rmz@ihu1e.UUCP (robert m. zieman) (04/12/85)
*** BEAM THIS LINE UP SCOTTY *** If Mr. Scott can beam someone from one place on a planet to another place, why can't Kirk and Spock (or anyone for that matter) be beamed directly from the bridge to their destination?
gts@wjh12.UUCP (G. T. Samson) (04/16/85)
> *** BEAM THIS LINE UP SCOTTY *** > If Mr. Scott can beam someone from one place on a planet to another > place, why can't Kirk and Spock (or anyone for that matter) be beamed > directly from the bridge to their destination? I think it has something to do with the fact that to beam someone from one place to another, this someone has to first be beamed to the transporter room, and thence to his/her destination. In "Day of the Dove" (I *think* that's the title), Kirk uses intraship beaming to get himself sent to a part of the Enterprise that they can't reach because Klingons control the turbolifts and some very inconveniently-placed bulkheads have closed; he mentions that it's very dangerous... The danger involved may be because transporters are better at beaming things from their "starting point" to a fixed destination; therefore, it would be dangerous to try to pluck Kirk and Spock off the Bridge, beam them to the transporter room, and then to their destination. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: G. T. Samson Quote: "No matter where you go...there you are." -- B. Banzai Other_Quote: "You speak treason!" "Fluently!" -- The Doctor ARPA: gts@wjh12 [preferred] OR samson%h-sc4@harvard USMail: Lowell H-41, Harvard U., Cambridge, MA 02138
schuster@Shasta.ARPA (04/17/85)
> If Mr. Scott can beam someone from one place on a planet to another > place, why can't Kirk and Spock (or anyone for that matter) be beamed > directly from the bridge to their destination? Even more importantly, something that was discussed in a Larry Niven short story: If a "bad" element got a hold of a transporter, what would prevent them from stealing things from behind locked doors (since no transmitter is needed) or from placing bombs behind said locked doors (since no receiver is needed either)? The premise in the short story was that if it was not true that both a transmitter and a receiver were needed society would decay to the point where transporters were no longer possible (with the current technology). Imagine a terrorist with a startrek type transporter. Even in a couple episodes they have stolen people off of other people's ships, and planted tribbles on a Klingon vessel (Klingons have vessels not ships?) -- Jay Schuster schuster@su-pescadero.arpa ...!decvax!decwrl!shasta!schuster
her3@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Benjamin Andrew Herman) (04/30/85)
addressing soly the problem of the transporter inconsistencies and why not
transport from anywhere on the ship... namely why have a transporter room.
There seems to be many problems with using the transporter. Scottie complains
to the good captain that to transport him on the ship itself there are great co
mplications (he may be transported into a wall without the precise coordinates).
< I hate to mention this but > those of you who are familair with Dr. Who may
remember that he had a similar trouble transporting the tardis on "these short
hops".
The question also arises ...." how are the coordinates arrived at? "
As we all know the teleporter has a limited range.... does the teleporter use
the enterprise as (0,0,0) and remaps the sector they are entering or is all of s
pace mapped and the teleporter can attempt to teleport across the universe but
just looses the person at the end of the range??????
any suggestions -- your all better read than I am..
Drew Herman
silly quote
the greater part of the public professors have, for these many years, given up
altogether the pretence of teaching.--Adam Smith 'Father of Capitalism'maurice@nmtvax.UUCP (05/03/85)
>There seems to be many problems with using the transporter. Scottie complains >to the good captain that to transport him on the ship itself there are great >complications (he may be transported into a wall without the precise coordinat es). If that is such a problem at close range, then why do they always get beamed onto the surface of a planet exactly (not knee deep or midair)? The distance to the planet is on the order of several thousand kilometers whereas the starship is only several hundred meters at most. If accuracy is the question, shouldn't it be better closer in? They have a better knowledge of the ships layout where the walls are. If they can find a good place to park them on the planet (or a cavern deep inside a planet (ST:TWOK)) when they beam them, they why should a starship they are on be so hard? Roger Levasseur
ugzannin@sunybcs.UUCP (Adrian Zannin) (05/05/85)
> The question also arises ...." how are the coordinates arrived at? " > As we all know the teleporter has a limited range.... does the teleporter use > the enterprise as (0,0,0) and remaps the sector they are entering or is all of s > pace mapped and the teleporter can attempt to teleport across the universe but > just looses the person at the end of the range?????? > any suggestions -- your all better read than I am.. > > Drew Herman I would think that they would use the Enterprise (actually some point in the transparter chamber) as the point (0,0,0). If you go by the asumption that all of space is mapped, that would mean that they couldn't use the transporter in regions of space that have never been charted before. Anyone agree/disagree? -- Adrian Zannin ..{burdvax,rocksvax,bbncca,decvax,dual,rocksanne,watmath}!sunybcs!ugzannin BITNET: CS24173@SUNYABVA
guads@nmtvax.UUCP (05/08/85)
In article <> ugzannin@sunybcs.UUCP (Adrian Zannin) writes: > I would think that they would use the Enterprise (actually some point in >the transparter chamber) as the point (0,0,0). If you go by the asumption >that all of space is mapped, that would mean that they couldn't use the >transporter in regions of space that have never been charted before. >Anyone agree/disagree? > > Adrian Zannin Why wouldn't they be able to use it in uncharted space? Coordinates are based on distance from the origin (0,0,0), so what has this to do with being able to transport or not? Just punch in each respective "distance" (x,y,z) from the transporter platform and zip 'em off! Of course, they would have to know the distance to the beam-down point, but that could be taken care of with short-range sensors... -- -Lautzy (Romulan) ...unmvax!nmtvax!guads
ry@brunix.UUCP (Rich Yampell) (05/08/85)
In article <1646@sunybcs.UUCP> ugzannin@sunybcs.UUCP (Adrian Zannin) writes: >> The question also arises ...." how are the coordinates arrived at? " > I would think that they would use the Enterprise (actually some point in >the transparter chamber) as the point (0,0,0). If you go by the asumption >that all of space is mapped, that would mean that they couldn't use the >transporter in regions of space that have never been charted before. >Anyone agree/disagree? > On the other hand, if they used the enterprise, or some point therein, as (0,0,0), then the coordinate of any given beam-down point is constantly changing as the enterprise moves. That would mean, for example, that you could only beam down to a planet if the ship were in a perfectly synchronized orbit, or some such thing. Off the top of my head, I suggest another alternative (there are always alternatives). Perhaps (0,0,0) is selected for any given context by a set of standard conventions. For example, while orbiting a planet, the exact center of the planet is chosen as (0,0,0). In other words, pick something which is *relatively* stable vis-a-vis position, and make that (0,0,0). That would explain the difficulties in intra-ship beaming, since if the ship is both source and destination, and is moving at high speed, there is no relatively stable reference point. And then, in retort to any attempts to say that they could compensate since they know how fast they are going, or some such thing, I would answer, "yeah, but that's a special case, and when the starfleet hackers put together the programs for the transporter, they never thought of it, so you have to take your chances with the existing code and hope it gets it right (the chances of which are vastly improved if the camera is watching; even though its supposed to be dangerous, we've never actually seen it fail)" rich yampell