syn@uo-vax3.UUCP (syn) (04/17/85)
But there is more to it than tachyons. Think about it. The transporter is a device that records information, destroys the original, constructs a copy. I support the notion that the Enterprise larder stocks one steak one egg, one eggroll, six jellybeans in various flavors, and simply reconstructs from the original recording. Obviously in such a case it would be inhumane to send those red shirts into life-threatening situations, let them get killed, and refuse to warm up another "copy". The crime of murder, then would not lie in wiping out the original, or a reproduction, but in erasing the record. A realistic extrapolation from the existance of the transporter is that everyone is immortal until their recording of choice is destroyed. I, for instance, would like to integrate my 1976 body with my present memories....
adolph@ssc-vax.UUCP (Mark Adolph) (04/22/85)
*** YOUR MESSAGE *** An interesting treatment of this sort of problem (creating multiple copies of folks) can be found in the Star Trek novel "The Price of the Phoenix" and its sequel, "The Fate of the Phoenix", which I'm reading now. The "Phoenix" referred to in the title is none other than a copy of Kirk. It's interesting if you'd like one authors ideas about having two actual Kirks in the same universe. -- Mark A. ...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!adolph "When a fly lands on the ceiling, does it do a half roll or a half loop?"
ccs020@ucdavis.UUCP (Kevin Chu) (04/23/85)
[]
The discussions on transporters should be moved to the heading
of "Inconsistancies." I think that the transporter was used more
as a Deus Ex Machina (so I flunked Latin) in that it was used to
solve script problems.
The only concept of the transporter that stays consistant with each
episode and the movies is that someone says "energize."
Other than that, the properties of the transporter seem to just
fit the script.
Consider this list of transporter capabilities:
o Convert living matter into enery, move it through space and
other matter, then reconstruct it exactely as before and
still keep the "life force."
o Split the human persona into two parts, and produce two human
bodies to put them into. Thus, creating twice as much mass
from which it started with. (I believe this violates one of
those "conservation of mass and enery" laws they teach here
at Davis.)
o Create a passage way into a mirror universe. Just add a small
ion storm.
o Always break down in a crisis. Have the transportees fade in
the fade out again, then with alot click a whirrs, rematerialize
the party without *any* harm, even though the transporter core
was melting down during it all. (Makes you wish you had a disk
drive that could spit out flawless info while breaking down.)
All in all, net.startrek has put in more thought about the transporter
than Gene Rodenberry and Co. ever did, and we have probably given it
much more time and thought than it deserves, I know I have.
Kevin Chu
...!ucbvax!ucdavis!vega!ccs020
Director to James Doohan:
"Just play with the switches and look like you know what you're doing!"
/exccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli @ UC Davis, Davis, CA) (04/23/85)
> > [] > The discussions on transporters should be moved to the heading > of "Inconsistancies." I think that the transporter was used more > as a Deus Ex Machina (so I flunked Latin) in that it was used to > solve script problems. > > The only concept of the transporter that stays consistant with each > episode and the movies is that someone says "energize." > Other than that, the properties of the transporter seem to just > fit the script. > > Consider this list of transporter capabilities: > ... Yep. I always thought that in Spock's Brain (my least favorite episode) they should have had Scotty use the transporter to beam the brain back into Spock's head rather than have McCoy perform the amazingly unrealistic task of reconnecting the neurons on a trial- and-error basis. -- --rick heli (... ucbvax!ucdavis!groucho:ccrrick)
li63sdl@sdcc7.UUCP (DAVID SMITH) (04/28/85)
In article <123@ucdavis.UUCP> ccs020@ucdavis.UUCP (Kevin Chu) writes: > > o Split the human persona into two parts, and produce two human > bodies to put them into. Thus, creating twice as much mass > from which it started with. (I believe this violates one of > those "conservation of mass and enery" laws they teach here > at Davis.) > Kevin Chu > ...!ucbvax!ucdavis!vega!ccs020 > > OK, splitting the human persona is a bit tricky, I'll admit, but creating another body is just a case of feeding enough energy into the bugger to create the extra 150 pounds or so of matter. A hell of a lot, I'll admit, but how much does the Big E put outr anyway? I never have heard teh specs on them warp engines -- ============= David Smith UC Sandy Eggo {ucbvax ihnp4} sdcsvax!sdcc7!li63sdl SHIFT TO THE LEFT, SHIFT TO THE RIGHT, MASK IN, MASK OUT, BYTE, BYTE, BYTE!!!!
mark@nvuxb.UUCP (M Friedman) (05/01/85)
Believe it or not the idea of a transporter is not a far fetched. The whole concept of the transportr works on the scrambling of one's atom's and the unscrambling of the atom's back to its original form. Today we have atom splitters, who knows maybe the transporter is a idea in the works. By the way has anybody noticed, a lot of inventions from startrek are in operation today. For example, the little video disks, laser weapons, etc. -- ********************** `'`'`'`'`'` * Back to the * suicide is punishable ` 0 ' * hole in the wall * >--------------------> ' '|` ` ************************* by the death penalty ` `|' ' Mark Friedman ' _/ \_ ` Bell Labs, Red Bank NJ '`'`'`'`'`' 758 - 2621
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (05/03/85)
>From: ry@brunix.UUCP (Rich Yampell) >Organization: Brown University Computer Science >Message-ID: <10424@brunix.UUCP> > >What of the mind and body? While it would be nice to suppose that the >body/mind does not function in such a state, there is evidence to the >opposite. In the episode entitled (I believe) "Mirror Mirror" [the >one with the alternate universe, where Spock has a beard], Kirk is >discussing where they are and how they got there with the rest of the >landing party [Uhura, Scotty, McCoy], and he talks about thoughts and >perceptions _during_ the transport process. He remembers first seeing >the normal Enterprise transporter room, and then materializing in the >alternate one. I don't remember all the details of what was said, but >it was clear that people in transport are concious of the experience. It could be a function of how far the person is "rematerialized". In any episode where there is a transporter malfunction, you usually see the person flicker in and out. It may be that once you materialized to a certain point, you become conscious of your new surroundings. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: "Oh sair, it was Kahn. We found him in an unlinked inode. He put creatures in our bodies... made us post lies, say things, flame things, but keptin was strong..."
rob@osiris.UUCP (Robert St. Amant) (05/07/85)
References: There is a philosophical question about transporters. It first came up in a discussion about immortality in the way of Zelazny's Lord of Light, and Niven's Rammer stuff. The deal is (as I'm sure you all know) that the electrical and chemical patterns of an old body and mind are transferred to a young, virile, etc. body. The sensation is that of going to sleep and waking up in a new body, or at least leaving consciousness in one place and regaining it in another. Now, to the transporter. Objectively, you have a body broken down into energy, beamed somewhere, and reconstructed (right.) Is it the same person? It can't be the same as falling asleep and waking up. We can say this because a recording can be made. If two copies are made, do they share the same consciousness? No, at least according to some episode the name of which I forget. So, anyway, is the id transferred as well as the body? Is the Kirk that beams down the same Kirk that beams up? Does anyone care? Rob St. Amant ps. May the wrath of the Great Bird of the Galaxy fall upon anyone who responds to this posting with a simple "no."
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (05/10/85)
> Believe it or not the idea of a transporter is not a far fetched. > The whole concept of the transportr works on the scrambling of > one's atom's and the unscrambling of the atom's back to its original > form. Today we have atom splitters, who knows maybe the transporter is > a idea in the works. > > By the way has anybody noticed, a lot of inventions from startrek are in > operation today. For example, the little video disks, laser weapons, etc. > > -- > ********************** `'`'`'`'`'` > * Back to the * suicide is punishable ` 0 ' > * hole in the wall * >--------------------> ' '|` ` > ************************* by the death penalty ` `|' ' > Mark Friedman ' _/ \_ ` > Bell Labs, Red Bank NJ '`'`'`'`'`' > 758 - 2621 *** THIS LINE IS INSANITY *** It is along way till the Enterprise will be in its heyday, in the meantime: Remember THE FLY jeanette zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie
ugzannin@sunybcs.UUCP (Adrian Zannin) (05/13/85)
> Now, to the transporter. > > Objectively, you have a body broken down into energy, beamed somewhere, > and reconstructed (right.) Is it the same person? It can't be the > same as falling asleep and waking up. We can say this because a > recording can be made. If two copies are made, do they share the same > consciousness? No, at least according to some episode the name of which > I forget. So, anyway, is the id transferred as well as the body? Is the > Kirk that beams down the same Kirk that beams up? Does anyone care? > > Rob St. Amant > > ps. May the wrath of the Great Bird of the Galaxy fall upon anyone > who responds to this posting with a simple "no." no. -- Adrian Zannin ..{burdvax,rocksvax,bbncca,decvax,dual,rocksanne,watmath}!sunybcs!ugzannin BITNET: CS24173@SUNYABVA
cef@cmu-cs-spice.ARPA (06/15/85)
I don't remember which episode it was, but I disticntly remember somebody remarking to Spock that they enjoyed reading one of his many papers. The one they mentioned was said to have been instrumental in Star Fleet's development of the equipment. ~The interstellar clam. ! Live long and prosper. ! ! Don't let the Denebian Slime Devils bite!