View Single Post
Old September 8 2008, 10:10 AM   #29
Re: First Replicator Usage?

The series and movies gave me the impression that it used a lot of power - slow, big light changes, 'transporter power is down to minimal!' lines and all the transporter malfunction episodes.
Then again, a starship would have power to burn, and it wouldn't make any real sense to try and save it pennywise when the warp engine already burns it poundfoolish.

And transporters don't seem to require that much power: they are available aboard small craft, they can be operated even by badly battle-damaged ships like the Enterprise and Reliant in ST2, and it seems Rona Dagar manages to activate one by using the batteries of a hand phaser in TNG "The Hunted"...

If the mess is on 7 or 8, and the food prep center is on 7 or 8, and the transporter is on 7 or 8... -it might not be that big of a deal. I do like the 'dumbwaiter' vending machine idea, too, for remote areas of the ship (on call engineering break areas). Those things could be easily re-supplied via carts.
That would work. Building dumbwaiter chutes to distant random locations would not. Whether transporter rooms count as "distant random" is arguable - they don't strike me as locations sorely in need of food slots, really, so I'd infer from the presence of a slot there that other, more deserving locations such as high-end crew cabins are also being supplied.

Not that we'd ever have seen a food slot in a crew cabin, of course. And in, say, "Enemy Within", "Obsession" and "Amok Time", the bringing of food to a cabin (in the latter case, to a definite high-end cabin of a top officer) furthered the plot... But of course people still bring bottles and other presents to each other in the TNG era where replicators are everywhere.

Saying Transporter = Replicator, to me, is like saying 'Celluloid Film Projection = Interactive Movie, afterall they're both moving pictures on a screen'.
Indeed. Which is why Janeway might refuse to call the TOS era replicators by the name "replicator", because they represent a significantly more primitive and limiting version of the basic technology.

Maybe the 23rd century transporter is an 'analog' technology and is 'digital' in the 24th? It seems to me that some kind of breakthrough happened that allowed practical replication.
Said breakthrough didn't seem to affect the workings of transporters themselves much, tho. Perhaps the TOS versions didn't have biofilters or comparable manipulators, since none were mentioned, but otherwise we're hard pressed to see a difference.

And as many have pointed out, both the TOS and TNG transporters were able to duplicate the objects being transported, in some "fault situations". The creation of an object out of nothingness, or out of a weeks-old pattern, didn't appear to be an option when using the basic transporters of either era, though - only "simultaneous" duplicates were allowed.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote