that, sir, is..IMPOSSIBLE!!

[RobertScorpio]

Back in the mid 60s, when TOS arrived, some of the tech, okay most of it, seemed very outlandish. I have always thought that it was the great stories that made that show, but the tech and surroundings to help indeed.

But now, here in the 2000s, some of that tech is finding its way into reality. Of all the 'technical' advances they showed in the original series (so, nothing from TNG-DS9 or the others is valid...not even Enterprise) which tech do you think is the most likely to be invented? And, of course, which tech do you think will never find its way out of the imaginations of the TOS writers and fands?

Rob

 

[Hambone]

I suppose much of the medical technology has already come to pass (non-invasive scanning, laser scalpels, needle-less injections). We have scanning/recording devices similar to tricorders. The communicator has come and gone, and even been surpassed.

The two main (to me) pieces of technology that make Star Trek what it is are the transporter and warp drive. Scientists have spent an awful lot of time on those two theories; rudimentary transporters currently exist.

Then there's artificial gravity. I don't know where that tech is going to come from.

 

[UssGlenn]

The communicator has come and gone, and even been surpassed.

People always say this but it isn't accurate in the slightest. Get back to me when your cell phone can call anywhere on the planet and into orbit without any infrastructure (like cell phone towers or a network of satellites) to support it.

 

[KimMH]

100 years ago a lot of current technology was inconceivable. I still am doubtful about transporting - I suppose I hope to live long enough to see it happen but do NOT plan on taking that particular train myself.

 

[Forbin]

The communicator has come and gone, and even been surpassed.

People always say this but it isn't accurate in the slightest. Get back to me when your cell phone can call anywhere on the planet and into orbit without any infrastructure (like cell phone towers or a network of satellites) to support it.

Ya beat me to it.
Not to mention subspace communication over several light years (see Mudd's Women).

The communicators were specialized military hardware designed for a single purpose, equivalent more to a SINCGARS set than to cell phones.

 

[scotpens]

I suppose much of the medical technology has already come to pass (non-invasive scanning, laser scalpels, needle-less injections)

There's still a way to go before we have something like the diagnostic readout panels in TOS Enterprise's sickbay. We have compact monitors that give a constant reading of temperature, blood pressure, pulse and other vital signs, but they still require something to be physically attached to the patient's body.

One area where Trek TOS technology HAS been surpassed is information storage. The Enterprise's computers used flat square “tapes” that were about the size of an old 3-1/2-inch floppy disk. Today we store multi-gigabytes on flash drives smaller than a man's thumb.

 

[A beaker full of death]

The one curious disconnect is video conferencing. We have it, and have had it for years and years, and yet it really hasn't been embraced. It was supposed to take the place of the telephone!

 

[RobertScorpio]

The one curious disconnect is video conferencing. We have it, and have had it for years and years, and yet it really hasn't been embraced. It was supposed to take the place of the telephone!

Same here..I work with the government and we never use it..still do conference calling all the time though. Oh, and nice avatar!

Rob

 

[mari]

The communicator has come and gone, and even been surpassed.

People always say this but it isn't accurate in the slightest. Get back to me when your cell phone can call anywhere on the planet and into orbit without any infrastructure (like cell phone towers or a network of satellites) to support it.

Ya beat me to it.
Not to mention subspace communication over several light years (see Mudd's Women).

The communicators were specialized military hardware designed for a single purpose, equivalent more to a SINCGARS set than to cell phones.

I always figured the communicator signals ran through the ship. Maybe through the deflector dish.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

have spent an awful lot of time on those two theories; rudimentary transporters currently exist.

No they don't. The demonstration of quantum teleportation has nothing to do with transporters in any sense as described by Star Trek.

 

[scotpens]

The one curious disconnect is video conferencing. We have it, and have had it for years and years, and yet it really hasn't been embraced. It was supposed to take the place of the telephone!

Science fiction has been predicting video telephones for more than a hundred years. The hitch is, there's no real necessity for them. How often do you need to see the person or persons you're talking with on the phone? The telephone was invented for voice communication, and that's what we use it for. When we need to send visual information like pictures and text, we use faxes and email.

Same with underground cities, underwater cities, levitated cities in the sky, humanoid robots -- concepts that have been staples of sci-fi for decades, but have no real practical value.

 

[Green Shirt]

Then there's artificial gravity. I don't know where that tech is going to come from.

Very heavy rocks in your pockets.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Then there's artificial gravity. I don't know where that tech is going to come from.

Very heavy rocks in your pockets.

Thanagarian warriors..LOL..

But I agree..don't see how thats gonna happen.

Rob

 

[Hambone]

The communicator has come and gone, and even been surpassed.

People always say this but it isn't accurate in the slightest. Get back to me when your cell phone can call anywhere on the planet and into orbit without any infrastructure (like cell phone towers or a network of satellites) to support it.

Ya beat me to it.
Not to mention subspace communication over several light years (see Mudd's Women).

The communicators were specialized military hardware designed for a single purpose, equivalent more to a SINCGARS set than to cell phones.

I guess what I was getting at is, cell phones appear to be able to do more than Star Trek's communicators could do (data storage, viewscreens, cameras, and so on). The broadcast capability or cell-tower infrastructure notwithstanding; however, with the infrastucture, it's possible to place a call to or from the ISS. Star Trek communicators were little more than 2-way radios, or advanced walkie-talkies.

 

[Kirk here]

Definitely the Transporter. Although it was *the coolest8 thing about ST when I was young, I think it's the least likely bit of tech in the show.

Think about it. A device that converts every bit of matter that you are made of into pure energy, then re-integrates *exactly* in another location. Just image the amount of data necessary to *absolutely* describe something, down to the smallest detail, which is impossible in quantum theory anyway. Imagine a system that could even collect data like this on something (even inanimate). Then imagine controlling all of the energy. The E in E=mc^2 for a human body is enormous. Then imagine a machine being able to change the energy back to matter, much less do it so that it perfectly matches the data collected before destruction, I mean, beaming. The last thing I'm going to do (unless my name is Shadrach, Meshach, or Abednego) is to step into a machine that's going to incinerate me on purpose. I'll deal with gridlock, thank you.

McCoy was right to question this. I submit that if a technology existed that could do this, it could do anything you could dream up.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Holodeck, with the kind of stuff we saw in treks, seems far off. I guess its another use of the transporter tech..

But, if it can be done, it will be the porn industry that will lead the way...Quark!!!

Rob

 

[John Picard]

I suppose much of the medical technology has already come to pass (non-invasive scanning, laser scalpels, needle-less injections).

Let's back that up -- AFIK, we don't have needle-less injections that don't smart like hell. Trek characters always get a hypo-spray to the neck. Anyone who's had a pressure injection to the arm can testify to how they smart. One guy in my boot camp company was the victim of a distracted Corpsman who pulled the gun back, moved up, and back into his arm again cutting him in the process.

The one curious disconnect is video conferencing. We have it, and have had it for years and years, and yet it really hasn't been embraced. It was supposed to take the place of the telephone!

Science fiction has been predicting video telephones for more than a hundred years. The hitch is, there's no real necessity for them. How often do you need to see the person or persons you're talking with on the phone?

Now that multiple computer monitors are becoming more prevalent and landlines are going the way of the Dodo, I wouldn't be surprised if the future (within 20 years) brings monitors with built-in cameras and phone conversations, as they used to be, will actually be conducted face-to-face where possible. I can see a small popup window that would be used for the conversation. Google is buying up tons of dark fiber, plus the FCC has yet to open up the wireless broadband spectrum from the old analog television airwaves.

 

[scotpens]

. . . I wouldn't be surprised if the future (within 20 years) brings monitors with built-in cameras and phone conversations, as they used to be, will actually be conducted face-to-face where possible. I can see a small popup window that would be used for the conversation. Google is buying up tons of dark fiber, plus the FCC has yet to open up the wireless broadband spectrum from the old analog television airwaves.

I just don't see phone-with-video ever becoming widely used. Speaking for myself, I don't even want to see the person on the other end of the phone -- and they probably don't want to see my ugly mug either.

 

[RobertScorpio]

. . . I wouldn't be surprised if the future (within 20 years) brings monitors with built-in cameras and phone conversations, as they used to be, will actually be conducted face-to-face where possible. I can see a small popup window that would be used for the conversation. Google is buying up tons of dark fiber, plus the FCC has yet to open up the wireless broadband spectrum from the old analog television airwaves.

I just don't see phone-with-video ever becoming widely used. Speaking for myself, I don't even want to see the person on the other end of the phone -- and they probably don't want to see my ugly mug either.

I dont know.. I bet the phone sex industry would sky rocket!!!

Rob

 

[Nerys Myk]

Or not, when Hot College Girl is really Middle Age Mom.