Replicator or Transporter?

[AntonyF]

I was going to answer replication without hesitation. Get to where you need to be straight away. Visit Vegas in my lunchbreak... yay!

But then I had thought of the replicator as just food.... if it can make things, well that does change matters considerably. Hmm.... would probably go with the replicator in that case, and sell things from it and get my own personal yet!

 

[sojourner]

What's a "personal yet"?

 

[BillJ]

^Unless of course you subscribe that replicators create things using patterns just like transporters.

I can't believe the two technologies don't share a common evolution. Especially when watching an episode like Unnatural Selection.

 

[infinix]

But transporters don't create things.

Well.... that's iffy. Remember the duplicate Riker?? Transporters is much easier to explain if there were pads on both the transmitting and the receiving end. Since the transporter supposedly rebuilds your pattern from the energy matter reserve that is at the bottom of the transporter pad. The fact that transporter can both snatch things and restore things out of thin air requires a ton of suspension of disbelief. But since that is the technology we were shown, that's the one I'm comparing with.

In this case, replicators IS indeed a less complicated piece of technology since it can only replicate something that is within the size of its replicate pad and not just randomly out of thin air. And yes, replicators can't create living beings.

I thought about being able to randomly transport anything into my living room (gold from Fort Knox, Diamond from the Smithsonian, Keeley Hazell... etc) But I still settled on having a replicator. A transporter would almost certainly get me in trouble a lot quicker than a replicator.

 

[Vanyel]

Replicator, It can't replicate an entire ready made transporter, but there are no limitations to it creating the parts needed to build a transporter.

Plus the whole world hunger, thirst, making shelters or homes (or the parts to build them), medications, heating sources or fuels, air conditioners lots of things.

 

[Myasishchev]

Which one would be more useful to you in everyday life situation??

Replicator is your normal sized replicator that you see in crew member's quarters. And no, you cannot use the replicator to replicate a transporter. All of the replicator rules set in the technical manual apply.

I would still choose the replicator. I'll turn that sucker into my personal factory pumping out crap like iphone accessories and make a fortune.

Neither, since I'd prefer there to be enough energy resources left on the planet to light a cigarette.

What's a "personal yet"?

He probably meant "personal yurt." Who wouldn't want to live in their own, personal yurt? Alas, such a utopia is unlikely.

 

[T'Girl]

But transporters don't create things

Well.... that's iffy. Remember the duplicate Riker??

And the duplicate Kirk and also there's Tuvix too.

Transporters is much easier to explain if ... [snip] ... the transporter supposedly rebuilds your pattern from the energy matter reserve that is at the bottom of the transporter pad.

I've found myself that the transporter is "easier" to explain if what it's moving around is your own particulate matter, and there is no creation of substance. At all points in the process, everything involved is "you."

In the case of Riker, while the operator did twin the pattern, it was the distortion field that provided for the existence of multiple Rikers, not the transporter itself.

In this case, replicators IS indeed a less complicated piece of technology ...

The transporter "just" dematerializes things, moves them, and rematerialized the same thing. If anything what the replicator does is far more complex. In between the steps of the demilitarization and the move, the replicator alters and manipulates the matter stream to rematerialize something totally different than what went into it. In comparison to this what the transporter does is compatible simple.

The only thing less complicated about the replicator is that it moves things via a cable, while the transporter transmits it's items.

 

[Dominic]

A replicator is a far more practical and believable piece of technology than a transporter...and safer as well.

A replicator merely takes raw elements and puts them into the right pattern to create non-living materials. We can do that on a small scale now with simple molecules (like taking oxygen and hydrogen to make water). In this instance you are just making more complex items.

Transporters are FAR more complicated and bring up a whole host of ethical issues. A transporter is required to take a life form...essentially kill it, disassemble it atom by atom and then nearly instantaneously, move said atoms to a new location, reassemble, and then revive...all the while hoping that nothing is lost or misplaced. On top of that is the philosophical question of whether what was spit out is the same entity as what was put in.

It never made sense that replicators were derived from transporter technology since they are far less complex.

I agree with you. But its not completely true that transporter are bring up a whole ethical issues.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

I agree.

 

[SilentP]

Replicator. I can get al the food and drink I want, thus eliminating these controlling factors for employment. It would free me up to pursue my own dreams and the job I want instead of the job I need.

I agree.

Or even better, start replicating fuel

 

[BillJ]

A replicator is a far more practical and believable piece of technology than a transporter...and safer as well.

A replicator merely takes raw elements and puts them into the right pattern to create non-living materials. We can do that on a small scale now with simple molecules (like taking oxygen and hydrogen to make water). In this instance you are just making more complex items.

Transporters are FAR more complicated and bring up a whole host of ethical issues. A transporter is required to take a life form...essentially kill it, disassemble it atom by atom and then nearly instantaneously, move said atoms to a new location, reassemble, and then revive...all the while hoping that nothing is lost or misplaced. On top of that is the philosophical question of whether what was spit out is the same entity as what was put in.

It never made sense that replicators were derived from transporter technology since they are far less complex.

I agree with you. But its not completely true that transporter are bring up a whole ethical issues.

They both take matter, convert it to energy and then convert it back to matter. It doesn't make sense that they aren't technological 'cousins', at the very least.

 

[Deks]

Replicators were derived from Transporter technology.
It's been stated/confirmed on-screen.

Also, one can indeed make a transporter using just a replicator... you'd need to replicate it in pieces which you'd assemble later on, but that's pretty much it.

In terms of which I'd rather pick...
Well, the replicator of course.

If it came with an appropriate power source, I'd use it to create food and most of the resources needed for self-maintenance so I don't have to be forced into what society does (to make you earn money in order to survive - a despicable aspect to say the least).

Next I'd probably construct a low-powered transporter, learn how to operate it, and use it once every 20 years (or so) to rejuvenate myself.

I'd also have to learn of a way to properly conceal both technologies in order to not risk the government from taking it (which would probably require of me to construct a self-contained 24th century environment/small facility the size of a shuttlecraft that would respond to my control only.

I'd probably also use the transporter in conjucture to bring fresh food and water in decent quantities to those who need it most (including proper material needs).
This would of course have to be done on a sparing basis though.

Furthermore, if technology such as the replicator or the transporter would be put into production or the market today, you can rest assured that you'd be prohibited from replicating certain matter such as money, and numerous other aspects.

Anything beyond food, water and clothing would likely be prohibited, and you'd have to pay extremely high prices to replicate something else, or they would simply limit you that you can replicate items for specific amount of money (I doubt they would release replicators for everyone to have one in each home).

Though furthermore, one can probably take into account the very real possibility that if such technology is seized by people in power, it would never see the light of day.
Or it would be exploited to boost those people's positions and simply develop better technologies using the replicator as a basis, and charge insane prices.

Society as such would indeed collapse if the replicator would be used to it's fullest potential as in the show (though to put something else to rest, humanity got rid of famine and poverty centuries before the replicator was invented... approximately within 50 years after FC - which is an era when they did NOT have replicators).

 

[JiNX-01]

I would want a replicator. I could make replicate anything I needed to survive. Food, potable water, weather-appropriate clothing and tools and materials to provide me with shelter.