• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

If you had replicator technology, would you still cook? (and other replicator oddities)

my issue is the replicator draw from the bio mass generatd from waste how come it never bothers anyo e they are basically eating yesterdays poo?
As brought up in another thread on the topic, I'm a firm believer that the reason some people voice a distate for replicated food is psychological; and for precisely that sort of reason.

There's no other reasons to suspect that, as presented on-screen, replicators create flawed, distasteful foodstuff. So it has to all be in their heads.
 
Last edited:
its all ship waste granted its a full demolecular provess but still oh and btw where they get animal waste lol
 
my issue is the replicator draw from the bio mass generatd from waste how come it never bothers anyo e they are basically eating yesterdays poo?
Where do think the drinking water from your tap comes from?
That's right, raw sewage (properly treated, of course)

Fecal matter is no different - it gets broken down, distributed and reabsorbed back into the food chain. Granted, not as directly as in the middle ages (where human waste was used directly as fertiliser and as a result everyone had worms) but it's all part of the big, wonderful circle of life. :D

The recycling facilities on board a starship are just microcosm of that process
 
Personally, no, I'd never cook. We're big fans of frozen or packaged food. Heat and eat. My wife WOULD like to cook if she didn't have to do it right after coming home from work. So she'd also replicate, at least until retirement, when she says she'd like to start cooking interesting things again.
 
One factor that hasn't come up here yet is the issue of aroma. Humans "taste" with our noses much more than our mouths (which really only detect sweet-salt-sour-umami). The cooking process lets you anticipate the meal whilst it is being prepared, whetting the appetite. Even in a restaurant, you get the smells from the kitchen, and a microwave lasts long enough you smell some of the aroma there too. With a replicator, the meal just appears.

I'd still cook. If I made a really great dish, I might scan it in for the days I didn't have time (I make a mean beef rendang, but it takes three hours) but I like the cooking process - it's a skill. And if you find yourself and your Away Team stranded, the one who can make the local foraged stuff tasty is never going to be murdered in their sleep when civilisation breaks down.
 
I suppose you could program the replicator to emit the aroma for a few minutes while you wash your hands or tidy up your quarters. Or you could just sit at your table inhaling the freshly replicated food and try not to eat it right away.

Yeah, right. ;)
 
I would but I enjoy cooking anyway. I would still use the replicator to replace dishes or if I need a special utensil or pan. Though I can see using it to make a quick meal like soup or a hot turkey sandwich (yummm) on those days I'm feeling lazy.

I would hope it would be useful enough for me to be better organized but I'm hopeless there!
 
On the personal question of whether I would cook, my answer is possibly. If this were a blank replicator into which I have to enter food examples, then I would definitely cook in the hope of doing my best and saving that copy. I would likely cook less in that case, since mediocre (neither good nor bad) would be tolerable for long periods. Eventually I would get frustrated or decide I have time to make a better attempt. That assumes I even mess up in the first place, or have only limited cooking facilities. With the right kitchen I would probably start with the things I eat most often, the my favorites which I eat infrequently, and then difficult dishes which sound good but I eat very rarely.

As for a preprogrammed replicator, that means I am far less likely to cook for myself or bother cooking for others. Although, this comes down to quality too, so is the quality merely good, excellent, or astounding? If it's good, I would be reluctant, but I might occasionally try to do better since I'm a good cook once I get used to a recipe. Merely good food can get boring. If the quality is excellent or better I am very unlikely to bother, unless there is a hole in the menu which needs filling. That hole could be an interesting variation I see and I do crave variety now and then, so I might use that as my reason to cook. On the other hand, restaurants provide diversity of cuisine.
 
I'm guessing you probably can @Go-Captain on the assumption that Data makes his Feline Supplements that way. I think you could then 'save' your best meals as 'Spaghetti Bolognese recipe number...' whatever.
 
Where do think the drinking water from your tap comes from?
That's right, raw sewage (properly treated, of course)
I don't know where your water comes from, but here in Los Angeles we get about half our water from Northern California and the Colorado River, 10 percent from local groundwater sources, and a third from the Owens Valley. None of it comes from sewage treatment plants.

Of course, we could say that all water is ultimately recycled. The glass of tap water you're drinking now could contain water molecules that were pissed out by a Roman centurion 2000 years ago.
 
I think the whole thing behind the idea of replicated meals is that it would provide exact calories, but in the format you asked for. So for example, if you had a shrimp salad or a triple chocolate fudge cheesecake they would taste, look and feel exactly the same as the real thing, but be identical in nutrients and calorific intake.

If cooking using replicated ingredients, the replicator would probably do the same thing. Dividing all those parameters amongst the ingredients, taking into account the number of persons being cooked for. Obviously it won't be as precise, but still the same ball park.
 
I don't know where your water comes from, but here in Los Angeles we get about half our water from Northern California and the Colorado River, 10 percent from local groundwater sources, and a third from the Owens Valley. None of it comes from sewage treatment plants.

Of course, we could say that all water is ultimately recycled. The glass of tap water you're drinking now could contain water molecules that were pissed out by a Roman centurion 2000 years ago.
Your second paragraph is more what I was getting at - all cleaned water from the sewage plants are put back into nature which, in turn, finds its way back into your drinking glass ;-)
 
I think the whole thing behind the idea of replicated meals is that it would provide exact calories, but in the format you asked for. So for example, if you had a shrimp salad or a triple chocolate fudge cheesecake they would taste, look and feel exactly the same as the real thing, but be identical in nutrients and calorific intake.

I definitely don't think this is true; I remember at least one case on TNG where Troi tried to order something from her office replicator and the computer declined it because her office replicator was set not to provide something as indulgent as she wanted. I can't remember anything on Trek that ever suggested anything like that with replicators either, either in-show or in any outside materials.

(I also don't think that's physically possible either, but that's basically irrelevant for this discussion honestly. :p )
 
I definitely don't think this is true; I remember at least one case on TNG where Troi tried to order something from her office replicator and the computer declined it because her office replicator was set not to provide something as indulgent as she wanted. I can't remember anything on Trek that ever suggested anything like that with replicators either, either in-show or in any outside materials.

(I also don't think that's physically possible either, but that's basically irrelevant for this discussion honestly. :p )

Actually, if memory serves, the issue with Troi's request was that she stipulated that the dish should be "real" (ie not replicated) and the computer replied something along the lines of '"real" is not possible, only an analogue of the item with similar nutritional parameters'.
 
Replicator all day everyday. If frozen food didn't cause cancer, I'd be eating that all the time right now as well. The only time I enjoy cooking is when my kids wants to make pancakes or bake a cake, but that's more of a family time thing than anything else.
 
I have a microwave and only use it for heating meals. A replicator would be used to replicate diamonds, shoes, handbags and makeup.
 
Actually, if memory serves, the issue with Troi's request was that she stipulated that the dish should be "real" (ie not replicated) and the computer replied something along the lines of '"real" is not possible, only an analogue of the item with similar nutritional parameters'.

Oh thanks, that was enough to let me find the quote on Chakoteya:

TROI: Transfer the letters from my mother to the viewscreen. And, computer, I would like a real chocolate sundae.
COMPUTER: Define real in context, please.
TROI: Real. Not one of your perfectly synthesised, ingeniously enhanced imitations. I would like real chocolate ice cream, real whipped cream
COMPUTER: This unit is programmed to provide sources of acceptable nutritional value. Your request does not fall within current guidelines. Please indicate whether you wish to override the specified programme?

So I guess that can be seen as possibly implying what @solariabsg25 was talking about, yeah.

If frozen food didn't cause cancer, I'd be eating that all the time right now as well.

Well I have good news for you! I'm not sure where that myth started, but there's never been any actual study that found that freezing food made it more carcinogenic, there's no real evidence for that at all. As far as I can tell that's one of those cancer scare myths that was either just invented whole cloth or was the result of a long game of telephone the steps of which are lost to time.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top