View Single Post
Old May 20 2014, 05:54 PM   #20
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Transporters Vs. Hovercars

Timo wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Timo wrote: View Post
...Which is an artifact of the vehicle mode of operation.
No, it's a consequence of reality being largely inefficient for tasks that require pre-determined schedules. Like if you're helping your girlfriend move all of her furniture into storage but you can't get the loading done right away because the movers are still on the other side of town eating a pizza: you're waiting.
You are still thinking in antiquated vehicle terms.
No, I'm thinking in "Star Trek transporter" terms, which is not the "magic teleporter" concept you have somehow slipped into.

Transporters require a human operator to function, a fixed base station and hardware at a pre-determined location. For all non-emergency use, travel by transporter means going to a transporter pad, giving your destination to the transporter operator and having that transporter operator beam you to your destination. It is not even certain that civilian transporters (or civilian USE of transporters) can beam to random locations outside of their counterpart stations.

But let's concede a little bit of magic here: your movers ARE capable of beaming directly to the work site and not to the transporter station down the street. But instead of getting to the work site on time, they're at Sarpinos finishing a deep dish pizza and they are half an hour late. There is, incidentally, no transporter pad at Sarpinos, so they still have to walk down to Wells and Lake and use the transporter station there to beam to your house.

So you're waiting.

But not in a vehicle. You don't need one if you have a teleportation machine.
If you're sitting in the teleportation machine staking out the house, then the teleportation machine is a vehicle.

If you're sitting in the trasnporter system machine that is somewhere else other than the suspect's house, then you're not doing a stakeout, you're just backing up the person who IS.

The vehicle is outdated and becomes a liability in either scenario.
I'll again remind you this thread is about transporters vs. hovercars, not bicycles vs. Harry Potter. In which case, a suspect equipped with a hovercar would find it remarkably easy to evade a police force equipped only with transporters. If he escapes the initial assault, they have no means to pursue him once he gets to his car, and they cannot even force him OUT of his car once he's in it (unless you get John McClain to beam down on the roof of the hovercar and try to shoot it out with him in flight, but I digress...)

No. Your tool closet back at the shop is waiting.
What makes you think my shop is equipped with a transporter pad?

A "mobile closet" is a fairly idiotic idea, as it's unnecessary "tare hauling" where moving the Ding an sich would be the superior approach.
You have entirely ceased to talk about anything that anyone in this thread would recognize as a "transporter" in the context of Star Trek.

With real teleportation technology...
There's no such thing as "real teleportation technology" because such a thing is logically impossible in the first place.

We're discussing Star Trek transporters, which -- while also impossible -- have certain built-in limitations in the context of their fictional universe. This entire discussion is pretty meaningless without taking those constraints into account; it's like saying "What would you rather have: a car or a magic genie?"

Again, Star Trek is irrelevant to the case at hand
I think you're in the wrong thread, mate.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote