even a perfect steak by ANYONES definition is simply a quantifiable amount of protons, neutrons and electrons
But it more than that, an actual (not a substitute) steak is the flesh of the beast, it's muscle tissue. What come out of a replicator never itself came out of a cow.
But we have seen humans eat meat."
Riker: "You've seen something as fresh and tasty as meat.
In other words, not meat.
If replicators cant make a perfect a steak, then transporters cant make captain janeway or captain picard when they beam on and off the ship. There is no reason a replicator cannot make a precise copy of a master chefs scanned and encoded steak the same as picard or janeway on a transporter pad.
The thing is there is, the transporter doesn't "make" either Picard or Janeway when they are transported, it just move them from one place to another. Nothing is created or changed in a normal
Given all the tech we see. A replicator would only be as simple as the following.
Or this happens. Let's say you want a poached egg (my favorite kind), the replicator creates a yellow thick liquid inside of a cavity in a soft solid white substance, both of these (as close as possible) have the coloring, smell and flavor of a poached egg. There no attempt on the replicators part to create an actual cooked biological egg.
If you were to ask the replicator for a fertilized chicken egg, in the shell, and you then placed the egg in a warm environment for 21 day, guess what? It would not produce a chick, because it was never a real egg.
When it comes right down to it, the egg (and the steak) are fakes. For the purpose of providing a nutritious meal to the crew of a starship, the food doesn't have to be "real." Just recognizable, nutritious and edible.
Why take the enormous and unnecessary step of making a down to the subatomic level duplicate egg? What purpose would it serve?
From the "author's notes;" (7) As above, parecon (participatory economics) explains all the major clues we have about the Federation Economic system.
Except it doesn't, it's ignores dialog and situation that don't fit. Selling houses and buying tribbles.
How can you have an economic system where money/value "disappears" when it is spent? Where store owners receive no compensation for the items that come off their shelves, that they display, market and distribute?
Where everyone randomly rotates through administration and management positions? And then the next day works as a skilled craftsman? And the day after that works as a physical laborer?
The guy who wrote this paper seems overly in love with the terms (and concept of) "empowered" and "empowerment."
From the main article; Those unwilling found themselves having to participate in the restructuring or not get the needed resources to live with, and soon fell into line.
And here we see how a silly idea like "participatory economics" would come into existence following the third world war. Force and starvation.
I have trouble with the time line proposed in the article. That Zephram Cochrane would quickly morph into a some kind of world leader who organizes international conferences on global economics. From what we saw in First Contact, Cochrane would literally run away from such a activity and position. That a couple of men from a small farming commune would be able to force their way into a meeting of world leaders and basically take over the meeting. To have the leaders of major national powers hang on their every word as they described a system that would (among other things) strip the leaders of their power.
The secret service would have arrested these bozos prior to their getting through the outside doors.
How many of you on this board would want to depend on the largess of the people in your community for your house, food, transportation, education? I get along with my neighbors fairly well, but I don't want a committee deciding my diet for the next year. Nor do I want them informing me how much I'll "need" to work to be permitted stay in my home.
I figure these thing out for myself.