Borg Personal Transporter

[Daedalus12]

So what do you guys think about One's personal transporter in the Voyager Episode Drone? Do you think the device works by going through some sort of sophisticated bootstrapping process or is it just two individual transporter units combined together?

 

[nx1701g]

I think that its of a similar design to the Site to Site transporter, though there are far too many questions relating to it (meaning it was just added in to try to impress).

- How does it power itself?
- Hod does it lock on to a location?
- How does the transport even take place?


Then it happened again in Nemesis...

 

[LiChiu]

If they can make transporters the size of com-badges then why have transporter rooms in later ships?

 

[Daedalus12]

nx1701g said:

- How does it power itself?

Presumably by something of very high energy density but really does it matter? We know that it's powered adequately just like most other devices on Trek are powered adequately.

- Hod does it lock on to a location?

The same way any regular transporter would lock on to any location.

- How does the transport even take place?

Depending on the design. If it's just two miniature transporter units combined into one then one transporter would transport the other one over first and then the other one transport the remaining one along with the wearer.

Then it happened again in Nemesis...

Really? Funny how I don't remember anything from that movie.

LiChiu said:
If they can make transporters the size of com-badges then why have transporter rooms in later ships?

I am assuming you are talking about Nemesis. For many reasons possibly such as enhanced safety mechanisms, the ability to handle a much wider range of possible transporting conditions i.e. the number of transportees, the maximum range, the amount of interference,etc.

 

[Meredith]

Daedalus12 said:
So what do you guys think about One's personal transporter in the Voyager Episode Drone? Do you think the device works by going through some sort of sophisticated bootstrapping process or is it just two individual transporter units combined together?

Boot strapping, Drone 1 has Transporter A and B.

Transporter A sends over Transporter B, using some of the drones systems as a Annular confienment beam, etc..

Transporter B then links up via subspace and goes into transporter to transporter mode and starts receiving the subject from Transporter A using Transporter A to dematerialize, package the matter and send the drone 1 over in chunks to Transporter B.

Once the Drone 1 is sent over and reconstructed by Transporter B, Transporter B uses the drones systems to retreive Transporter A. (This step is optional in extreme emergencies).


Done, easy and more plausible, the fact that to send the transporter to it's destination requires the use of integrated drone components to send the first part of the transporter over and later to retreive it means it is a Borg only thing.




The only parts that are needed for Transporter A & B are:

1. power source, ie, battery, capacator, fusion pack etc.
2. Dematerializer/rematerizer circuit
3. Subspace link/matter transport beam thingie.

Meaning it could be a bit small.



All the other circuitry needed for a transporter could be stuff that is supplied by the Drone's suit/armor or preexisting circuits in the Drone's systems.

 

[Trekker4747]

Consider that shipboard transporters are two decks-high (there's a patter buffer tank under the transporter room), consider the sheer mind-boggling ammount of energy it would take to convert even the smallest mass into energy.

Then you need to trasnmit that and reverse the process.

The notion that something so vastly complex and energy intensive like a transporter could be made into something so small and not only THAT, but also transport itself.



Just a case of TPTB not fully understanding the "reality" of transport technology.

 

[Daedalus12]

Trekker4747 said:
Consider that shipboard transporters are two decks-high (there's a patter buffer tank under the transporter room),

I have yet to see any on-screen evidence showing the transporter devices on a starship being two decks high.

consider the sheer mind-boggling ammount of energy it would take to convert even the smallest mass into energy.

Considering that we have no actual numerical data (real or fictional) on how much energy is spent every time an object is transported nor do we have any actual idea about the physics of teleportation in the Star Trek universe then it's safe to say that it's not that mind boggling since a small shuttle can also provide enough power to a transporter.

Then you need to trasnmit that and reverse the process.

Every transporter shown in Trek has these two functions.

The notion that something so vastly complex and energy intensive like a transporter could be made into something so small

It was suppose to be on par with Federation technology from the 29th century i.e. the mobile emitter also had a power source of very high energy density.

and not only THAT,

but also transport itself.

I think I have already mentioned two plausible ways for it work above. Both of them require in essence multiple transportation components.

Just a case of TPTB not fully understanding the "reality" of transport technology.

Not really but there is no "reality" to understand anyways.

 

[Meredith]

Trekker4747 said:
Consider that shipboard transporters are two decks-high (there's a patter buffer tank under the transporter room), consider the sheer mind-boggling ammount of energy it would take to convert even the smallest mass into energy.

They have shown emergency transporters in small dinky shuttle craft, I think the Borg could have made a smaller version, especially a 29th centry hybrid borgy being.

 

[Trekker4747]

Meredith said:

Trekker4747 said:
Consider that shipboard transporters are two decks-high (there's a patter buffer tank under the transporter room), consider the sheer mind-boggling ammount of energy it would take to convert even the smallest mass into energy.

They have shown emergency transporters in small dinky shuttle craft, I think the Borg could have made a smaller version, especially a 29th centry hybrid borgy being.

Shuttlecraft transpoters I can cope with, it can obviously be a truncated system that dosen't have the capacity or abilities of their shipboard counterparts.

But it is still in a large object with a massive power supply (M/AM and fusion reactors) and not a wearable pin that can, and this the biggest beef for me, transport itself.

As I said. "Personal Transporters" is a clear indicator of the writers not understanding the technology and its limitations.

 

[Daedalus12]

Trekker4747 said:


But it is still in a large object with a massive power supply (M/AM and fusion reactors) and not a wearable pin that can,

As you may realize the Doctor's mobile emitter wasn't recharged even once on Voyager hence it's plausible that it's energy generation technology can be adapted to be used as a sufficient power source for drone One's personal transporter. Remember that a hologram also requires a fairy hefty amount of energy.

and this the biggest beef for me, transport itself.

Again why? As I mentioned and Meredith expounded on the personal transporter is probably consisted of two units of which both are have stand-alone transportation capability.

 

[Ronald Held]

Withput highjacking the thread, is there any onscreen evidence either way about whether the portable holoemitter was ever recharged?

 

[Trekker4747]

Again why? As I mentioned and Meredith expounded on the personal transporter is probably consisted of two units of which both are have stand-alone transportation capability.

Why does it bother me it can transport itself?

Clearly, sense you're arguing this with me, you've no concept of how transportation would work. If you did you would realize how incredibly stupid something the size of mento can do it.

But on the question at hand. If the thing can transport itself and the subject. Exactly WHAT is putting everything back together at the other end of the transport process?

How is it taking itself apart transmitting itself to the other end and then putting itself back together when it'd be a jumble of energy and a "matter stream" once taken apart.

Sorry, I will never accept the idea of the "personal transporter" because it is a really, huge, absurdly dumb idea that something so tiny can generate the 7.3 trillion joules of energy needed to decompile a person into energy and then generate that all over again (taken apart) to put it all back together again on the other end.

7.3 trillion joules is, frankly, a "shit ton" of energy. It's enough for a SHIP to generate, let alone those tiny personal transporters. And certainly whole lot more energy than what is needed to create the tractor beams, forcefields, and general holography to allow the mobile emitter to work.

 

[Daedalus12]

Trekker4747 said:
Why does it bother me it can transport itself?

Clearly, sense you're arguing this with me, you've no concept of how transportation would work. If you did you would realize how incredibly stupid something the size of mento can do it.

But on the question at hand. If the thing can transport itself and the subject. Exactly WHAT is putting everything back together at the other end of the transport process?

How is it taking itself apart transmitting itself to the other end and then putting itself back together when it'd be a jumble of energy and a "matter stream" once taken apart.

Have you even read my posts and Meredith's? The personal transporter can be easily created with 2 separate transporting units. For the sake of this discussion lets call them A and B. Unit A transports Unit B over and then Unit B transports the rest including Unit A over. Done! It's as simple as that.

Sorry, I will never accept the idea of the "personal transporter" because it is a really, huge, absurdly dumb idea that something so tiny can generate the 7.3 trillion joules of energy needed to decompile a person into energy and then generate that all over again (taken apart) to put it all back together again on the other end.

7.3 trillion joules? You got to be kidding me. As I said before there is nothing in the star trek canon that specifically states the energy requirement of a transport so any speculation about it would be pointless. You can't actually compute it using real science because we don't know how it works exactly.

 

[Trekker4747]

7.3 trillion joules? You got to be kidding me. As I said before there is nothing in the star trek canon that specifically states the energy requirement of a transport so any speculation about it would be pointless. You can't actually compute it using real science because we don't know how it works exactly.

Simple E=mc^2.

Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

180lb person = 81 kilograms.

81 kilograms times c-squared (300,000 kps)

= 7.3 trillion

Have you even read my posts and Meredith's? The personal transporter can be easily created with 2 separate transporting units. For the sake of this discussion lets call them A and B. Unit A transports Unit B over and then Unit B transports the rest including Unit A over. Done! It's as simple as that.

Possibly. But we're still talking about an incredibly complicated, bulky, device they should not be able to be worn. I can 'fanwank' that the Borg one we see in "Drone" simply tapped into Voyager's transport system and worked that way. But we can't say that for Data's unit (transporters were down on the Enterprise.)

And there was only ONE of those devices. And even if there were TWO, it's still too damn small to be "realisticly" accepted as a transporter. If it left itself behind I might be willing to accept it.

 

[Meredith]

Trekker4747 said:

7.3 trillion joules? You got to be kidding me. As I said before there is nothing in the star trek canon that specifically states the energy requirement of a transport so any speculation about it would be pointless. You can't actually compute it using real science because we don't know how it works exactly.

Simple E=mc^2.

Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

180lb person = 81 kilograms.

81 kilograms times c-squared (300,000 kps)

= 7.3 trillion

Have you even read my posts and Meredith's? The personal transporter can be easily created with 2 separate transporting units. For the sake of this discussion lets call them A and B. Unit A transports Unit B over and then Unit B transports the rest including Unit A over. Done! It's as simple as that.

Possibly. But we're still talking about an incredibly complicated, bulky, device they should not be able to be worn. I can 'fanwank' that the Borg one we see in "Drone" simply tapped into Voyager's transport system and worked that way. But we can't say that for Data's unit (transporters were down on the Enterprise.)

And there was only ONE of those devices. And even if there were TWO, it's still too damn small to be "realisticly" accepted as a transporter. If it left itself behind I might be willing to accept it.

Would have been easier to believe it it had been one of those "shift devices" the rebels on that one episode were using.

 

[Daedalus12]

Trekker4747 said:

Simple E=mc^2.

Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

180lb person = 81 kilograms.

81 kilograms times c-squared (300,000 kps)

= 7.3 trillion

Bad physics. No you got the principle right but it is just that E=mc^2 doesn't apply at all in this case because E=mc^2 is the amount of energy released if the matter is all converted into energy but it's certainly not the amount of energy required to hypothetically trigger such conversion. In fact we don't know what sort of physics is involved in a Star Trek transporter that allows the transformation of matter into some sort energy signal hence any computation using existent equations is inherently flawed.

Possibly. But we're still talking about an incredibly complicated, bulky, device they should not be able to be worn. I can 'fanwank' that the Borg one we see in "Drone" simply tapped into Voyager's transport system and worked that way. But we can't say that for Data's unit (transporters were down on the Enterprise.)

Bulky in the 24th century maybe but not in the 29th century apparently since the bulky hologram emitters has been replaced by a small mobile ones.

And there was only ONE of those devices. And even if there were TWO, it's still too damn small to be "realisticly" accepted as a transporter. If it left itself behind I might be willing to accept it.

How do you know that? You could always design a casing that looks like one device but is actually two devices connected together by some sort locking mechanism.

 

[Trekker4747]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this.

I personaly feel a tiny, wearable, transporter is absurd and flies in the face of thin "realisim" of treknology.

It's no wonder to me that bad Trek (Voyager and the TNG movies) came up with it.

 

[Timo]

But we can't say that for Data's unit (transporters were down on the Enterprise.)

Actually, we could say that, and make it sound more plausible than what the writers would have us believe.

How could all the transporters of the E-E, widely distributed and deep within the hull, be down? Only if some central resource shared by all of the individual platforms had been damaged. And that would still leave the shuttlecraft transporters fully operational.

But we could say that the crucial shared resource knocked out by Shinzon was the sensor system of the transporters. In the murky soup of the Rift, transporters would need top-notch sensors, and mere shuttlecraft units wouldn't do. But a transporter remote control button (similar in concept to the one used by Paris in "Non Sequitur") would chance all that by acting as a beacon to which even damaged sensors could lock. The hardware of the pads themselves would remain mostly unhurt, so by bypassing the usual sensors and instead relying on Data's special beacon, the system could be made to work again.

That sort of a patch would restore some story logic. But it's annoying that a crucial plot moment hinges on blatantly unsound technobabble; it would be preferable to have the scene rewritten altogether. As long as that option isn't available, though, calling the transporter thingamabob a mere remote/beacon is a partial consolation.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Daedalus12]

Trekker4747 said:
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this.

Interesting how most of my few arguments on TBBS ends in this fashion with this exact phrase. Oh well.

I personaly feel a tiny, wearable, transporter is absurd and flies in the face of thin "realisim" of treknology.

It's no wonder to me that bad Trek (Voyager and the TNG movies) came up with it.

While Voyager can be pretty bad in this regard (see Threshold) and I am not a bug fan of Voy as a whole either but I think your personal dislike towards the show is clouding your judgment on this matter. IMHO One's personal transporter is consistent with the level of technology already established in the show i.e. Doc's mobile transmitter. On the other hand what was shown in Nemesis is another matter altogether and I tend to try to forget anything that was shown in that movie.

 

[Trekker4747]

While Voyager can be pretty bad in this regard (see Threshold) and I am not a bug fan of Voy as a whole either but I think your personal dislike towards the show is clouding your judgment on this matter.

Well, it's worth pointing out that while I wouldn't call Voyager my favorite series, infact it's probably my least favorite series, and it's filled to brim with flaws and problems I wouldn't say I "dislike" it. There's some good, watchable, stuff in there.

One's personal transporter for me isn't probably all that big a deal there's a number of ways to fanwank it or reconcile it into "working" but the whole wearable transporter idea to me is still bollocks.