Their screen technology. I'd love to have that for my PC and for my TV. Whatever they have must be superior to what we have today
Which Star Trek technology would people abuse the most if it was released today?
- Thread starter Candleicious Ghost
- Start date
Which screen tech? Lcars?
Whatever they use for things like the screen in Picard's cabin, the one that is on his desk.
Whatever tech it is is still better than anything we have now.
Last edited:
Lots of great answers here by lots of far more intelligent people than me. I will simply add that I've always been in awe of the power of phasers, especially how they were used in TOS. Such sophisticated energy weapons would be incredibly devastating, especially if mounted to satellites. A country could vaporize an enemy country or continent in minutes or seconds. I don't think the stun setting would be used much in today's warfare. There are non-lethal applications, too, but I don't think the people who would use the tech in such ways would actually be allowed access to it.
I'd very possibly abuse replicator tech in that I would rarely eat healthily again if I had one. I would be far too weak-willed.
Transporter tech could possibly make me lazy. On the other hand, if I used it strictly for holidays, then it may not be so bad.
I'm not gonna go into detail about how I'd abuse a holodeck.
Transporter tech could possibly make me lazy. On the other hand, if I used it strictly for holidays, then it may not be so bad.
I'm not gonna go into detail about how I'd abuse a holodeck.
See the stuff M'benga and Chapel use in SNW.
Cheap stable fusion power but of course people today would abuse that too if they could.
Fusion bombs even?
Fusion bombs even?
We already have those, it's called H-Bombs.
We've had them since the end of WW2.
We just don't call them Fusion Bombs, but they are technically ThermoNuclear Fusion Bombs.
Yes I know. But I was thinking more along the lines of a bomb with a fusion reactor as the core which could vary it's own yield
That seems overly complicated and requires extra engineering compared to what already exists.
Have you seen the WarHeads on modern day Nukes?
File:W88 warhead diagram-num.svg - Wikipedia
They're very small, take a ruler to measure it IRL, once you remove the cone casing, most of the War Head portion could easily fit in a large Office Waste Basket.
It's scary how much Potential Energy is in just one War Head that isn't that large.
That seems overly complicated and requires extra engineering compared to what already exists.
Have you seen the WarHeads on modern day Nukes?
File:W88 warhead diagram-num.svg - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
They're very small, take a ruler to measure it IRL, once you remove the cone casing, most of the War Head portion could easily fit in a large Office Waste Basket.
It's scary how much Potential Energy is in just one War Head that isn't that large.
OK that is scary..... and also fascinating, and yes my idea would be over complicating things, but then we don't have fusion reactors they're still 10 years away LOL
The Irony is that it's easier for our scientists to create a ThermoNuclear Fusion WarHead/Bomb than to create a working Fusion Reactor.
Despite it being always 20 years in the future for the last 70+ years.
One day you'll see, when most conventional fuels start getting scarce bam! There will be a miracle breakthrough on fusion lol
And then the Fusion Power will be used to make Synthetic Fuels for our vehicles.
You're not flying a modern AirLiner on Batteries, the Physics & Mathes don't work in it's favor.
The Energy Density of modern Petrol is TOO Good.
Similar threads
