Why not have a spacedock that scans and "beams up" say a runabout and then duplicates it? Obviously some materials can't be duplicated for example latinum, i'm not sure how many are used in starship design but then could probably copy and paste 80% complete shuttlecraft to their their hearts content, even duplicate defiants if they had mega -transporter-replicator copiers.
We know the replicator can create matter from thin air. This is tried and tested technology even in the TNG era.
Why not have a spacedock that scans and "beams up" say a runabout and then duplicates it? Obviously some materials can't be duplicated for example latinum, i'm not sure how many are used in starship design but then could probably copy and paste 80% complete shuttlecraft to their their hearts content, even duplicate defiants if they had mega -transporter-replicator copiers.
As with several other possibilities in the thread, there is a strong implication that some day, they will be able to apply replicator tech on a much larger scale.
It can, but it can't copy LIVE people. Replicators can only copy biomass and molecule-for-molecule duplications of bodies, but it can't duplicate what those molecules are supposed to be doing at the moment they are copied.I do really like your notion that transporter tech can essentially copy people--but that's a technology that would have to be very carefully approached from a dramatic standpoint in order to make effective stories out of.
Why use this for damage control? Since we're already using holograms all over the ship to create doctors and the person you're talking to on the opposite bridge, would it not be efficient to simply have all consoles or at least the monitors be holographic to begin with?Here's a truly new tech: holographic damage control. This involves holoemitters throughout the ship which are capable of patching EPS conduits, hull breaches, and exploding consoles. Due to the huge energy expenditures involved, eventually industrial replicators will have to put physical patches in place, but for the duration of combat, starships should have a significant advantage.
No, it tends to the nature of scanning technology. It's sort of like an electron microscope: it's impossible to scan something at that high a resolution without simultaneously killing it, because once you've scanned its many molecules to figure out exactly what they're doing at such and such a time, the intensity of the scan itself has already disrupted those molecules and probably ionized very important parts of them.As for transporters, it's described in the TM as essentially a resolution issue which could in theory be overcome by a suitably huge memory capacity.
You don't build minds, let alone rebuild them. The mind is an emergent property of a working brain; if the brain isn't working, neither is the mind. That's probably another reason why you can't bulk-copy inanimate objects in a replicator. It's actually likely that anything with a large amount of structural/chemical/metallic bonds can't be reproduced in the replicator; you have to build the parts and then physically mate them together the old fashioned way. For those kinds of materials it would probably depend more on bulk storage of complex compounds, unable to fashion them ex nihilo just by attaching electrons to each other.Further, it is really questionable whether a position/velocity replication of every particle in the brain is necessary to rebuild a human mind.
It can, but it can't copy LIVE people. Replicators can only copy biomass and molecule-for-molecule duplications of bodies, but it can't duplicate what those molecules are supposed to be doing at the moment they are copied.I do really like your notion that transporter tech can essentially copy people--but that's a technology that would have to be very carefully approached from a dramatic standpoint in order to make effective stories out of.
I mean, unless you're beaming someone through some type of local quantum hyperbole.
Why use this for damage control? Since we're already using holograms all over the ship to create doctors and the person you're talking to on the opposite bridge, would it not be efficient to simply have all consoles or at least the monitors be holographic to begin with?Here's a truly new tech: holographic damage control. This involves holoemitters throughout the ship which are capable of patching EPS conduits, hull breaches, and exploding consoles. Due to the huge energy expenditures involved, eventually industrial replicators will have to put physical patches in place, but for the duration of combat, starships should have a significant advantage.
Scene:
Sensors detect a Romulan ship decloaking at the edge of sensor range. A monitor window appears in the air next to the tactical officer's head (thereby drawing attention to itself) with the report.
Tactical officer reports "Romulan ship decloaking!"
Captain orders "On screen." Another monitor appears in the middle of the room directly in front of him showing a visual image sans sensor data.
Captain orders "Red Alert," at which point a control station appears in front of the Captain's chair, as does a more extensive fire/shield control console in front of the tactical officer.
Think of it like a floating LCARS system. You can customize the entire room with as many stations and consoles as you want. Really, the only limit to how many stations you have on the bridge is the number of chairs and even these can easily be holographic.
And why just flat surfaces? Shouldn't Trek's holographic technology allow for a free-floating holographic multi-touch interface like that Tom Cruise used in Minority Report? (I like to fancy that maybe that wave Spock - may or may-not have used - to change the screen in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" could have been an example of something like this. And why not? 23rd century tech could easily allow commands signaled with a wave of the hand or tentacle.)
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.