• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Why do people die in Star Trek?

OK. People usually do net think like that. I mean what it matters if your dreams are carried out if you're not there to experience them? And you too might hesitate once Janeway points a phaser at you.
So why have children? It's obvious why it matters if dreams are carried out even if you're not there. Cue Dr. Soong's speech to Data in Brothers.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

And what do you mean, to net think.
It's astonishingly obvious that "net" was simply a typo of "not."
 
Last edited:
So why have children? It's obvious why it matters if dreams are carried out even if you're not there. Cue Dr. Soong's speech to Data in Brothers.
True, true.

Nevertheless, people tend to be rather attached to the continuation of their subjective experience. I'd claim that is the main reason of fear of death, not that your dreams are not carried out (although that certainly has some part in it too.)
It's astonishingly obvious that "net" was simply a typo of "not."
It's corrected now.
 
Industrial replicators are mentioned being a thing. I meant the bare metal bar frames and outer metal plates. We see that in a Voyager episode set at the Utopia Planitia, large metal bars and plates are being flown around by the work bee's from somewhere.

Duranium is the metal used to make hulls, replicators or some atomic forging processing machines could pump out large pieces in hours compared to the primitive metal working we do now.
I guess it depends how efficient the process is - replicating parts on that scale could be hugely energy intensive. Labour-intensive mining operations still exist in the 24th century, even for the technologically advanced Federation. It might just be easier to mine ore, melt it down and cast the hull plates ready for use. That was Terok Nor's job! Plus everyone got very excited about the Particle Fountain in Quality of Life, as it promised to revolutionise mining operations. Clearly there was still a massive need for extracting stuff from the ground.
 
Considering the matter is probably taken apart on molecular level...
No, subatomic/quantum. Molecules (made of more than one atom) converted to energy would be utterly destructive due to the huge loss of state resolution contained in the fundamental (subatomic) quantum wave functions of various "particles" within each atom.
 
Dilithium still needs to be, as is the material antimatter is converted from, so yes those being essential to warp drive I could be large scale mining being a thing. But metal casting after the fact, maybe not so much.

And Terok Nor is a Cardassian station, they're repeatidly shown as being behind several other Alpha Quandrant powers for their quality of design and technology.
 
Industrial replicators are mentioned being a thing. I meant the bare metal bar frames and outer metal plates. We see that in a Voyager episode set at the Utopia Planitia, large metal bars and plates are being flown around by the work bee's from somewhere.

Duranium is the metal used to make hulls, replicators or some atomic forging processing machines could pump out large pieces in hours compared to the primitive metal working we do now.
Thanks for the support.

@PhaserLightShow
 

I don't know? Personal built in bias? I don't believe in God, or heaven or any of that stuff. By the same token, I do believe there's something more to use than we can explain. That there is something to us that will survive this existence.
 
I don't think that's what actually happens. (What episode you actually mean? "The Bonding" wan't on first season...) No one is telling the kid in "The Bonding" that it is wrong to mourn. The crew obviously mourns Tasha in the first season.
To be honest, I just remember it's something everyone usually brings up whenever there's a discussion criticising TNG's first season. Regardless, Roddenberry definitely did take issue with The Bonding, so there's that on the matter.
 
I don't know? Personal built in bias? I don't believe in God, or heaven or any of that stuff. By the same token, I do believe there's something more to use than we can explain. That there is something to us that will survive this existence.
I don't believe that humans have any one use. I believe their only use is what they do.
And, @Nerys Myk, Katras do make me sad. For reasons I cannot explain.

@PhaserLightShow
 
To be honest, I just remember it's something everyone usually brings up whenever there's a discussion criticising TNG's first season. Regardless, Roddenberry definitely did take issue with The Bonding, so there's that on the matter.
Here's a quote from Piller's book describe a meeting with Gene.

My first time in Roddenberry’s Box was during the very first episode I
worked on as head writer. We were already in production of season three, four
shows were finished, twenty-two still to do. There were no scripts and no stories
to shoot the following week. Desperate, I bought a spec script that had been sent
in from an amateur writer named Ron Moore who was about to enlist in the U.S.
Navy. It was a rough teleplay called “The Bonding” and would require a lot of
reworking but I liked the idea. A female Starfleet officer is killed in an accident
and her child, overcome with grief, bonds with a holographic recreation of his
mother rather than accept her death.
I sent a short description of the story to Rick and Gene. Minutes later, I
was called to an urgent meeting in Gene’s office. “This doesn’t work” he said.
“In the Twenty-Fourth Century, no one grieves. Death is accepted as part of life.”

Source: Fade In by Michael Piller.
 
And didn't Rick tell him to ignore Gene and write the script?
Gene didn't like the idea that the kid would grieve to the extend that he would recreate his mother on the holodeck. They changed it to the alien and Gene was OK with that.
 
I have a tough time believing people who don't think, on some level, that we're more than the sum of our parts.

That does not mean immediately leaping to a supernatural conclusion, you can be more than the sum of the molecules that create you without invoking mysticism.
 
I think you and I are only our molecules.
Statements like that deserve to use the most fundamental constituents possible. It's not molecules. And not atoms either. At the moment, we might need to disregard any sort of real particle and just go with probabilistic wave functions. If you really need particles to hang on to your false sense of non-reality: quarks and gluons (for now).
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top