Problem with AUTHOR notes ...is that startrek retcons itself on every occasion possible. I go with the scientificly plausible and the technical manuals ..not the author notes
Replicators working by transforming energy into matter is 'scientifically plausible' for you?
You're far from Physicists or chemists or biologists yourself, Photonic:
PS - Transforming a person into energy=a large yield atomic explosion.
And you clearly do not 1. apply the fundamentals of your studies to their absolutes. 2. Apply them to broader models than what you earned your degree in and 3. think outside the box. We can only go on WHAT is most "copy and paste" to our best physics knowledge, and that is that transporters and replicators ...are stated to convert energy to mass and vice versa. Perhaps via some means we do not understand. And reassembling them in a variety of forms. Again, startrek retcons itself on countless occasions ..the barkley episode about transporter phobia is one of them.
lets have a one on one. We can eliminate the disparities in our language and come to a common understanding I am sure. We already KNOW mass and energy are interchangeable. You come off like some first year student in physics who assumes converting mass/energy equals energy release. This does not have to be the case and someone I believe already addressed this issue. If you can further convert and preserve the EM emissions to something that can be transmitted..which is at yet ..unknown ...why should mass be lost? ahh ..the laws of thermodynamics. But what if you could also replicate the same em emissions from the transporter hardware to replace the energy lost in the interactions such that it would be the same or at least similar to the original product.
This is why I do not agree with transporter technology as depicted in startrek. You are indeed not preserving quantum states ..but thats was never implied in the show. As far as I am concerned ...it is a copy, while it might be atomically perfect . The only method of teleportation i subscribe to would be multi dimensional transferrance. It would be far easier to accept based on occams razor (which actually means ..."explanations should be KEPT simple ..until we can aquire the increased explanatory power" it is commonly misinterpreted). That if indeed the person was "transported" they took a multidimensional path to get there. As with warp fields bending space time, being able to access higher dimensions where space can exist in multiple configurations and you may choose the right one ...is more plausible than converting mass/energy and preserving its quantum state.
So you are right in your questioning of my opinion, but you dont know how deep it goes. Keep trying