RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,505
Posts: 5,511,300
Members: 25,136
Currently online: 522
Newest member: aprizan

TrekToday headlines

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 28 2013, 05:37 AM   #16
Lt. Uhura-Brown
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: New Zealand
Re: Transporter beams itself?

25th Century internal transporter nodes.

Voyager must have decided to share some of the information they collected after returning to Federation Space.
Lt. Uhura-Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 05:43 AM   #17
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Christopher wrote: View Post
After all, consciousness is information as well, so the mind could be active within the beam just as it would if it were uploaded into a computer.

I never thought of that. After 47 years of Star Trek, it's not every day you get a new insight.
ZapBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 06:10 AM   #18
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

^Well, it's kind of necessary to rationalize idiocies like "Realm of Fear" and TWOK's scene of Saavik talking while half-dematerialized. I'd just as soon not have to deal with it.

Really, the whole idea of transporters is a mess. The original intention was that matter would be converted to energy and back again, ignoring what a vast amount of energy is contained in matter, with a single gram holding an amount comparable to the Hiroshima bomb; you'd essentially be firing a devastatingly intense energy pulse at a planet every time you beamed someone down. But the TNG-era technological retcon made it even worse in some ways, because of all the convoluted procedure of breaking matter down into particles, sending the particles through a subspace beam akin to a wormhole, then putting the particles back together again. Why not just make a bigger wormhole and send intact people and objects through? It would be so much simpler.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 07:47 AM   #19
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Agreed. Disassembling people is a bitch. And the real trouble comes when you try to beam a man back up. Before it even disassembles you, the machine would have to somehow detect the precise arrangement of all your atoms-- from hundreds of miles away. It's called the telescope problem, and would-be transporter inventers won't be solving it any time soon.
ZapBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 10:57 AM   #20
Tiberius
Commodore
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Christopher wrote: View Post
But the TNG-era technological retcon made it even worse in some ways, because of all the convoluted procedure of breaking matter down into particles, sending the particles through a subspace beam akin to a wormhole, then putting the particles back together again.
Where did this come from? And how is a subspace beam a wormhole?
Tiberius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 02:06 PM   #21
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: Transporter beams itself?

The show has mentioned a "matter stream" being involved in getting you from point A to point B.

I believe Christopher was using wormhole as a metaphor, your substance (regardless of it's exact form) is being sent though some kind of conduit to it's destination. Unlike Stargate's rings, the transporter isn't apparently moving you through normal space, there certainly isn't a visual energy beam briefly connecting the ship with the destination.


Merry Christmas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 03:22 PM   #22
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Tiberius wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
But the TNG-era technological retcon made it even worse in some ways, because of all the convoluted procedure of breaking matter down into particles, sending the particles through a subspace beam akin to a wormhole, then putting the particles back together again.
Where did this come from?
From Rick Sternbach and Michael Okuda, the technical advisors for TNG and its successors, in the technical notes they created for the production and eventually incorporated into the TNG Technical Manual. It was their attempt to find a more plausible interpretation of the dematerialization-based operation of the transporter. And it is more plausible in terms of raw physics than the old "matter to energy" idea, but it's far more convoluted from a practical standpoint. It would've ideally been preferable to abandon the dematerialization angle altogether, but they were stuck with it because TNG was treated as a continuation of TOS rather than a wholesale continuity reboot.

And how is a subspace beam a wormhole?
They're analogous because they both involve bypassing normal 3-dimensional space to transmit things through additional dimensions. The reason Sternbach & Okuda established that transporters operate through subspace was to explain how they could beam through solid matter, transporting people inside ships or buildings or into/out of caves underground. Their conclusion was that the beam bypassed normal space by passing through subspace. That's essentially what a wormhole does.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2013, 04:17 PM   #23
Phanton
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Phanton's Avatar
 
Location: Andromeda
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Christopher wrote: View Post
The absurdities of "Realm of Fear" notwithstanding, the matter stream is supposed to be the stream of particles that make up the subject, being transmitted through the transporter beam to the destination coordinates. It's literally a stream of matter -- your atoms are disassembled, turned into a stream which travels through subspace to the destination, and then reassembled into their original configuration. It's kind of like sending something through a very tiny wormhole only wide enough to fit individual subatomic particles rather than an intact person.

Essentially there are two key components transmitted through the beam. One is the matter stream, the actual raw material, and the other is the transporter pattern, the information describing how the particles go together to make a person or object, which is recorded when the transporter scans you. Now, in quantum physics terms, particles of the same type are identical and interchangeable; the thing that makes them individual is their particular state. So the information that defines you essentially is you in quantum terms. So in a sense, the real you is converted into the transporter pattern, an energy matrix in the beam which encodes that information. That would have to be the part that retains consciousness while the body is disassembled. After all, consciousness is information as well, so the mind could be active within the beam just as it would if it were uploaded into a computer. That's my take on what Barclay experienced in "Realm" -- that his mind perceived himself as still having a body because he was experiencing things from within the pattern that encoded all information about his body and mind simultaneously, so subjectively it felt to him as if he still had physical form. And when he sensed the others in the beam, his mind interpreted the sensation through sensory hallucinations.

It's still a dumb episode, but that's how I rationalize it.
I like your rationalization. I’ve been thinking re quantum superposition, entanglement and consciousness; Heisenberg Compensators to one side for now. Quantum energy described by Schrödinger’s wave function is forced to surf the subspace as a surfer rides an Ocean wave; just as the surfer doesn’t need to take his car and house on the surf board there may be no need to move the fermions and bosons so no massive release of energy their states spring back to a zero point in the Higgs field.

Maybe at the right frequencies energy can be extracted and used like replicators. So when materialisation reintroduces the wave function back into the Higgs field at the chosen three dimensional co-ordinates we just ‘pop’ into existence without the need for time delay or the sound effects. There may be no need to disassemble fermions.

I think from point of view of Schrödinger’s equation physical continuity in the matter stream for example Copenhagen interpretation (one of many theories to consider) might be reasonable assumption as all possibilities played out in the stream; physical energy interference patterns collapsing to determined state upon materialization means events might have substance.

Imho.
__________________
Make it so.
Trek Trance

Last edited by Phanton; December 28 2013 at 06:41 PM. Reason: Spelling
Phanton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 01:53 AM   #24
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Transporter beams itself?

Now explain to me in technical terms how the transporter splits you into good and evil halves.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 01:40 PM   #25
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Transporter beams itself?

I've taken a stab at this on a previous thread:

"Realm of Fear contradicts a lot of the pre-existing language relating to transporters but comes closer to explaining how transporters must work to avoid killing transportees IMO.

There must be a dimension outside time (per Relics) and space to which the transporter has access. The system scans and quantum links every atom in your body with energy from this dimension and the transporter switches those atoms with their quantum linked counterparts (not exactly quantum linking as we currently know it but some kind of futuristic equivalent). So the transporter's own power keeps the person in a dimensional pocket and the linked energy is kept in our dimension by the confinement beam. The energy then has to be transmitted to the desired location and when the confinement beam is removed the energy and the person snap back to where they should be but in the new location in our dimension.

Where I disagree is the allegation that transporting does no DNA damage. It absolutely should. No confinement beam is going to be 100% perfect and some of your information is going to leak away in transit - we have seen this to be a danger in many TNG era episodes. I personally think that replicators cannot replicate living material so no simple cloning machines will exist on starships. The reason for keeping a blueprint of the transportee in the pattern buffer is so that when you beam them back to the ship you can replicate a portion of their DNA that has been lost in the two transports. If the % of the pattern that has leaked away is too high then you end up with a poorly or dead person. It also explains the term, 'Boost your matter gain,' used by Rand, I think in TMP. If the links to the information get scrambled like in TMP you get a dead mess returning when the transportee snaps back in the wrong order.

This also covers things like good/evil Kirk or Thomas Riker where the transporter was somehow able to add 50%+ replicated material to the transportee and still have them live through outside intervention.

It also means that long distance transport is possible but only if you have a way to maintain a confinement beam to your destination without leaking too much information. My issue with NuTrek transporters is largely that I can't see how the long distance transports are supposed to work using standard 23rd century technology. A new algorithm can tell you mathematically what you need to do, I just don't see how it lets you maintain a confinement beam over such long distances let alone deposit you on a moving target 'safely' in the time it takes the transport to resolve.

The degree to which one remains conscious and/or able to interact while in the pocket dimension is open to debate. TWoK and Realm of Fear suggest that there is a threshold at which you can interact while being only partly in our dimension. I don't believe that Saavik was talking to Kirk in the transport beam, she was just continuing her conversation once she materialised sufficiently to allow her brain to continue performing the task it had started while in our dimension prior to dematerialising into the pocket dimension.

This system has a few nice story elements that could have kept Trek transporting reasonably elegant. It means one cannot transport too often since you run the risk of DNA damage from too much replicated matter building up in your system. It means you need a localised quantum scanner so no more beaming up without a communication device or locking on to enemies unless you have first 'tagged' them somehow. It means emergency transporters are less accurate and sacrifice a certain level of detail in order to get a lot of people off the ship safely, which has health implications."

So in answer to the thread title, a transporter cannot exactly transport itself unless there is a separate device that remains behind to maintain a confinement beam to the destination. The dimension is outside time and space. The issue is sending enough of the quantum-linked energy to the desired destination for enough of them to snap back in the correct order.

Of course if energy is being swapped for matter it doesn't really get over the matter to energy conversion ratio. Could halve the amount of energy required by using quantum computing?

It's not how transporters were ever really described but it's how I think they should have worked.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29 2013, 06:06 PM   #26
Phanton
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Phanton's Avatar
 
Location: Andromeda
Re: Transporter beams itself?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Now explain to me in technical terms how the transporter splits you into good and evil halves.
Copenhagen’s interpretation every possible universe that can exist does exist and is also fully played out until observed (maybe).

On the Subspace carrier wave (the Ocean wave the surfer rides) it is possible for more than one surfer to be on the same wave at the same time even if the waves were initially independent of each other later combining (increasing amplitude) might in some instances cause probability of surfer to tend to be on other board; causing in some instances the surfer to quantum mechanically tunnel to other surf board; non local relative effects from materialization might obey Pauli Exclusion Principle pushing future waves to opposite surf boards.

The surfers own wave function’s now exist on opposite surf boards, the wave energies could eventually separate with chance of being stuck on the surf board.

This all means the Heisenberg Compensators need an overhaul and subject to proper regular maintenance and the chances of tunnelling on an ‘evil selfie surfboard’ could probably be calculated with uncertainty equations accounting for all variables for there would be many.

Imho.
__________________
Make it so.
Trek Trance
Phanton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2013, 12:14 AM   #27
picardo
Lieutenant
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

In computer programming there's something known as the metadata, which is commonly defined as "data about data".

Thence I'd logically conclude that a transporter can beam itself, since this is explained by the metadata handling lesser units of data.
picardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2013, 01:12 AM   #28
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

picardo wrote: View Post
In computer programming there's something known as the metadata, which is commonly defined as "data about data".

Thence I'd logically conclude that a transporter can beam itself, since this is explained by the metadata handling lesser units of data.
But that's software. You still need intact hardware to run it on. How the hell can a dissociated cloud of atoms function as a transporter?
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2013, 03:48 AM   #29
Phanton
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Phanton's Avatar
 
Location: Andromeda
Re: Transporter beams itself?

picardo wrote: View Post
In computer programming there's something known as the metadata, which is commonly defined as "data about data".

Thence I'd logically conclude that a transporter can beam itself, since this is explained by the metadata handling lesser units of data.
Recursion is more aligned with this thread.

Christopher wrote: View Post
How the hell can a dissociated cloud of atoms function as a transporter?
Becuase the atoms are in a superposition of many possible states and entangled with each other therefore no reason to assume physical laws can't continue in the matter stream in a sense.
__________________
Make it so.
Trek Trance
Phanton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2013, 05:43 AM   #30
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Transporter beams itself?

I think Gödel's second incompleteness theorem rules out the possibility of a transporter beaming itself. A transporter needs to model and process the complete data about anything it transports, nothing left out, but Godel's theorem proves that no system can completely explain or encompass itself. It can only be completely modeled by a larger system that contains it.

And you seem to be saying the matter stream is a Bose-Einstein condensate, but that doesn't mean there's an intact machine in there somewhere. In order for something to function as an intact material object, it needs to have its particles correlated in a macroscopic, "classical" state wherein they're all physically connected into a solid. They need to be in certain positions to work; the particles of the focusing components have to be aligned so that they function as lenses, the particles of the current paths have to be aligned so that they can actually conduct electricity along a path, etc. There needs to be a single definite answer to where the bits go and how they interact in order for them to have a definite effect.

Physical laws apply everywhere, but they have to be directed in the right ways to get a desired effect. A huge pile of sawdust is subject to the same physical laws as a catapult made of the same amount of wood, but it's not going to be able to have the same effect, because it's not in a configuration that can exert or take advantage of physical laws in the right way.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
beaming, matter stream, nemesis, technology, transporter

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.