Star Trek levels of civilization/technology

[Crazy Eddie]

While we can always identify and feel sorry for people who lose their jobs, I think ultimately it will probably be a good thing. Re-training and innovation are some of the most important things this country can do if they want to mitigate the problem.

This is the problem you're missing though: the majority of the country ISN'T retraining, and neither is the majority of the human race. In the U.S., on the one hand, there are fewer new high-paying jobs to replace the old ones; on the other hand, the newer jobs do not actually pay as much--adjusting for inflation--as the old ones.

Retraining isn't a benefit to the workers, it's an EXPENSE, one workers have to pay just to keep their jobs or to get one in the first place. The higher the sophistication of the job and the cost of training, the smaller the number of workers capable of paying that cost... which is okay in the long run, because the high-tech jobs require fewer and fewer workers to do them and still maintain productivity. Innovators, on the other hand, don't have to pay that penalty; they get a return on their investment far greater than what they paid in the first place.

 

[Deckerd]

Innovators only get a return if someone backs them. One wonders how many humanity-changing inventions have disappeared because nobody would fund the development.

 

[Deks]

Innovators only get a return if someone backs them. One wonders how many humanity-changing inventions have disappeared because nobody would fund the development.

In real life?
More than plenty.

In trek?
Ever since humans made FC with the Vulcans and managed to catch up relatively close to their technology in terms of advancement in mere 90 years... I'd say, not so much.

I would say that they (Trek humans) are mainly looking at things if it's feasible from a technological/resource point of view, and not a 'monetary' one (which consistently showed to be a MAJOR obstacle when it came to advancement in real life).

Even in real-life, numerous things were/are more than doable from a technological/resource point of view for decades, but was/is deemed 'too expensive' in monetary value.

That explains their rapid advancement.
Humans in Trek probably managed to implement numerous technologies that were previously conceived of (but never pulled off in practice) on a global scale.
Plus, as soon a new ideas that are doable from a scientific point of view came to fruition, then they implemented right away (for the most part).

Of course, exposure to highly advanced technologies from Vulcans probably accelerated their advancement even further.

When talking about the Federation capabilities in the 24th century... trivial limitations as imposed on TV shows by the writers were idiotic at best.
These people have the ability to convert energy into matter.
Here's a solution for Voyager:
Park the ship in an uninhabited solar system, use high concentrations of solar energy from that star for direct energy to matter conversion to replicate more than enough spare parts and components that will last you for quite a while, not to mention anti-matter reserves (omicron particles were one way of boosting them, and I can imagine that they could find other ways of doing so).

With their level of technology, every SF ship equipped with transporters and replicators in the 24th century can be completely self-sufficient and operate in deep space if need be without necessity for trading with other cultures for resources (though the latter can prove easier instead of spending extra time doing it yourself).

One more thing... weren't bussard collectors mentioned to continuously pull matter or energy (or an equivalent) from space and convert that into power for the ship?
At least, that's what TOS explained if I'm not mistaken.

Seriously... I realize that with all these capabilities, numerous premises on the show would be non-existent, but that's the problem with the writers not being able to find creative ways around highly advanced technology and still preserve the drama.
Some Trek novels on the other hand were able to preserve highly advanced technology premise but still introduce various dramatic events that worked well in such a setting.

 

[FordSVT]

Although perhaps the Trek folks have learned to despise their ancestors - thanks to WWIII, every Earthling may feel he or she is the descendant of people worse than the Nazis, and is justly ashamed of any past achievements.

Timo, there is plenty of dialogue from every series to suggest that 23rd and 24th century humans take plenty of pride in the achievements of their ancestors, and absolutely none to suggest that they feel that people from their past are "worse than the Nazis".

 

[Deckerd]

Nobody calls us Earthlings now, let alone in centuries to come. I think Timo's from the 1950s.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Innovators only get a return if someone backs them. One wonders how many humanity-changing inventions have disappeared because nobody would fund the development.

In real life?
More than plenty.

In trek?
Ever since humans made FC with the Vulcans and managed to catch up relatively close to their technology in terms of advancement in mere 90 years... I'd say, not so much.

I would say that they (Trek humans) are mainly looking at things if it's feasible from a technological/resource point of view, and not a 'monetary' one (which consistently showed to be a MAJOR obstacle when it came to advancement in real life).

Even in real-life, numerous things were/are more than doable from a technological/resource point of view for decades, but was/is deemed 'too expensive' in monetary value.

That explains their rapid advancement.
Humans in Trek probably managed to implement numerous technologies that were previously conceived of (but never pulled off in practice) on a global scale.
Plus, as soon a new ideas that are doable from a scientific point of view came to fruition, then they implemented right away (for the most part).

All that really boils down to is a reallocation of society's priorities: the tens of trillions of dollars spent on war and defense are suddenly spent on solving the world's social problems, with all the time/personnel investment that implies.

That doesn't change the relative expense of new technological development, of course, especially in real-world terms of the physical resources required to build and develop them. It's enough to say that although humans no longer use "money" in the 23rd century, that does NOT mean they simply pull goods and services out of their asses and do everything for free. Some mechanism of regulating exchanges has to still exist, and that mechanism is always in play in the development and/or production of technology. Just because Jean Luc Picard is too evolved and enlightened to care how it works doesn't change that.

These people have the ability to convert energy into matter.

Not really, no. They had the ability to REARRANGE matter, but converting energy into matter--or matter into energy--is the kind of thing that can only be done in a warp core (which tends to explode, violently, when something goes wrong with it).

Here's a solution for Voyager:
Park the ship in an uninhabited solar system, use high concentrations of solar energy from that star for direct energy to matter conversion...

Which would require a solar collector the size of a small planet to collect enough pure energy to form any amount of material.

OTOH, if they had the ability to convert matter into energy and back again, they could just as soon stop by some random dead rock in space (of which the universe is abundant) and use the transporter to beam a few tons of it aboard as energy-only surplus.

The reason they can't do this is because replicators AREN'T magic and can only work on a pre-arranged stock of material that is chemically similar to the stuff it's trying to replicate in the first place.

With their level of technology, every SF ship equipped with transporters and replicators in the 24th century can be completely self-sufficient and operate in deep space if need be without necessity for trading with other cultures for resources (though the latter can prove easier instead of spending extra time doing it yourself).

But they're not, for the reasons mentioned above. Their level of technology is not nearly as high as you (or for that matter, THEY) think it is.

One more thing... weren't bussard collectors mentioned to continuously pull matter or energy (or an equivalent) from space and convert that into power for the ship?
At least, that's what TOS explained if I'm not mistaken.

TOS explained nothing of the kind. The "bussard collectors" were explained in the TNG manual as collecting interstellar hydrogen to refuel the ship as it traveled through space (of which only deuterium is useable as fuel, evidently). Some of that is converted to antimatter, some is stored as slush hydrogen.

Which still doesn't change the fact that given actual matter-energy equivalence, a three-course meal is physically equivalent to the energy output of six photon torpedoes. Even if it were possible to convert energy directly into matter, it would mean each of the ship's six hundred replicators would be able to draw the full power of the ship each and every time they were activated.

Seriously... I realize that with all these capabilities, numerous premises on the show would be non-existent...

And yet it never occurred to you that maybe the CAPABILITIES you describe are non-existent?

 

[Deckerd]

These people have the ability to convert energy into matter.

Pffft that happens all the time on Earth. What do you think photosynthesis is?

 

[Deks]

All that really boils down to is a reallocation of society's priorities: the tens of trillions of dollars spent on war and defense are suddenly spent on solving the world's social problems, with all the time/personnel investment that implies.

I would be inclined to agree with this statement.
Real life shows evidence that 'money' or 'expense' is not the problem when the government for example wants to get specific things done that correspond with their interests.

That doesn't change the relative expense of new technological development, of course, especially in real-world terms of the physical resources required to build and develop them. It's enough to say that although humans no longer use "money" in the 23rd century, that does NOT mean they simply pull goods and services out of their asses and do everything for free. Some mechanism of regulating exchanges has to still exist, and that mechanism is always in play in the development and/or production of technology. Just because Jean Luc Picard is too evolved and enlightened to care how it works doesn't change that.

People aren't pulling the goods out of their rear ends even now.
The point is that once you eliminate 'cost' (in terms of money) from the equation and you work with what is doable from a technological/resource/manpower point of view, you would be surprised just how many things WE could have accomplished decades ago, let alone today and relatively fast.

Picard is probably informed much more so than you or I in how their system works.
There is no reason to think he's lying or blowing things up merely to impress someone. He was in fact stating those aspects without too much thinking, implying it's a way of life for these people.
People would likely be compensated for the work they provide, but not in anything of monetary value because basic needs would have been long taken cared of for everyone.

[/quote]
Not really, no. They had the ability to REARRANGE matter, but converting energy into matter--or matter into energy--is the kind of thing that can only be done in a warp core (which tends to explode, violently, when something goes wrong with it).
[/quote]

Which of course flies in the face of evidence/dialogue as seen on-screen on multiple occasions which stated: Replicators convert energy into matter (and back again in case of recycling).
TM is NOT canon, therefore it doesn't apply in the discussion.
Yes of course they can re-arrange matter, but that is not implied to be done when they replicate something as far as on-screen evidence is taken into account.

Which would require a solar collector the size of a small planet to collect enough pure energy to form any amount of material.

In your opinion perhaps.
I distinctly recall ST: IV movie in which solar collectors (which were carried in hands) were used when primary power went down as a result of the probe which was damping all energy emissions.
The weakness of the signal can easily be result of power being suppressed, BUT, solar energy from what we saw on-screen was used to power FTL subspace communications among other things.

That was an example from 78 years into the past. Voyager is a full blown ship with technology that goes beyond that of Kirk's, and as evident on-screen, crews in the 24th century can easily rig various system for direct energy transfer or collection with very high efficiency.

The efficiency of solar collection technology in the 24th century would likely be much more advanced/refined in contrast to that of the 23rd, and would be able to provide more than enough power to any system.

OTOH, if they had the ability to convert matter into energy and back again, they could just as soon stop by some random dead rock in space (of which the universe is abundant) and use the transporter to beam a few tons of it aboard as energy-only surplus.

Idiocy of writers is not my concern. They downgraded technological capabilities in Trek on more than one occasion for the sake of mere drama.
And yes, they COULD have done exactly what you just wrote. Now THAT would have been excellent to see - but Voyager didn't show plenty of things - how they managed to have more than 36 torpedoes for one thing, or shuttles -but both are easily explainable.

The reason they can't do this is because replicators AREN'T magic and can only work on a pre-arranged stock of material that is chemically similar to the stuff it's trying to replicate in the first place.

Whoever said anything about magic? Conversion of energy into matter would likely entail rearrangement of particles located in the energy that runs through the ship's EPS grid on a subatomic scale.
There was 0 mention that pre-existing 'raw material' would be used except when it might have been implied in case of recycling (waste, urine, feces, old clothes), and even then, it would likely be converted into energy and cycled through the ship.
Torres even explained how to create 0 waste by essentially stating that they recycle energy itself.

But they're not, for the reasons mentioned above. Their level of technology is not nearly as high as you (or for that matter, THEY) think it is.

On-screen evidence disagrees with you... and blatantly so on numerous occasions.

TOS explained nothing of the kind. The "bussard collectors" were explained in the TNG manual as collecting interstellar hydrogen to refuel the ship as it traveled through space (of which only deuterium is useable as fuel, evidently). Some of that is converted to antimatter, some is stored as slush hydrogen.

I was under the impression that TOS stated on-screen this process was taking place (I cannot corroborate that directly though because I cannot recall the episode where it might have been said - of course I could be wrong).
But, even if the TM's explanation of how the collectors work, it can be interpreted that it's used for continuous power generation.

Which still doesn't change the fact that given actual matter-energy equivalence, a three-course meal is physically equivalent to the energy output of six photon torpedoes. Even if it were possible to convert energy directly into matter, it would mean each of the ship's six hundred replicators would be able to draw the full power of the ship each and every time they were activated.

In your opinion which doesn't hold ground when compared to on-screen dialogue and what we saw.
Any technology can be improved upon to spend less energy than initially required - even direct energy to matter conversion.
They have the ability to fly at speeds that surpass the speed of light by a pretty wide margin for one thing.
FTL communications and computers operating at similar speeds, both of which probably entail heavy manipulation of 'subspace'.
And you're gonna tell me that superimposing OUR theoretical understanding onto their technology is doable?
Please don't make me laugh.
WE have barely begun to scratch the surface and are in technological infancy, they managed to overcome global adversities in 50 years after FC with the Vulcans, unify over 150 alien races into the UFP which by the mid/late 24th century spans through 8000 Ly's.
Open your mind a bit more and take into account that science is not an absolute (especially what is currently 'known').

Replicators were stated on several occasions to use a relatively size-able portion of the ship's energy reserves.
In Voyager, this was intentionally used as means to 'ration' their use. But Voyager was not operating at peak efficiency in the early seasons, hence it made sense. By the time it managed to properly restock on energy and various other things (photon torpedoes among other things - given the amount they used throughout the show) the crew grew accustomed to Neelix's cooking and so they probably used both that and replicators in the later seasons (which they did, and replicators became more widely used for other things).

Plus, in the episode 'Void' of S7, Voyager managed to get it's hands on tech which trippled their replicator efficiency and were able to feed 500 people per day using half the power than before.

And yet it never occurred to you that maybe the CAPABILITIES you describe are non-existent?

It did, and I take into account the possibility, but ...
Did it ever occur to you that the capabilities exist but were shown on a seldom basis and were intentionally limited by the writers for the sake of 'drama'?
On-screen evidence suggests that on more than one occasion.

Of course, evidence is not proof, and correlation is not proof of causation, so I have to keep an open mind to the possibility I could be wrong.
But given the sheer amount of evidence from on-screen dialogue and what we saw, I'm inclined to lean much more towards the explanation I provided.

 

[The Castellan]

Innovators only get a return if someone backs them. One wonders how many humanity-changing inventions have disappeared because nobody would fund the development.

Tesla, for one. Both JP Morgan and another asshole, Thomas Edison, both went out of their ways to destroy him, because had he gotten his way, free, clean, and nearly unlimited energy might have been a reality...both Morgan ruined him because no one would make money off it.

 

[The Castellan]

Picard is probably informed much more so than you or I in how their system works.
There is no reason to think he's lying or blowing things up merely to impress someone. He was in fact stating those aspects without too much thinking, implying it's a way of life for these people.
People would likely be compensated for the work they provide, but not in anything of monetary value because basic needs would have been long taken cared of for everyone.

Yep. And whatever system they use, it's a HELL of a lot better than what we have, now. If given a chance to be in a world like that, never coming back to this one, I'd go there, without hesitation.

 

[EmperorTiberius]

Innovators only get a return if someone backs them. One wonders how many humanity-changing inventions have disappeared because nobody would fund the development.

Tesla, for one. Both JP Morgan and another asshole, Thomas Edison, both went out of their ways to destroy him, because had he gotten his way, free, clean, and nearly unlimited energy might have been a reality...both Morgan ruined him because no one would make money off it.

When I was a kid, I was surprised that Tesla is never even mentioned in American history books as inventor of electricity (alternating current). Edison is

 

[Deks]

Is it possible that one of the reasons he wasn't mentioned as such because of his Serbian heritage?

 

[The Castellan]

Is it possible that one of the reasons he wasn't mentioned as such because of his Serbian heritage?

More like due to his wanting to create free, clean and safe energy for everyone....the rich guys in power of the energy industries don't want that to happen. Power means everything to these big shots. Edison was a ruthless business man first, and a scientist second, unlike Telsa, who wanted to pretty much just create something to benefit humanity, Edison was mainly looking to make more money.


Tiberius, you forget that the winners write the history books to go in their own favor.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Which of course flies in the face of evidence/dialogue as seen on-screen on multiple occasions which stated: Replicators convert energy into matter (and back again in case of recycling).

To be sure, it was stated a handful of times in Season 1 of TNG (vaguely in "Encounter at Farpoint" and by inference elsewhere) but like many things in early TNG it was quickly retconned away. It popped up again in the cavalcade of scientific nonsense that was Star Trek Voyager, so we shouldn't really be surprised by the contradiction.

TM is NOT canon, therefore it doesn't apply in the discussion.

The TM always applies in any instance where it is isn't directly contradicted by canon, primarily because it was written by the producers of the show itself. In point of fact it was written several years AFTER the references in Encounter at Farpoint to "energy into matter" and thus represents a retcon in and of itself.

More to the point: even those EaF references are vague enough that the replicators can be inferred as being similar to transporters and thus working on the same basic principle, in which case they--like transporters--would require a physical material to exist first before they can replicate anything.

Yes of course they can re-arrange matter, but that is not implied to be done when they replicate something

It absolutely is. In fact Troi says as much in "The Price":

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?

What is the point of this exchange if the computer can literally produce from energy alone all the ingredients for a chocolate sundae? Troi ought to know that the ice cream and the whipped cream in her sundae are just as "real" as they would be if she got it from Ben & Jerrys. The thing is, the computer can't make REAL ice cream, because the simple proteins are carbohydrates it uses to manufacture food items aren't the same ones found in ice cream and whipped cream. They can be arranged to TASTE like the real thing, but the replicated ice cream sundae is formulated so that it has the same nutritional value as a replicated cheeseburger or a replicated tofu salad: they are essentially the same thing, arranged in a different shape with a different texture and flavor. That's on-screen vindication of a tech manual reference, and it is NOT the only one.

In your opinion perhaps.

It's simple mathematics, a function of the intensity of solar radiation and the surface area of the object involved. Even if your solar array is 100% efficient, one kilogram of matter would be equivalent to the amount of energy that would reach a planet-sized object in one second, or a starship-sized object in two weeks. You could obviously speed this up by moving closer to the star--ALOT closer--but that would cost you on efficiency.

I distinctly recall ST: IV movie in which solar collectors (which were carried in hands) were used when primary power went down as a result of the probe which was damping all energy emissions.
The weakness of the signal can easily be result of power being suppressed, BUT, solar energy from what we saw on-screen was used to power FTL subspace communications among other things.

At the time Yorktown was transmitting, they hadn't actually rigged their solar sail yet.

That was an example from 78 years into the past. Voyager is a full blown ship with technology that goes beyond that of Kirk's, and as evident on-screen, crews in the 24th century can easily rig various system for direct energy transfer or collection with very high efficiency.

They could probably learn jujitsu in one really intense afternoon in the holodeck too. I'm not really sure what that has to do with converting energy into matter.

The efficiency of solar collection technology in the 24th century would likely be much more advanced/refined in contrast to that of the 23rd, and would be able to provide more than enough power to any system.

Efficiency is a matter of how much energy is LOST, between 1% and 100%. Even if 100% efficiency were possible (it isn't) there is a quantifiable limit to how much energy you can collect from a solar array of a given size. There is also a quantifiable amount of energy for a given amount of mass.

Point here is, one kilogram of solid matter is equivalent to ALOT of energy; one square foot of solar radiation is not.

Whoever said anything about magic? Conversion of energy into matter would likely entail rearrangement of particles located in the energy that runs through the ship's EPS grid on a subatomic scale.

Which WOULD be pretty magical considering energy is not composed of "particles."

More to the point: if you're going to be rearranging subatomic particles anyway, it is far more efficient to store those particles in a concentrated solid matter than thinly diffused through the power grid. The ability to rearrange matter is far more useful than the ability to materialize energy, primarily because matter is a lot easier to find and store than energy.

There was 0 mention that pre-existing 'raw material' would be used

Actually there were SEVERAL such references in Deep Space Nine, one of the most explicit of which is "Babel"

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BASHIR: Based on the levels of the virus found in the patients' blood, I believe it's being absorbed through ingestion.
SISKO: You're saying it's in our food?
KIRA: That's not possible. All the food on the station is replicated, and all the replicators use biofilters. They automatically screen out contaminants including viruses. [/FONT]

Biofilters are a component of transporters used when beaming a physical object from one place to another. There are no viruses or contaminants in a stream of energy, but there potentially could be in a barrel of stored protein and simple carbohydrates.

Torres even explained how to create 0 waste by essentially stating that they recycle energy itself.

Fail science is fail.

But they're not, for the reasons mentioned above. Their level of technology is not nearly as high as you (or for that matter, THEY) think it is.

On-screen evidence disagrees with you...[/quote]
Well, Voyager disagrees with me. But that's okay, because Voyager disagrees with pretty much anyone who tried to watch it sober.

I was under the impression that TOS stated on-screen this process was taking place

It did not.

But, even if the TM's explanation of how the collectors work, it can be interpreted that it's used for continuous power generation.

It is. The collected hydrogen is used by the fusion reactors and the warp core to run the engines and power systems. There is only one component on the ship capable of converting matter directly into energy, and that component is the warp core.

In your opinion...

In the opinion of REAL SCIENCE, you mean, which therefore has nothing to do with Voyager.

Any technology can be improved upon to spend less energy than initially required

But it cannot be streamlined to PRODUCE more energy than it consumes; that is thermodynamically impossible.

You're essentially suggesting that an engineer would prefer to expend one hundred petawatts of energy to produce a steak and a glass of water when he could just as easily expend half a liter of bulk protein and a couple ounces of silicon.

And you're gonna tell me that superimposing OUR theoretical understanding onto their technology is doable?
Please don't make me laugh.
WE have barely begun to scratch the surface and are in technological infancy...

Which doesn't change the fact that 2+2 does not equal 5. We may not know enough about science to predict what the 24th century will bring, but we DO know enough to judge the plausibility of a 20th century television show.

Replicators were stated on several occasions to use a relatively size-able portion of the ship's energy reserves.

Only on Voyager, and never with any amount of consistency. There's the physics thing to consider again: Matter, unlike energy, is easy to store. So much easier, in fact, that the easiest way to store energy is to turn it INTO matter and convert it when you need it (which is why warp drives run on antimatter and not batteries).

Plus, in the episode 'Void' of S7, Voyager managed to get it's hands on tech which trippled their replicator efficiency and were able to feed 500 people per day using half the power than before.

Exactly my point. Boosting the efficiency of the replicators would NOT change the basic reality of matter-energy equivalence; one gram of matter is STILL equivalent to 89 petawatts no matter how efficient the replicators are. Higher efficiency means the replicator WASTES less energy doing whatever it it is that it does.

Now for the math part: suppose a replicator only takes three and a half kilowatts to operate. It is only 26% efficient, which means 2.6 kilowatts of energy are wasted every time it is used. We're told there's a 3x boost in efficiency, which means the waste energy is reduced to a third (1750 watts less waste). We're also told this, OVERALL, allows replicators to use half as much energy because of this efficiency boost.

Now imagine this same replicator is directly converting energy into matter. This means that its input is 175 petawatts, and its original waste was 260 petawatts--the equivalent of several very large back-to-back thermonuclear detonations. Trippling the efficiency would reduce the waste to about 86 petawatts, the equivalent of several SMALL back to back thermonuclear detonations, or one photon torpedo.

IF replicators channeled that much energy, they could not operate safely unless their efficiency was around 99.999999% (releasing only a small amount of waste energy in the form of heat and light into the surrounding environment). It is, however, MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for replicators to tripple their efficiency AND reduce their power consumption by half at that level of efficiency.

IOW, 2+2 still equals 4, even if you're using a replicator.

And yet it never occurred to you that maybe the CAPABILITIES you describe are non-existent?

It did, and I take into account the possibility, but ...
Did it ever occur to you that the capabilities exist but were shown on a seldom basis and were intentionally limited by the writers for the sake of 'drama'?[/quote]
In which case, they didn't REALLY exist, they were only talked about, and then very imprecisely between people who knew enough about that technology not to take that imprecision literally.

Think of it this way: you pick up a guy from the 17th century in your DeLorean time machine, then zip back to 1985 saying you need to stop for gas. Then at the gas station he looks at you all confused and asked, "I thought you said you were getting gas? The fuel you're pumping is CLEARLY a liquid."

 

[Timo]

What is the point of this exchange if the computer can literally produce from energy alone all the ingredients for a chocolate sundae?

Umm, what?

The obvious and explicit point of the exchange is that Troi wants a chocolate sundae with unhealthy ingredients, and the replicator is set to only produce sundaes with healthy ones. The process of replication does not affect the healthiness of the ingredients; the choice of ingredients affects the healthiness of the dish. A live chef from today would give Troi the same response: "The boss told me not to give you that fatty stuff."

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Deks]

To be sure, it was stated a handful of times in Season 1 of TNG (vaguely in "Encounter at Farpoint" and by inference elsewhere) but like many things in early TNG it was quickly retconned away. It popped up again in the cavalcade of scientific nonsense that was Star Trek Voyager, so we shouldn't really be surprised by the contradiction.

It's hardly a contradiction since the statement was repeated throughout the Trek canon.
You discarding Voyager on scientific basis is none of my concern.
By that same token, a lot of TNG and Star Trek is considered 'nonsense' as well (as far as 'current' human understanding of science goes - such as it is).

The TM always applies in any instance where it is isn't directly contradicted by canon, primarily because it was written by the producers of the show itself. In point of fact it was written several years AFTER the references in Encounter at Farpoint to "energy into matter" and thus represents a retcon in and of itself.

Wrong. The TM is NOT canon.
Case closed.

More to the point: even those EaF references are vague enough that the replicators can be inferred as being similar to transporters and thus working on the same basic principle, in which case they--like transporters--would require a physical material to exist first before they can replicate anything.

Wrong. Replicators were stated to have 'roots' in transporter technology - which in turn was stated to turn matter into energy and back again (at a different location).
A process which is clearly evident in replicators when recycling is done, but only to the point where leftover matter is turned into energy which is cycled back into the ship's power grid.
When replicating an object, energy is turned into matter.
Finally, just because a tech employs processes from another technology, doesn't mean they will behave or do things exactly the same.

It absolutely is. In fact Troi says as much in "The Price":

What is the point of this exchange if the computer can literally produce from energy alone all the ingredients for a chocolate sundae? Troi ought to know that the ice cream and the whipped cream in her sundae are just as "real" as they would be if she got it from Ben & Jerrys. The thing is, the computer can't make REAL ice cream, because the simple proteins are carbohydrates it uses to manufacture food items aren't the same ones found in ice cream and whipped cream. They can be arranged to TASTE like the real thing, but the replicated ice cream sundae is formulated so that it has the same nutritional value as a replicated cheeseburger or a replicated tofu salad: they are essentially the same thing, arranged in a different shape with a different texture and flavor. That's on-screen vindication of a tech manual reference, and it is NOT the only one.

Troi for that matter was spouting nonsense and was clearly not thinking 'rationally' at the time because after the computer couldn't understand what she wanted, she became agitated (not a hallmark of rational thinking).
We are coming back to the notion that the 'replicated food doesn't taste right' is just a stupid made up concept that was spouted on few separate occasions by those who were in a certain frame of mind that colored their perception in a non-objective manner.
You are making deductions based on an individual who was for a lack of better term 'not thinking clearly' at the time.

It's simple mathematics, a function of the intensity of solar radiation and the surface area of the object involved. Even if your solar array is 100% efficient, one kilogram of matter would be equivalent to the amount of energy that would reach a planet-sized object in one second, or a starship-sized object in two weeks. You could obviously speed this up by moving closer to the star--ALOT closer--but that would cost you on efficiency.

At the time Yorktown was transmitting, they hadn't actually rigged their solar sail yet.

Transmission originated on Earth in the first place and power from the sun was harnessed and implemented DIRECTLY.
Which means subspace communications were used to reach the Yorktown which later on transmitted the message onward.

They could probably learn jujitsu in one really intense afternoon in the holodeck too. I'm not really sure what that has to do with converting energy into matter.

Efficiency is a matter of how much energy is LOST, between 1% and 100%. Even if 100% efficiency were possible (it isn't) there is a quantifiable limit to how much energy you can collect from a solar array of a given size. There is also a quantifiable amount of energy for a given amount of mass.

And the point is, Federation technology in this area (and many others) are currently leaps and bounds AHEAD of ours.

Point here is, one kilogram of solid matter is equivalent to ALOT of energy; one square foot of solar radiation is not.

Which WOULD be pretty magical considering energy is not composed of "particles."

So, the stellar phenomenon known as nucleosynthesis which occurs in supernovas doesn't convert energy into matter?
Oh that's right, it DOES.
Nevermind the premise that WE actually were able to do the same thing (albeit on a MINUTE scale).
Furthermore, even our understanding of physics and energy shows that particles exist in energy.
When it comes to Trek, this is actually pretty evident... phasers for example.
Even the plasma running through the ship's EPS system.

More to the point: if you're going to be rearranging subatomic particles anyway, it is far more efficient to store those particles in a concentrated solid matter than thinly diffused through the power grid. The ability to rearrange matter is far more useful than the ability to materialize energy, primarily because matter is a lot easier to find and store than energy.

Except that Picard stated on 2 occasions alone that they found that matter and energy are interchangeable.
To them, this is a simplistic notion.
Since they already have an abundance of energy in the first place, for THEM, it's much easier to use energy than matter.
Besides, you'd need an enormous amounts of 'raw matter' to create foods, clothing, spare parts, etc... much more than a ship could store at any given points most likely, and they would sooner complain that they have a shortage of raw matter for the replicators, and not energy (and clearly, ENERGY is ALWAYS mentioned as the issue and not a sliver of 'raw matter' has been mentioned in all of Trek).

Actually there were SEVERAL such references in Deep Space Nine, one of the most explicit of which is "Babel"

Biofilters are a component of transporters used when beaming a physical object from one place to another. There are no viruses or contaminants in a stream of energy, but there potentially could be in a barrel of stored protein and simple carbohydrates.

Fail science is fail.

I remember the episode. And to my recollection, that PATTERN was the one mentioned as 'tainted'.
Information is digitized. This virus upon infection would likely 'get into the food' on the premise that the patterns themselves become 'tainted' (something which happened on several occasions in Trek if I remember accurately) or distorted where the computer incorporates the virus as part of the pattern and replicates it along with other matter.

Well, Voyager disagrees with me. But that's okay, because Voyager disagrees with pretty much anyone who tried to watch it sober.

No. It just disagrees with you.

It is. The collected hydrogen is used by the fusion reactors and the warp core to run the engines and power systems. There is only one component on the ship capable of converting matter directly into energy, and that component is the warp core.

Case in point... I was stating that they were mentioned in TOS to perform this function for the purpose of energy generation - which further corroborates the claim (if the explanation holds true) that 'energy' is 0 issue for SF ships and they can be self-sustaining effectively and that any 'limitations' imposed by writers were IDIOTIC.

In the opinion of REAL SCIENCE, you mean, which therefore has nothing to do with Voyager.

Which by opinions of numerous other people has nothing to do with Trek in general.
Voyager actually kept certain tech aspects in line with how Gene Roddenberry envisioned them.
And other shows didn't really discredit it. Voyager sometimes expanded on it.

But it cannot be streamlined to PRODUCE more energy than it consumes; that is thermodynamically impossible.

In our current understanding of science.
Trek humans obviously broke or bent more than one of the pre-established scientific notions, and if you thought along scientific lines, you would know that science as such is always supposed to be subject to change regardless of evidence or proof presented.
Start stating things as 'facts', 'beliefs' or 'faith', and it easily turns into religion (it's no longer science).

You're essentially suggesting that an engineer would prefer to expend one hundred petawatts of energy to produce a steak and a glass of water when he could just as easily expend half a liter of bulk protein and a couple ounces of silicon.

Which doesn't change the fact that 2+2 does not equal 5. We may not know enough about science to predict what the 24th century will bring, but we DO know enough to judge the plausibility of a 20th century television show.

Actually no. Since we don't know jack about science compared to the Trek's 24th century humans which are thousands of years ahead of us thanks to being exposed to such techs from the Vulcans for example and closed the gap (for the most part) in 90 years which likely prompted skipping several stages because of inspiration along... we CAN'T judge the plausibility of a TV show which is set to occur hundreds of years into the future.
At the rate recent history has been changing, the changes could be quite large in mere 200 years in real life alone.

Only on Voyager, and never with any amount of consistency. There's the physics thing to consider again: Matter, unlike energy, is easy to store. So much easier, in fact, that the easiest way to store energy is to turn it INTO matter and convert it when you need it (which is why warp drives run on antimatter and not batteries).

Consistency in terms of how the replicators work was retained throughout Voyager, and ENERGY was a big issue (repeatedly stated) initially which forced the crew to ration replicator usage and rely much more on agriculture.
Replicators were more widely used after Voyager's third season.

Exactly my point. Boosting the efficiency of the replicators would NOT change the basic reality of matter-energy equivalence; one gram of matter is STILL equivalent to 89 petawatts no matter how efficient the replicators are. Higher efficiency means the replicator WASTES less energy doing whatever it it is that it does.

Given their capabilities of manipulating and channeling energy, it's not tough to imagine that they in fact CAN reduce the amount of energy required to create a piece of matter.
I won't even pretend to know how they did that, but I wouldn't put it past their capacity to do so.

Now for the math part: suppose a replicator only takes three and a half kilowatts to operate. It is only 26% efficient, which means 2.6 kilowatts of energy are wasted every time it is used. We're told there's a 3x boost in efficiency, which means the waste energy is reduced to a third (1750 watts less waste). We're also told this, OVERALL, allows replicators to use half as much energy because of this efficiency boost.

Now imagine this same replicator is directly converting energy into matter. This means that its input is 175 petawatts, and its original waste was 260 petawatts--the equivalent of several very large back-to-back thermonuclear detonations. Trippling the efficiency would reduce the waste to about 86 petawatts, the equivalent of several SMALL back to back thermonuclear detonations, or one photon torpedo.

IF replicators channeled that much energy, they could not operate safely unless their efficiency was around 99.999999% (releasing only a small amount of waste energy in the form of heat and light into the surrounding environment). It is, however, MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for replicators to tripple their efficiency AND reduce their power consumption by half at that level of efficiency.

IOW, 2+2 still equals 4, even if you're using a replicator.

In regards to 'waste energy' Voyager clearly establishes they can recycle it and use it again. Producing 0 waste.
So what is 'wasted' is likely 'captured' by other processes and put back into circulation.
TNG certainly implies this as well on several occasions.
Oh, and replicators in TNG were used to such an extent in one of the episodes where the ship couldn't go to Warp for a specific time frame (season 2 if I'm not mistaken) because the energy requirement was the same as using the Warp drive or more.
So this essentially easily corroborates that energy is changed into matter and that you need a great deal of it in the process.
Regular replicator use wouldn't really impact Warp drive functions because they aren't used all the time.
In that specific episode, they used them essentially for industrial purposes.

In which case, they didn't REALLY exist, they were only talked about, and then very imprecisely between people who knew enough about that technology not to take that imprecision literally.

Think of it this way: you pick up a guy from the 17th century in your DeLorean time machine, then zip back to 1985 saying you need to stop for gas. Then at the gas station he looks at you all confused and asked, "I thought you said you were getting gas? The fuel you're pumping is CLEARLY a liquid."

Let me put it to you this way:
They had 2 shows after TNG to 'correct' the problem (per you) and state the tech works differently.
They didn't. They KEPT saying it operates on the principles of converting energy into matter.
Just because it's 'incredulous' to you doesn't mean it's to everyone... and I for one like scientific way of thinking, but not in a religious manner where people stick to established theories as 'facts' or take into account 'evidence' as something that will hold ground for time to come never changing.
The beauty of scientific thinking is to try and think outside the box every once in a while, regardless of how 'inefficient' or 'ludicrous' it may seem.
The so called 'geniuses' thought in such a way which is why numerous advancements in science were made.
However, that doesn't mean their theories are not subject to being infallible.
Furthermore... society is never quick to discard what is thought to be 'well established theories' because it implies admittance to the possibility that they could have been 'wrong' - that's just a stupid societal construct where people are trying to 'save face' in order to not be embarrassed or lose 'funding'.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

What is the point of this exchange if the computer can literally produce from energy alone all the ingredients for a chocolate sundae?

Umm, what?

The obvious and explicit point of the exchange is that Troi wants a chocolate sundae with unhealthy ingredients, and the replicator is set to only produce sundaes with healthy ones. The process of replication does not affect the healthiness of the ingredients; the choice of ingredients affects the healthiness of the dish.

But they DON'T have a choice of ingredients, which is the entire point of the exchange. It's implied in the TM and elsewhere that the reason they don't have a choice is primarily for technical reasons.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

To be sure, it was stated a handful of times in Season 1 of TNG (vaguely in "Encounter at Farpoint" and by inference elsewhere) but like many things in early TNG it was quickly retconned away. It popped up again in the cavalcade of scientific nonsense that was Star Trek Voyager, so we shouldn't really be surprised by the contradiction.

It's hardly a contradiction since the statement was repeated throughout the Trek canon.

Give me a single non-Voyager reference to back that up.

The TM always applies in any instance where it is isn't directly contradicted by canon, primarily because it was written by the producers of the show itself. In point of fact it was written several years AFTER the references in Encounter at Farpoint to "energy into matter" and thus represents a retcon in and of itself.

Wrong. The TM is NOT canon.

The TM was written by the producers of the show, compiling THEIR understanding of the technology as they chose to depict it. It is, essentially, canon until contradicted.

Wrong. Replicators were stated to have 'roots' in transporter technology - which in turn was stated to turn matter into energy and back again (at a different location).
A process which is clearly evident in replicators when recycling is done, but only to the point where leftover matter is turned into energy which is cycled back into the ship's power grid.

There are virtually no references anywhere to "recycling back into the ship's power grid." And even if there were, this once again ENTIRELY defeats the purpose of fueling a warp core with antimatter. If you do not NEED to react matter with antimatter then you might as well just open the ramscoops and suck the hydrogen directly into a giant replicator in engineering.

You see, there are certain capabilities you're implying into replicators that the PRODUCERS OF THE SHOW intentionally left out of them. Without those additional capabilities, everything else makes sense. WITH those additional capabilities, nothing makes sense; warp cores are redundant, antimatter is unnecessary and fusion reactors are WOEFULLY inadequate for almost everything they're said to do.

It's alot simpler to leave replicators as the producers of Star Trek left them: glorified transporters that rearrange molecules turning bulk protein (or bulk building material) into food (or tools/toys/musical instruments). Even if you believe the TM isn't canon, the people who WROTE IT are significantly more familiar with Star Trek than you are.

When replicating an object, energy is turned into matter.

Half right. Matter is turned into energy and then back into matter in a (slightly) new configuration.

We are coming back to the notion that the 'replicated food doesn't taste right' is just a stupid made up concept

What's stupid and made-up about it? Unlike the "matter-energy" thing, THAT is a reference that spans EVERY incarnation of Star Trek and is also backed up by the TM and the producers themselves.

Transmission originated on Earth in the first place

No, the Yorktown was in deep space. The Captain reports "It has been three hours since our contact with the alien probe," and he goes on to say "Our chief engineer is trying to create a makeshift solar sail. It is our hope that this will, if successful, generate power to keep us alive." That is future tense, meaning three hours after contact with the alien probe, Yorktown was still working on the solar sail.

So, the stellar phenomenon known as nucleosynthesis which occurs in supernovas doesn't convert energy into matter?

Depending on the exact product being synthesized, it may actually convert some matter into energy.

To be clear on this: nucleosynthesis is what happens when several atomic nuclei are fused together to form newer, heavier atoms. For most elements this is an endothermic process, which means that the reaction absorbs more energy than it releases. In a trivial sense, this is indeed "converting energy into matter." Nucleosynthesis, however, does not operate ONLY with energy; a similar process occurs in a thermonuclear warhead where the fusion of hydrogen atoms releases some energy because the rest mass of the resulting helium atoms is lower than the total mass of the hydrogen atoms and that extra mass is liberated as energy.

If replicators are indeed using nucleosynthesis, that makes them, essentially, portable atom smashers capable of slamming any two atoms together to form a new element. The power requirements for such a device would be staggering, but many orders of magnitude less than a device that runs on energy alone.

Furthermore, even our understanding of physics and energy shows that particles exist in energy.

No they don't. Particles--by definition--are points of mass, while energy is a property which particles may be said to possess. The reason mass and energy are equivalent in physics is because conservation of mass/energy always has to balance on both sides of the equation, so if you do something to a particle that causes it to shed some mass--or GAIN it--the change constitutes a loss or gain of potential energy.

The only way to produce matter from ENERGY ALONE, even in theory, involves pair production, in which case 50% of the resulting matter turns out to be ANTI-matter.

When it comes to Trek, this is actually pretty evident... phasers for example.

Phasers are particle beam weapons. Particles possess energy, and are a useful means of directing it. Hence the technical term "directed energy weapon."

Even the plasma running through the ship's EPS system...

Is a MEDIUM for energy, not energy itself. Even VOYAGER never makes that mistake.

Except that Picard stated on 2 occasions alone that they found that matter and energy are interchangeable.
To them, this is a simplistic notion.

It's also a simplistic reference. It's a little like saying that mass and weight are basically the same thing. As far as what you're talking about (discussing a very heavy object you're trying to lift) that may be true, but for the most part it is not.

To be clear again: mass and energy are EQUIVALENT, not interchangeable. You cannot have one without the other.

Since they already have an abundance of energy in the first place, for THEM, it's much easier to use energy than matter.

No it isn't, for the same reason that you can ALWAYS store more matter than you can store energy. Which means that no matter how easy it is to use energy, it is always EASIER to use matter. This is, once again, the entire reason why starships run on antimatter instead of batteries.

Besides, you'd need an enormous amounts of 'raw matter' to create foods, clothing, spare parts, etc...

Which would seem to explain the existence of cargo bays on starships, don't you think?

Besides, you would need the same amount of raw energy for that. What you seem unwilling to understand is that energy cannot be stored without a physical medium, which means you STILL have to carry around a huge amount of material (batteries, power cells, fuel tanks, etc) in order to keep that energy from dissipating into entropy.

They would sooner complain that they have a shortage of raw matter for the replicators, and not energy

And if the writers of Voyager were thinking clearly they would have done exactly this. There is no logical reason why they would have any difficulty gathering more energy, nor would they have any difficulty gaining more fuel (namely hydrogen and antimatter) to convert INTO energy in the warp core.

The best you can do is a retcon: the bulk material on the Intrepid class starships is a protein slurry called "EnArgee," a product of the Tyrell Corporation. Voyager has a limited supply of it, BUT their replicators are designed to re-fashion human waste into useable EnArgee stock, so Voyager can essentially replenish its food supplies just by obtaining non-replicated food and feeding the crew a high-fiber diet.

Actually, this wouldn't even require a retcon. It might just be the explanation as to why nobody in Star Trek ever makes an overt reference to a "toilet." They don't want to admit that the replicators are feeding their own reconstituted shit back to them.

I remember the episode. And to my recollection, that PATTERN was the one mentioned as 'tainted'.

Not tainted, but intentionally sabotaged. Which is beside the point, since a biofilter wouldn't really screen out a digitally altered program, it would only prevent existing pathogens or contaminants from remaining intact in the finished replicated product from wherever the replicators draw their bulk material.

Of course, there's also the DS9 Tech Manual which suggests Cardassian replicators physically pump the bulk material to the individual replicator slots instead of using transporter waveguides from a central source. Evidently, Cardassian plumbing is more susceptible to such contaminants than their Starfleet counterparts.

Case in point... I was stating that they were mentioned in TOS to perform this function for the purpose of energy generation

They weren't.

More to the point, the "energy generation" function of the ramscoops is in the ability to capture matter and then react it with the ship's stored supply of antimatter. They serve basically the same function in TNG, which directly suggests--as is explicitly stated throughout Trek and described in detail in the TM--that the only way to convert matter into useable energy is to annihilate it with antimatter.

Which by opinions of numerous other people has nothing to do with Trek in general.

Not in the opinions of the people who actually produced the show, however.

Voyager actually kept certain tech aspects in line with how Gene Roddenberry envisioned them.

In our current understanding of science.
Trek humans obviously broke or bent more than one of the pre-established scientific notions,

If you're suggesting that Trek science has nullified even the most BASIC principles of modern physics, then you're pretty much falling back on "It's MAGIC!" and there's nothing more to discuss.

Actually no. Since we don't know jack about science compared to the Trek's 24th century humans...

Trek's 24th century humans are FICTIONAL, and so is their science. We all agree it is entirely plausible that some totally knew scientific concept might emerge that would render irrelevant both the laws of thermodynamics and the normal mass-energy equivalence as we understand the concept.

The problem is, Star Trek at least pretends to be BASED on that real science, and therefore must also pretend to respect some of its basic tenants. If you toss out the basics as irrelevant, then the technology can do LITERALLY anything you want it to do, but you no longer have any coherent way of explaining how it works or what its real limitations are (except as a built-in plot device; e.g. We don't have the faintest idea how a sonic screwdriver works, but we know it doesn't work on wood).

Consistency in terms of how the replicators work was retained throughout Voyager

It was retained through the first half of the first season of Voyager, which is about as much consistency as that show was capable of.

Given their capabilities of manipulating and channeling energy, it's not tough to imagine that they in fact CAN reduce the amount of energy required to create a piece of matter.

That's like saying "If you had a powerful enough computer, you could prove 2+2=47."

In regards to 'waste energy' Voyager clearly establishes they can recycle it and use it again. Producing 0 waste.

Which, in addition to being thermodynamically impossible is also provably false.

Replicators produce items with a distinct glowing/sparkling special effect, a distinct noise, and an unknown amount of heat from the electrical elements inside. The light, the sound and that heat ALL consume a certain amount of energy, and that energy constitutes waste. That's just the visible part we see in the foreground; several tens or hundreds of kilowatts could be needing removal from the system by coolant lines every time the replicator is activated (just like REAL electronic devices, including the computer you're using right now).

The other problem with your theory is that Torres specifically mentions "boosting efficiency." A machine that has zero waste is considered to be 100% efficient, and therefore CANNOT have its efficiency increased. Clearly replicators are nowhere near 100% efficient since their efficiency can be tripled by liberal application of [tech].

Oh, and replicators in TNG were used to such an extent in one of the episodes where the ship couldn't go to Warp for a specific time frame (season 2 if I'm not mistaken) because the energy requirement was the same as using the Warp drive or more.

That would be "The Child," needed by Geordi to replicate 512 specimen containers for the Big Scary Box of Germs.

Regular replicator use wouldn't really impact Warp drive functions because they aren't used all the time.

For a crew of 1014, "regular" replicators would be used FAR more often than their industrial counterparts. Remember, Geordi is only replicating 512 of those containment modules, nothing more. Imagine lunchtime on the Enterprise where 512 people all decide to replicate a glass of water, a caesar salad and a three-piece chicken dinner. Not a very efficient system if your ship has to drop out of warp every time the crew gets hungry.

Let me put it to you this way:
They had 2 shows after TNG to 'correct' the problem (per you) and state the tech works differently.

They didn't even wait that long, they had already corrected it by TNG's second season and DS9 maintained the same principle. Only Voyager deviated from that trend, and then using "energy" in a way that was logically identical to the stored material anyway.

Just because it's 'incredulous' to you doesn't mean it's to everyone... and I for one like scientific way of thinking

"Scientific way of thinking" means something VERY different from "throw together a bunch of half-understood scientific concepts because this is sci-fi and I can't really be wrong."

 

[Timo]

But they DON'T have a choice of ingredients, which is the entire point of the exchange. It's implied in the TM and elsewhere that the reason they don't have a choice is primarily for technical reasons.

This would be one interpretation of the scene. It cannot be argued to be the point of the exchange - the dramatic point is clear and concise (the replicator keeps Troi on a diet), and does not involve any definitions of how the replicator works.

The problem is, Star Trek at least pretends to be BASED on that real science, and therefore must also pretend to respect some of its basic tenants.

We can make a list of those tenets that are explicitly outdated by key Starfleet technologies, though. We don't have to believe in "what goes up must come down" any more, or in any other claims of ol' Newton. Einstein was dead wrong about the nature of motion, too.

And since transporters and replicators do work, there's a very good reason to consider thrashing certain ideas about conservation of energy, too. I mean, we have thrashed most of those already in the real world, by gradually realizing that the conservation laws are broader than we originally perceived, and that hidden qualities contribute to the conservation. E=mcc is likely to be only a fraction of the truth, then...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The problem is, Star Trek at least pretends to be BASED on that real science, and therefore must also pretend to respect some of its basic tenants.

We can make a list of those tenets that are explicitly outdated by key Starfleet technologies, though. We don't have to believe in "what goes up must come down" any more, or in any other claims of ol' Newton. Einstein was dead wrong about the nature of motion, too.

And since transporters and replicators do work, there's a very good reason to consider thrashing certain ideas about conservation of energy, too. I mean, we have thrashed most of those already in the real world, by gradually realizing that the conservation laws are broader than we originally perceived, and that hidden qualities contribute to the conservation. E=mcc is likely to be only a fraction of the truth, then...

Timo Saloniemi

If you toss the science that Star Trek is based on, then you have conceded that a scientific analysis of Star Trek is meaningless since the basic workings of their technology is PURELY fictional, not speculative or derivative.

Are you willing to take that step? Because if you're not, then an attempt to wish away those basic scientific laws as "outdated" is just special pleading.