quantum level, as storing patterns at the quantum level would require an impossible amount of data storage or a set of copies of the originals. This is also given as the reason why certain substances such as dilithium or latinum can't be replicated, as their 'quantum structures' are too complex. This is only an uncited theory though. The Memory Alpha article simply claims that Replicators rerarrange matter.

As I see it, it comes down to whether or not Replicators work at the atomic or subatomic level. If the former, they would require stocks of whatever elements they required, whereas in the latter case they could in theory make do with 'bulk matter', whatever that might be. I personally prefer the atomic method, as it offers a clear explanation as to why substances like latinum and dilithium can't be replicated; they are elements (the ST version of dilithium is described as such).

Even if it they only work at the atomic level, Replicators would completely change resource processing and manufacturing. With an industrial Replicator you could, in theory, put crude oil in one and end get plastic trinkets (or whatever else you're making) out the other. Drawing on Crazedwraith's example of turning carbon into diamonds, this might in theory render certain substances less valuable than before, but then again it might not. Because of its density and structure, it would take a hell of a lot more carbon to create diamond than to create graphite. Diamonds might therefore retain their scarcity value if the raw material and opportunity cost of making them in Replicators is just too high.

[Crazedwraith]

From the rules you gave. I think you should be able to feed in any kind of carbon and get any kind out. So easy to make diamonds. Maybe carbon nanotubes?

to which, diamonds become worthless and latinum becomes the new base value monetary exchange?

Indeed. Was that not what the OP was asking for?

With those limitations, what things would become cheap/common that are currently difficult or valuable to make? What would still be difficult? Assume normal manufacturing methods are needed to make the molecule stock (farming, chemical refineries, etc.).

But Diamonds are quite useful things, we might want to make for other reasons that just sticking in jewelry. Industrial cutting blades for example.

[Darmalus]

Oh wow, this old thread.

When I was talking about no chemistry but doing intermolecular bonds, I was talking about the replicator being able to turn plastic dust into a plastic spoon, but it can't turn the plastic into carbon dioxide and water or vice versa. If it can do unlimited chemistry, then why would you need to go to the horribly dressed planet of stereotypes for a vaccine? No doubt I was misusing terminology.

[Simon_Jester]

The limit could be complexity. Replicators might be able to replicate pretty much any crystalline structure you please, or make plastic from oil or ball bearings from piles of ore. But they might still fail when asked to make a 600-atom molecule for a vaccine, or at least fail to do so in a reasonable amount of time. Finding a place where it occurs naturally would kind of make sense.

This ties into the replicated food thing- it might be that replicators turn out most "food" as a rather generic-textured material, plus flavor molecules simple enough to duplicate, but can't match all the complex proteins and such that go into real food.

[Lord Garth, FOI]

Poo is most valuable
Recycled human waste is what is used to reform proteins and foodstuffs, that which can not be turned into food is used to manufacture building materials

This is known

[Baffalo]

Given your premise and the given, what you must then consider is that elements are valuable depending on quantity, compounds more so depending on the availability of the elements being used within them and the necessary pieces for it to work. For example, the replicator would need to create a heat source in order to take hydrogen and oxygen and burn it in order to produce water vapor, then cool it back down to form actual liquid water. On the flip side of that, it would need to take pools of water and feed electricity into it to cause separation of hydrogen and oxygen in water.

Regardless of how you want to think of it, breaking apart compounds can be either complicated or extremely easy. Catalysts make the work easier but trying to combine them can also be a pain in the ass. Creating diamond from pure carbon sounds nice in theory, but you can't simply put one carbon atom next to another and tell them, "Congrats, you're now diamond." Food and drinks are one thing, but I imagine actual industrial replicators contain parts that we haven't seen, since they are generally considered not only larger but also able to produce more and in bulk. If that's the case, there might be tools and functions within the industrial replicators that allow them to, in a sense, fabricate the atomic structures that would otherwise be unavailable to the average replicator.