# Theory on money in the 24th century

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by hxclespaulplayer, Jan 25, 2013.

1. ### NightdiamondFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Feb 18, 2009
Location:
California
There's an argument that the transported person is just a copy. Since the original pattern was dissolved and turned into computer data, and then reformed based on that data.

I'm no physicist at all, so I'll take a shot at a theory on this.

I'll assume that the atomic levels carries the properties of the quantum by default, so if you replicate the atoms of a yolk and shell in a specific pattern, you'll get the quantum properties of that yolk and shell automatically.

You should get an egg about as real as the original with all its properties.

If the pattern in the replicator was based on an original object that was scanned into the computer, then when that pattern replicated, it should replicate the eggs with much more of it qualities than Trek sometimes claim.

The only way I can see a steak not tasting like steak, is if the replicator replicates a couple of 'wrong' molecules in it

Or if the atoms that are replicated are some weird type of empty atoms that affect the quality of taste and texture.

2. ### PhotonicEnsignNewbie

Joined:
Jan 25, 2013
its ok. Its clear quite a few folks are far from Physicists or chemists or biologists.

And actually transporters destroy matter, convert it into energy, according to E=MC2 this mass is preserved as an equal conversion. This energy is used to REFORM matter at the destination from raw energy. converting energy back into mass particles. You cannot move matter close to C through space without a warp field. You get around this by converting the mass to energy. The simplest example is antimatter annihilation. You take the complete mass of the object and convert it into its constituant parts (pure energy , no protons or neutrons or electrons just pure EM emissions). If you took hydrogen, and anti hydrogen which equals 1 proton 1 neutron 1 electron and 1 antiproton 1 neutron and 1 positron you would get 0 protons 0 electrons 0 positrons and 0 anti protons and instead get a massive amount of EM radiation. So energy IS matter, and matter IS energy...in a certain form. Startrek DID get this part right ....

Transporters are stated on many occasions to borrow from this idea , converting mass to energy, and converting energy back into mass. For this to work it would imply sensor and computer capacity and modulation from the hardware sophisticated enough to direct these converstions on a nano scale. Which is what the transporters do.

It is also clearly stated several times in canon and in the manuals replicators DO function based on transporter technology. They use raw materials, and using transporter technology reengineer it on a nano scale. "flesh from a cow" has quantifiable properties, it has atoms in certain locations. These can be duplicated if you have the scanning resolution ...and ....a transporter.

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

3. ### Edit_XYZFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Sep 30, 2011
Location:
At star's end.
Replicators working by transforming energy into matter is 'scientifically plausible' for you?

You're far from Physicists or chemists or biologists yourself, Photonic:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?...&postcount=130

PS - Transforming a person into energy=a large yield atomic explosion.

Last edited: Jan 29, 2013
4. ### Edit_XYZFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Sep 30, 2011
Location:
At star's end.
No they don't.
You can't create an exact copy of quantum information under any circumstances without destroying the original (google no cloning theorem).

You do not seem to understand how informationally complex living systems are.
There's a HUGE difference between the bare ingredients and a living tissue made of them.

Last edited: Jan 29, 2013
5. ### cgervasiLieutenant CommanderRed Shirt

Joined:
Dec 10, 2006
Location:
Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

I recently finished Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. It predicts that replicator-like technology is coming soon. People feel compelled to create open-source parts that can be shared and replicated on the Internet. The value of manufactured goods is already decreasing. This will continue as people manufacture open-source parts they share over the Internet, similar to how personal Youtube videos (provided for free as a labor of love) have replaced some commercial TV viewing.

I don't know if this is true, but I could see elements of it happening and realizing some of the Star Trek economy. Maybe all the cost to produce goods by replicator is trifling, like the cost of water from a bubbler. Maybe the patterns, designs, and software are produced as a labor of love and for recognition as an expert in the field.

I don't know if this could work because it seems like eventually there would be some things that are scarce, esp things that require someone else's time.

It requires stretching my imagination, but I can imagine people ordering dinner the way we stop by a bubbler in the park. If they want something special, they go to a place like Sisko's father's restaurant where you give them respect and publicity for providing something special.

Another book to check out in the vein is Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. It provides cases where paying people paradoxically makes a task a chore and not paying them makes it a fun game that they are inclined to work harder at.

I am not predicting a future with a Star Trek economy. Based on what I've seen with open-source hardware and software in the past few years, though, it's much easier to suspend belief when Star Trek economics comes up.

Joined:
Aug 20, 2009
Location:
T'Girl
Re: Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

The problem I've always had with this argument is the Federation at least is supposed to possess a high ethical code, but you are still going to step into a machine that ends your personal existence? Even if an exact copy of you is created at the far end of the process, you are still gone. You're dead.

I don't see it. Yes, select individuals might have a fatalistic philosphy on the matter, they don't believe in the personal self. But we seen many people on the various show who display a reverence for life, they mourn the passing of others, and will fight to preserve their own life's and personal survival.

These people Nightdiamond are not going to step into the transporter you describe.

The transporter would seem to change the "transportee" into some kind of energy state, but not destroy the orginal matter in favor of energy. We know from Kirk and Saavik conversation, and Barkley's personal experience that people being transporter remain conscious and aware, and are capable of movement in the matter stream. We've seen many examples of people materializing in different positions than they were in when they dematerialized.

While you are in an energy state, you remain (in some fashion) a person the entire time. You never cease to exist.

That goes beyond converting into energy, that also involves then releasing the energy. There no evidence that a person's mass/energy is being release during transport.

Excuse me?

7. ### Edit_XYZFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Sep 30, 2011
Location:
At star's end.
Re: Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

T'Girl, there does NOT exist a magical energy form (EM radiation, kinetic, etc, etc) that does not explode into an atomic explosion if there is enough of it concentrated to equate to 90 kg worth of matter.
Unless you view matter as energy in the first place, that is. In which case, matter is the only exception.

8. ### PhotonicEnsignNewbie

Joined:
Jan 25, 2013

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

Last edited: Jan 29, 2013
9. ### Edit_XYZFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Sep 30, 2011
Location:
At star's end.
I think outside the box just fine. It's just that I keep track of certain fundamental principles while doing so - you know, conservation of energy, thermodynamics, that kind of stuff.

I already said enough to demonstrate the matter/energy scheme for replicators/transporters is absurd - in light of fundamental scientific principles. I won't repeat myself again.
If teleportation/replication will ever be invented, they won't be using such means.

"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."
Because what comes out of the transporter would be either a failed genetic experiment of a Bizzaro 'copy' of the person that came in.
Of course, there are tons of gigantic problems before you arrive at this one (how do you convert mass in energy - what king of energy, for that matter; how do you keep that energy from exploding/radiating; etc, etc).

"are stated to convert energy to mass and vice versa. Perhaps via some means we do not understand."
"The only method of teleportation i subscribe to would be multi dimensional transferrance."
"higher dimensions where space can exist in multiple configurations and you may choose the right one "
Photonic, you should skip all this technobabble and name these concepts for what they are - magic/fantasy.
The concepts you're using are from fuzzy pseudo-physics. And, despite what you think, they don't make your ideas more credible.

10. ### NightdiamondFleet CaptainFleet Captain

Joined:
Feb 18, 2009
Location:
California
Not according to Riker and Data when they talk about replicators and transporters;.

And yet these are the same types that claim a food product from the replicator doesn't taste the same as the original-or that the replicator can't recreate certain items.

That's just thing. the main goal we're going for is to replicate a steak that taste like the real thing, which some characters in the Trek universe claim the replicators can't do.

Why not scan an actual steak cut from a muscle? True, it's not a living muscle, it's not simple either, but the show itself suggests It can be done--it should be done on a regular basis.

Exactly- The show itself confirms it, and there are probably a gazillion other statements about it.

Riker connects transporters, replication and the product's qualities all together.

Supposedly, one reason why people do strange things for money in the 24th century when they have replicators is--the real thing tastes, feels, looks so much better.

And the replicators supposedly can't make it like the original.

So it has more value, and people work, otherwise--some of it doesn't make any since when you see jobs people are doing that they hate and stresses them out, but they need the money..

Kassidy Yates works a grueling schedule, and later risks going to prison but it looks like shes does it because she likes money and needs it, even though she knows what a replicator is.

11. ### cgervasiLieutenant CommanderRed Shirt

Joined:
Dec 10, 2006
Location:
Re: Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

I think you're just teasing, but what I'm saying is YouTube videos, blogs, encyclopedia articles, and other digital content are provided for free. Most solid goods are not, except for things of little value like water from a drinking fountain. There is a possibility in the near future some planes for physical goods will be shared freely like YouTube videos and manufactured on inexpensive desktop mfg machines. In the more distance future, maybe that makerbots will become Star Trek replicators. If the replicators are cheap, an economy of physical goods could come to look like the economy for Wikipedia articles. The Star Trek economy looks more plausible than ever.

Joined:
Aug 20, 2009
Location:
T'Girl
Re: Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

Youtube last year made about three and a half billion dollars in advertising revenues. Every time you glance at a advertisment there, you are "paying" to use the site. When you use a public water fountain (I'm guessing that what you meant) the price of that water and the operation cost of the fountain is coming out of your (or someone's) taxes, the water isn't free.

At the very least, you are the recipient of charity.

13. ### TheGoodNewsLieutenant CommanderRed Shirt

Joined:
Oct 29, 2012
Re: Maker Movement Motivates Federation Citizens?

You are paying for it indirectly via taxation. Unless you're coming from out of state and it's not federally subsidized.

Joined:
Dec 10, 2006
Location: