Why Not Personal Warp Fields Instead of Matter Transporters?

[Dayton3]

Everything I've read suggests that the transporter as described in Star Trek is a physical impossibility.

Even recent work with teleporting photons and exchange of quantum states doesn't look like transporters would ever actually work for real masses.

Why not redesign the transporter as a device that encases the occupants (or cargo) inside a warp field that lasts for approximately one second at the equivalent of Warp 1?

That would give a transporter a "range" of 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) and allow most of the missions the device described in Star Trek has.

 

[FamilySlitheen]

Right so we haven't got a Matter Transporter? And you're suggesting modifying a device capable of creating a pocket of subspace that will allow a stable warp field to be created? Great idea but we haven't got Warp Engines either.

 

[SonicRanger]

^^^ Yeah, I have to echo the same sentiment. Warp drive and transporters are basically equally imaginary. Why try to replace one with the other?

 

[DontFeedPhil]

I think we should scrap both ideas and just use a stargate...


Actually a wormhole would be easier (in reality) to make and would do abouh transport stuff and be the equivilant of warp movement...

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think in Trek's distant future, there may come about "subspace portals" which could allow personnel and equipment instantaneous travel to and from a starship over much greater distances than a transporter could. Such a capability would come in handy in situations in which a ship may not be able to get within an AU or two of a planet or whatever.

But I also think that whatever new technology comes about, there will also come forth something that will limit its effectiveness for dramatic purposes...

 

[Wingsley]

The Iconians used a Stargate-like device, so I suppose anything is possible.

There was a book out called "The Cosmic Dancers" 20+ years ago, in which the authors explored "the science behind science fiction", and they reached some interesting conclusions about transporter beams. Don't rule them out.

 

[Tigger]

I was always a fan of the Farcaster system from Dan Simmons' Hyperion Cantos.

 

[Loneknight]

Enveloping someone inside of their own pocket of subspace...interesting theory.

The issue is, considering the speed one could travel in their own little subspace bubble (and please correct me if this doesn't sound accurate), there would have to be the equivalent of an inertial dampening field to counter-act the forces being applied to the subject in transit. IIRC, in the book "Physics of Star Trek", just impulse power alone would pulverize everyone onboard, hence why IDF was created.

I'd also guess that one would have to also be concerned with atmospheric entries, oxygen supply, the issue of getting oneself onto another ship without tearing a hole through the side of a bulkhead, warp engine, etc.

The transporter was convenient for several reasons, both in the Trek universe and in real life: it allowed for a faster story to be told, plus the effects of a transporter vs. showing a shuttle landing on a planet every week would have been cost-prohibitive for the ability of visual effects(at the time of TOS). Furthermore, in TNG Geordi explained to the inhabitants in "The Masterpiece Society" that they were able to 'phase' through objects (that could be innaccurate...someone correct me if that's the case).

I don't think the that transporter is necessarily impossible...I think it's amazing to think that scientists have made breakthroughs in potential technologies that are based around the idea...but to see a functional transporter in our lifetime will probably out of the question. Maybe by the 22nd-23rd century, who knows where it will be?

 

[JuanBolio]

Because being dematerialized is scary enough?

 

[Timo]

Flying used to be really scary, too. Once it became possible, though, many found it strangely enjoyable...

People feared, and continue to fear, trains and escalators, too. Today, we pity and ridicule those who dare not enter an elevator, and thus have to struggle up twelve floors on their own feet. Tomorrow, we might pity and ridicule those who dare not die and be reborn every morning and afternoon, and thus have to take the long hoverbus ride to work and back.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JuanBolio]

How about this then - a personal warp field cannot beam you INTO a building or another ship.

 

[Timo]

(Why not, though? Certain types of warp bubble remove you from the universe altogether, as in "Remember Me", so mere walls would probably be no hindrance.)

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JuanBolio]

I suppose you could, using all the plot devices they've cooked up over the years. Personally I think god-like handwavium technology kills a good sci-fi story, but sure. Everyone zips around in personal warp fields. Lots of fun til someone smacks into a planet at 700 times the speed of light and obliterates both himself and a couple of large continents.

 

[Timo]

It very much seems that this is exactly what Q does. Or is it just a coincidence that his finger-snapping flashes look exactly like the TNG era going-to-warp effect?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Loneknight]

It very much seems that this is exactly what Q does. Or is it just a coincidence that his finger-snapping flashes look exactly like the TNG era going-to-warp effect?

Timo Saloniemi

I think Q's 'finger snapping' light show is just a coincidence when compared to the E-D jumping to warp. Remember that they saved money wherever possible when it came to the show's budget, so chances are they just took the flash of the ship going to warp and said, "That'll work!", then applied it to Q.

There isn't much that we know about how Q's travel...just another one of those obscure mysteries we may never know...

 

[JuanBolio]

It very much seems that this is exactly what Q does. Or is it just a coincidence that his finger-snapping flashes look exactly like the TNG era going-to-warp effect?

Timo Saloniemi

I think its pretty much just a coincidence. Q certainly COULD scoot around in his own personal warp bubble if he wanted, but I'm sure the Q are a little more elegant than that.

 

[Ronald Held]

How much healthier is it to go though a transporter, with some integrity checks versus your personal warp fields?

 

[Loneknight]

How much healthier is it to go though a transporter, with some integrity checks versus your personal warp fields?

Considering that a transporter's biofilter can detect and remove harmful or potentially dangerous bits of matter that could endanger the population of a ship, I'd say that's a significant advantage over the 'health' factor. Consider that if you 'warped' down to an unknown planet, then returned carrying a foreign virus or bacteria, one would have to go to a de-con room like they had to in ENT. The transporter takes care of all that in one shot.

 

[Ronald Held]

That was a point I was trying to make.

 

[bintak]

Everything I've read suggests that the transporter as described in Star Trek is a physical impossibility.

Even recent work with teleporting photons and exchange of quantum states doesn't look like transporters would ever actually work for real masses.

Why not redesign the transporter as a device that encases the occupants (or cargo) inside a warp field that lasts for approximately one second at the equivalent of Warp 1?

That would give a transporter a "range" of 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) and allow most of the missions the device described in Star Trek has.

KABOOM!

That's my other punch line.