Sorry if this has already been asked or discussed. But when did Scotty invent this "transwarp beaming". I'm assuming it would have been "old" Scotty, sometime in the 24th century (since we never really saw this on TNG etc._
Question on transwarp beaming?
- Thread starter dave_R_treker
- Start date
In the novels, old Scotty works for the 24th-century Starfleet Corps of Engineers and sees some of the most advanced technology in the galaxy. I presume that he made this breakthrough during that time. Perhaps the Iconian Gateways provided the answer, or maybe it was Daimon Bok's subspace transporter that offered a vital clue.
Thanks
Omega_Glory
Commodore
Transwarp beaming would fundamentally change space travel in Trek. I wonder if TPTB are going to forget the technology (ala Genesis) or pretty much ditch spacecraft for any trip within a few light years distance. They certainly don't need intrasystem spaceships anymore...you can just beam from planet to planet. Same with cargo. Terrorists could beam bombs all over the place. Travel at Christmas would take a lot less time to go to Alpha Centauri to visit gramma.
A massive change for sure.
A massive change for sure.
You're assuming that Spock didn't simply delete the equations from the computer as soon as Scotty and Kirk transported to the Enterprise.
Terrorists could always beam bombs anywhere, transwarp distances or not. It is simply never addressed why this doesn't happen. I predict there will be zero realistic implications from the new beaming tech. Or it could turn into a a one-shot wonder, as it were, never brought up in dialogue or seen to affect the plot again. Trek has plenty of those, too.
Why fire torpedoes and wait for them to track and impact shields when you could simply beam the warhead on top of the shield for instant effect with no risk of them being shot down?
Why are torpedoes only beamed onto an enemy ship when its shields are down, what, once or twice in all of Trek visual history?
If you can lock onto something traveling at relativistic speeds in relation to you, why don't ships beam enemy torpedoes back at the ship that fired them conventionally?
That's three implications of the transporter off the top of my head. They'll never be addressed because it would break the world of Trek as it is. Most sci-fi and fantasy fiction falls into this trap with tech and magic. No one thinks these things through, nor can one author or even collection of authors predict all the possible implications of their inventions.
Why fire torpedoes and wait for them to track and impact shields when you could simply beam the warhead on top of the shield for instant effect with no risk of them being shot down?
Why are torpedoes only beamed onto an enemy ship when its shields are down, what, once or twice in all of Trek visual history?
If you can lock onto something traveling at relativistic speeds in relation to you, why don't ships beam enemy torpedoes back at the ship that fired them conventionally?
That's three implications of the transporter off the top of my head. They'll never be addressed because it would break the world of Trek as it is. Most sci-fi and fantasy fiction falls into this trap with tech and magic. No one thinks these things through, nor can one author or even collection of authors predict all the possible implications of their inventions.
Doesn't address how this would affect the original timeline Trek. Spock can't erase anything from original Trek anymore. As for nuTrek, nuScotty saw the equations and had the epiphany necessary to come up with them. He's not likely to either forget or abandon developing the tech no matter what Old Spock says and he already invented the technique once.
Once people realize a thing is possible, it is impossible to stop its coming into being short of killing everyone who knows it is possible and even then, it will still be rediscovered eventually.
We also don't know that Scotty Prime and Starfleet publicly shared his discovery. Spock might've been one of the privileged few that Scotty consulted with.
why don't they beam torpedoes? because of interference of course... why don't terrorists beam bombs places? who says they don't? sensitive places are probably shielded. for instance, spock couldn't beam the vulcans out of the katric arc.
you know there will always be some treksplanation why they can or can't do something.
you know there will always be some treksplanation why they can or can't do something.
Introducing transwarp beaming is no more dangerous than introducing the slingshot effect as a controllable way to time travel.
I'm still waiting for the transport thread to produce an in-universe explanation of the episodes where transportees were conscious during the process.
But they're busy still arguing about whether it kills you or not. I wish there were a foot-tapping emoticon right about now.
How's this?
Science-Fiction is designed to make you think, so how-about we do some thinking.
It is (if I remember correctly) Very difficult to impossible to transport antimatter (which I assume your talking about)). So it may be impractical to use as an offensive or defensive manoeuvre.
Transporters take time, and when a battle is being fought at even partial light speeds (Let alone warp speeds), a second in time can equate to a hundred thousand kilometres. Once again, this prevents them being used effectively in combat.
Transporters require shields to be dropped, which would defeat both defensive and offensive purposes. Also prevent beaming explosives on-board a battle ready and shielded ship.
"No one thinks these things through"
In my experience of trekbbs, it is usually the viewer who cannot rationalise the reasons behind these things. Certainly, its not impossible for a mistake to come through, however most 'mistakes' are simply people who cannot think for themselves.
even then scotty was almost killed due to where he beamed in.
i think orci even alluded to this. that there were dangers because of difficulties in not being more precise about the beam in point.
i also wouldnt have been suprised if spock had just left part of the equation in place for scotty to see.
How's this?
I like it!
Oh, let's say that multiphasic shields or metaphasic shields or multi-meta-phasic shields can.
