this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
23 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

453 readers
3 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll busmittions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissure Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"
01-24 Film "Section 31"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)


In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The Technical Manual explanation is not that replicators create matter out of pure energy - they are a type of transporter that dematerializes raw material and rematerializes it to match a molecular pattern. They are "matter-energy converters" only in the sense that the stream of particles during the materialization process could be called an energy stream.

These replicator system headends are located on Deck 12 in the Saucer Module [of the Enterprise-D] and on Deck 34 in the Engineering Section. These systems operate by using a phase-transition coil chamber in which a measured quantity of raw material is dematerialized in a manner similar to that of a standard transporter.

Instead of using a molecular imaging scanner to determine the patterns of the raw stock, however, a quantum geometry transformational matrix field is used to modify the matter stream to conform to a digitally stored molecular pattern matrix. The matter stream is then routed through a network of waveguide conduits that direct the signal to a replicator terminal at which the desired article is materialized within another phase transition chamber.

[–] data1701d@startrek.website 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Was about to cite TNG Tech Manual as well - although that also said that holodeck characters’ bodies were replicated meat puppets, which I think they didn’t stick with.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It thankfully stops short of "meat":

Such animated characters are composed of solid matter arranged by transporter-based replicators and manipulated by highly articulated computer-driven tractor beams. The results are exceptionally realistic "puppets," which exhibit behaviors almost exactly like those of living beings, depending on software limits.

Objects created on the Holodeck that are pure holographic images cannot be removed from the Holodeck, even if they appear to possess physical reality because of the focused forcebeam imagery. Objects created by replicator matter conversion do have physical reality and can indeed be removed from the Holodeck, even though they will no longer be under computer control.

Obviously, there is an inconsistency here, as we saw that later holographic characters could not be removed from the holodeck, and therefore must not have been replicated.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

IIRC there are 3 different methods seen for food creation in Star Trek.

Protein Resequencers (ST:ENT, ST:TOS): which presumably take stored amino acids and combined them with supplementary minerals and flavouring into nutritious cubes that look like marshmallows.

Matter Recombinators/Food Sythesizers (ST:TOS): capable of taking stored matter and producing 'simple' foodstuffs like drinks, iced cream, slabs of protein similar to chicken breast or steak, etc. I think these were sometimes called replicators but the distinction is the production is done elsewhere and the food delivered in seconds on request.

Replicators (ST:TNG +): I swear they described this as direct energy to matter conversion but I can't find the source for this. The seemingly ridiculous energy demands this requires can be justified by the fact they use matter+antimatter reactions for energy supply. A cup of water would take a cup of fuel give or take. (edit: To confuse the issue, it's also described in Discovery that waste matter is broken down and used for things like replication, but matter=energy so it is all the same in the end).

Transporters: it's been clear from the beginning the matter is being deconstructed into energy and sent to the destination where it is reconstructed using the original's pattern. The ethics of it are dubious because every time you see someone transport they are being literally killed in front of your eyes and a new copy created elsewhere.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So... and I'm in no way a Memory Alpha-level ST nerd, caveat lector:

  • transporters are matter-to-energy-to -matter transformers; which implies
  • they have both energy-to-matter conversion technology, and matter-to-energy technology; which means
  • assuming the conversion process itself isn't using vast quantities of energy, they could easily be turning energy into matter, and powering it with matter to energy, losing some energy in the conversion tax; which means
  • they may as well be turning humanoid waste into food

It would imply that transporter and replicator technology are, basically, the same thing.

However, there are cannon issues.

  • Even assuming metaphysics beyond what we know, they'd have to be violating the laws of thermodynamics to get more efficient energy production than matter-to-energy conversion. Which would make dilithium crystals and such less efficient than the technology they use to create food... so, why use it? Well, because
  • The conversion process isn't low cost. They can transport people, and produce from from energy, but it's a super-expensive process. Like, you lose 90% of your energy in the matter:energy:matter cycle, out something. Which would mean
  • Transporter technology isn't converting things to energy and back; it's using some cheat that does the same thing effectively, but with constraints, such as limits on how much you can alter the source object to destination object in the process; and getting pure energy out of matter is really lossy. But if you go from baseball to baseball, but in a different place, you avoid the energy penalty.

My head cannon is that this is how both replicators and transporters work. If you take a Riker and turn him into Riker somewhere else via a conversion loophole, it's pretty cheap. If you take a 236g of lead and turn it into a cup of Earl Grey (hot), it costs you some energy loss but you're using basically the same loophole. But if you try to turn Riker into pure energy to power the Enterprise because the warp core is offline, really you only get a couple of grams of usable energy because you can't use the loophole and most went into the conversion process -- which is why they still need an efficient fuel like dilithium.

Like, matter-to-energy requires antimatter, which is expensive to produce; but the loophole lets you skip over the antimatter part as long as, in the end, you have basically the same sort of matter.

[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
they may as well be turning humanoid waste into food

Yeah, they are. Waste matter is reclaimed as energy/supplies for food production

It would imply that transporter and replicator technology are, basically, the same thing. I agree. This is supported by replicators and transporters having a very similar special effect on the show.

they’d have to be violating the laws of thermodynamics to get more efficient energy production than matter-to-energy conversion. I don't follow here. Why do they 'have' to be? They could very well be spending more energy but the increased amount is 'trivial' from their perspective. This would not violate Thermodynamics.

Ah I think I see the confusion. They are using antimatter for energy creation. Energy to matter for transport or replication is 'paid' for by the matter to energy destruction of the og material (whether it be the transported individual, waste matter collected from the crew, equivalent amounts of reactor fuel, or some combination of these) and the excess cost of thermodynamics is paid for by the matter-antimatter reactions in the reactor.

Is the efficiency miraculous? Yes, ofc. Is it breaking thermodynamics? No. It's easy to see how they are paying for the excess costs with reactor fuel and that is without any hand-wavium of subspace or dilithium crystals being involved.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

Ah I think I see the confusion.

I was saying that there's nothing, within our current physics, that is not efficient than a matter/antimatter reaction. You get 100% of the energy. Whether or not it's useful energy is another question, and I'm doing some hand-waving around the topics of containment, manipulation, etc. However, nothing we know of is a more efficient use of matter to generate electricity. Not fission; not fusion; not radioactive decay. If we could wrap a black hole in a Dyson sphere and capture Hawking radiation, it'd still be less efficient than M/AM annihilation.

I was saying that - barring a magic technology such as capturing usable energy from quantum fluctuation, saying ST has a form of energy production that is a matter-based energy production that is more efficient than M/AM annihilation would violate our known laws of physics, because introducing a hydrogen atom to an anti-hydrogen atom is 100% efficient and costs nearly nothing to effect.

ST is full of magic technologies, and carrying around a bunch of AM as part of a way to play Mozart in the ready room is really dangerous, so - maybe they use it a bit, but they rely on more stable, less dangerous energy sources like dilithium. Anyway, trying to mix hard science and Star Trek is a dangerous endeavor. ST is more hard-sciency than the Space Wizards in Star Wars, but there's still a vast amount of speculation required to make things work.

[–] MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Admiral Vance:

"It's made of our shit, you know?"

[–] Jaccident@startrek.website 2 points 2 months ago

apple crunch “Tastes pretty good for shit.”

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 5 points 2 months ago

The replicators work very well, thank you.