Could Data be replicated over and over?

[Corran Horn]

I don't see why they don't build a replicator a mile long and replicate entire starships.

The TNG Tech Manual states that this would not be energy efficient. (seriously)

 

[SWHouston]

I think that Android Duplication has been around since 2261, or before even.

Ref: http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Android_duplicator

 

[Cepstrum]

I think that Android Duplication has been around since 2261, or before even.

Ref: http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Android_duplicator

I know very little of TOS, but if they such androids back then, what was the big deal about Data? I can think of only three possible/feasible explanations:

1. Data is somehow far more advanced than these things, even though they're apparently more life-like. (It never really made sense that Data could behave and appear similarly to humans yet he had to have unhuman-like skin and eyes. Maybe it was for the same reason he couldn't use contractions: it would frighten people somehow if he were *too* human-like. But his prohibition against contractions would only affect English-speaking humans, right?)

2. Those weren't UFP androids, and the UFP had trouble making sentient robots. Thus, Data was special to the UFP and Starfleet, for he was their unique creation. But this still conflicts with the notion that the thieving collector in "Most Toys" would risk stealing him if he could get androids elsewhere.

3. TPTB forgot about the TOS androids and/or were counting on people like me who weren't around to watch TOS (I started with VOY, then DS9, then TNG. Even though TOS is freely available to watch both on broadcast TV and CBS's web site, it doesn't interest me at all. I can understand that people who got into Trek via TOS like and revere it because of nostalgia and the fact that it was groundbreaking and about the only sci-fi show on from the 1960s until TNG and then the many other franchises that followed in the 1990s and 2000s. So for a long time, it was literally the "only show in town". But the sizeable new audience who got into Trek long after the advent of TNG-era Trek and other shows like B5 and Stargate, we have only a passing knowledge of TOS events.

I know they created Data well before any of these other shows and a mere 20 years after TOS, but they must have either completely forgotten or figured the TNG would've forgotten or not known about it.



Thanks for the link, btw. It's kind of disappointing, though, to think that there existed canonical androids like these 100 years before TNG. Of course, the Enterprise-D's holodeck was supposed to be an amazing piece of new technology, but later we learn that not only are holosuites common but also adults "remembered" holodeck stories and adventures from their youth (in "Once Upon a Time"). *And* that holoprogramming isn't difficult as I'd expect such a radically new technology to be when so many characters are able to easily write or alter programs (eg, Reg, Tom, Harry, B'Elanna, Tuvok, Seska, Quark, Kira, Odo, et al.)

Sure, a lot of those people were engineers. I'm an electrical engineer and know how to program to solve problems etc, but there's no way I could perform software engineering or write complex, robust programs for other non engineers to use. It requires special knowledge and training. So either holoprogramming is really easy, or it's been around a long enough time for these people to have learned it somehow. I'd think holoprogramming would be like writing a game for a PS3 if holodecks are supposed to be so new.

 

[Unicron]

The thing to remember, though, is that Data wasn't a "creation" of Starfleet or the UFP. He was Soong's creation, and he chose to join Starfleet because they were the ones who found him after Soong was forced to leave. He is certainly a unique life form, but it's very debatable how much of that could be connected to his fleet service.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It can create the PARTS just fine. What it can't do is reliably put them together in working order.

Why would it have to? It's not an assembly machine, as far as we can tell. It's a machine that materializes entities on one stroke.

Those entities are made of molecules, Timo. If you don't put those molecules together, you don't have an object, you have a puddle of chemical swill. If the replicator fails to bond even one hundredth of one percent of those molecules in the proper configuration, you've created something with billions of trillions of molecular-level imperfections which can render the replicated object totally inert.

I again repeat that we know as a matter of FACT that replicators do make a significant number of errors when replicating complex molecules. Thus it is to be expected that a successful replication is not "error free" as much as "error tolerant," a material that still suffices for someone's purposes no matter how badly it's assembled.

Human beings are not error tolerant. Evidently, neither is Data.

"Rivals" alone should debunk the idea that replication requires expertise, or indeed any sort of cognitive capabilities beyond the ability to move one's finger to the "replicate" button.

Except it's never stated that Martus LACKS that expertise. It certainly stands to reason he knows more about replicators than Cos, given the latter's inability or disinclination to try and replicate one. OTOH, it's never made clear HOW the device affects probability; it could literally be a supernatural luck pod, and replicating a larger version of it is no more complicated than replicating an scaled-up rabbit's foot.

Small, complex, unknown and unfathomable functional objects can be replicated with trivial ease, using a device otherwise employed as a food replicator.

Even though this is basically never done, I'm supposed to take your word for it, right?

When did they have the opportunity to replicate Data? Or Picard?

They certainly had an opportunity to obtain Picard's DNA, which means access enough to scan him on the molecular level or clandestinely obtain a transporter/trace pattern. Similar opportunities presented themselves in capturing LaForge (whom they did not bother to replicate for intelligence purposes) and the crew of the Enterprise-C.

Then again, the Romulans DID have such an opportunity in "Unification," but didn't seem at all interested in duplicating him then. Suffice to say, these events makes alot more sense if replication of living beings isn't technologically possible.

Exactly. Which is why it would be criminalized, and thus about as common as murder.

But we've seen murder in star trek. We've seen all sorts of crimes in Trek, as a matter of fact, by all kinds of different people. The one thing we have NEVER seen is the replication of a living being.

We've even seen instances of cloning, and there are indications that cloning isn't even illegal (though killing your own clone is still murder). Again, the lack of instances makes far more sense if it is simply not a possibility.

Except it would also require special resources (something beyond food replicators), so it wouldn't be as common as murder by kitchen appliance, it would be as common as murder by sniper rifle.

Which we have seen on Trek no less than three times in canon.

So our heroes never do it, while people like the Dominion, while apparently still klutzes with replicators, are famed for their photocopying of biologicals...

Except even the Dominion still use CLONES, and do not actually replicate living beings. Even the six identical Weyouns are all explicitly referred to as clones.

This coming from the Dominion, the one race in the entire galaxy that would have no reason whatsoever NOT to use replicators to mass produce living beings. If even the Dominion does not use this technique, it seriously calls into question whether the technique is even possible.

The dockyard might be quite similar to a Starfleet facility from 2375, considering we never saw one of the latter in action, either.

We did, at the end of Nemesis. The "action" there is not appreciably different from its 22nd century counterparts.

We have seen it demonstrated that all the elements of the process exist: extreme resolution, ability to handle man-sized objects, retention of functionality, complete irrelevance of knowledge on function as far as perfect duplication of structure is achieved.

But not all at the same time, which is the nature of the limitation. You can only replicate parts, and even then only a few at a time as the case seems to be. The Trek preference is to assemble these parts manually using tools and skills rather than try and jury-rig a cascade of a few thousand replicators to make those parts individually. More to the point, living tissues can only be replicated by a very skilled expert, and even a non-working positronic brain could only be replicated by someone VERY well versed in cybernetics (difficult enough that only three people in the galaxy have ever been able to pull it off).

No different from flying to the Moon. The technological basis (not theoretical, but practical) existed as of 1950, but getting there by 1970 required extreme motivation. Without such motivation, we might still not be there. Which we aren't, lo and behold, now that the motivation has evaporated.

True that: if we had a more efficient and reliable way of getting to the moon, we'd have no reason to figure out how to FLY there. This seems to be the case in the Trekiverse: for whatever reason, replicators have never materialized the--at this point, still theoretical--capability to duplicate living beings. Whatever the specific reason for that limitation, it IS a limitation they possess, and it is not something that can be simply wished away.

Not to over-expand on such an analogy, but I do suspect that a replicator capable of duplicating a life form would indeed be an undertaking as monumental--and possibly just as expensive--as a Saturn-V rocket. That such a thing may very well already exist is just idle speculation; it isn't a practical means of replicating anything that isn't already supremely valuable.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I think that Android Duplication has been around since 2261, or before even.

Ref: http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Android_duplicator

I know very little of TOS, but if they such androids back then, what was the big deal about Data?

He's the only android in the galaxy who escaped being argued to death by James T. Kirk.

 

[Rulius]

If the replicators can't reliably make a copy of Data, how does the transporter do so?
Also, we've seen the transporter make perfect copies of people and or things, why not use them to make more?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If the replicators can't reliably make a copy of Data, how does the transporter do so?

It doesn't. Transporters are not replicators, transporters are TRANSPORTERS. That means it TRANSPORTS Data--the one and only--to a new location.

Also, we've seen the transporter make perfect copies of people and or things, why not use them to make more?

Apparently it can only do this as a one-in-a-million fluke. And occasionally the copies are not so perfect.

 

[Captain Robert April]

As for replicating starships, as Roddenberry said, anybody capable of doing that would be so powerful that they wouldn't need to.

 

[SWHouston]

There's no doubt that the Soong type Android is a wonderful piece of technology... however...

I think if I were to "need" something like that, I'd have to start over, and hopefully eliminate the "weaknesses" which account for NUMEROUS times where Data has been taken over by some external influence (Lore/Soong/other) which were some sort of Transmitted RF or Radiogenic Signals/Source.
That should include some sort of Shielding, which would protect it from electrical type discharges (grabbing Q when the bad guys wanted him). There have been SO many times when this piece of equipment has hit the floor "out cold", that one may think of just dumping it, and starting over again.
And for GOD's sake, get rid of, or at least re-hide that "OFF Switch" !

 

[George]

Regarding the idea of ships being replicated, I think that was addressed in the TNG Tech Manual.

Edit: Here's the relevant excerpts.

No copyright infringement intended, fair use as per 17 U.S.C §107 for reasons of purpose of theuse and substantiality of the portion used.

REPLICATION VERSUS STORAGE

The use of replicators dramatically reduces the requirement for carrying and storing both foodstuffs and spare parts. The limiting factor is the energy cost of molecular synthesis versus the cost of carrying an object onboard the ship. In the case of foodstuffs, the cost of maintaining a large volume of perishable supplies becomes prohibitive, especially when the cost of food preparation is included. Here, the energy cost of molecular synthesis is justified, especially when one consid- ers the dramatic mass savings involved with extensive recycling of organic material.

On the other hand, certain types of commonly used spare parts and supplies are not economical for replication. In such cases, the items in question are used in sufficient quantity that it is more economical to store finished products than to spend the energy to carry raw materials and synthesize the finished product on demand. Additionally, significant stores of critical spares and consumables are maintained for possible use during Alert situations when power for replication systems may be severely restricted or unavailable.

REPLICATION LIMITS

The chief limitation of all transporter-based replicators is the resolution at which the molecular matrix patterns are stored. While transporters (which operate in realtime) re-create objects at quantum-level resolution suitable for lifeforms, replicators store and re-create objects at the much simpler molecular-level resolution, which is not suitable for living beings.

Because of the massive amount of computer memory required to store even the simplest object, it is impossible to record each molecule individually. Instead, extensive data compression and averaging techniques are used. Such techniques reduce memory storage required for molecular patterns by factors approaching 2.7 x 10^9. The resulting single-bit inaccuracies do not significantly impact the quality of most reproduced objects, but preclude the use of replicator technology to re-create living objects. Single-bit molecular errors could have severely detrimental effects on living DNA molecules and neural activity. Cumulative effects have been shown to closely resemble radiation-induced damage.

The data themselves are subject to significant accuracy limits. It is not feasible to record or store quantum electron state information, nor can Brownian motion data be accurately re-created. Doing so would represent another billionfold increase in the memory required to store a given pattern. This means that even if each atom of every molecule were reproduced, it is not feasible to accurately re-create the electron shell activity patterns or the atomic motions that deter- mine the dynamics of the biochemical activity of conscious- ness and thought.

Sternbach and Okuda have spoken

 

[F. King Daniel]

Wasn't that the manual that said phasers couldn't be fired at warp speeds?

Just sayin'