Topic: Is the holodeck dimensionally transcendental???
MIB
Ex-Member
posted
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this topic has ever been discussed. Has anyone ever noticed whenever the holodeck is off, it is quite small, but when it is on, it is huge?
I know all about the little treadmill effect generated via forcefields under the holoedeck user's feet so that he/she can cover "huge" distances while staying in the same place.
However, this explanation is not satisfactory to me. Many times now we have seen multiple people use one holodeck at the same time and be very far apart from each other. Distances between 2 people would be larger than the floor size of the holodeck! The Voy episodes 'Fair Haven' and 'Spirit Folk' is proof of this. I don't even need to mention the other episodes in VOY and TNG that support this.
And so I've been wondering. While a holodeck is on does it become dimensionally transcendental?? In other words, while the holodeck is on, does it literally become larger on the inside than it is on the outside via some wierd quantum flux type thing????
quote:Originally posted by MIB: And so I've been wondering. While a holodeck is on does it become dimensionally transcendental?? In other words, while the holodeck is on, does it literally become larger on the inside than it is on the outside via some wierd quantum flux type thing????
Um, no. This is hardly a new question... the holodeck simply projects a wall between the two people and makes virtual holodecks for each of them, with independent imagery and sound fields.
posted
It is right. As I recall, this is the explanation put forth by the TNGTM, and the one that's generally accepted. Not that TPTB seem to care what's generally accepted, but I doubt they'll have any reason to contradict this one.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
quote:Originally posted by MIB: While a holodeck is on does it become dimensionally transcendental?? In other words, while the holodeck is on, does it literally become larger on the inside than it is on the outside via some wierd quantum flux type thing????
"NEW!! for Starfleet vessels, 2361! The HOLODECK!! From TardisCo!!"
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
If anybody's read Shatner's novels, there's a part in one of them where Spock and Kirk break out of a Vulcan holding cell which is also a holodeck (to prevent the occupents from finding the exit). They break out of it using the whole independent imagery thing. I think 'Avenger' is the one, they're all very good books.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I've learned not to trust his books. A Romulan-Borg alliance? A Defiant-class USS Monitor? The Farragut being assimilated after "Generations?" Kirk's one million lives? They may be good books, but not exactly "canon." (Which isn't a bad thing, actually)
posted
The "compartmentalization" of holodecks is *not* mentioned in the ST:TNG:TM. At the time that was written, I'm not sure if any episodes actually demanded that sort of technology.
posted
Encounter at Farpoint? Riker shouts to Data, and Data doesn't hear him. They have to be over a holodeck distance apart.
Elementary Dear Data, Pulaski is kept a long distance away from the rest of the people on the holodeck.
Possibly the Big Goodbye too, I can't remember.
So, yeah. Pretty much every episode demanded it.
Boogeymen was a good book. The weirdo-holodeck stuff was quite original at the time, pre-empting Ship in a Bottle by a couple of years.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
posted
Treknophyle: That was Liam's point. Someone said that, when the TNGTM was written, those issues had never come up in episodes. He was giving examples of episodes in which they did.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
In "Encounter at Farpoint" [TNG], another possible explanation is that the simulation was too noisy - there were trees and running water and other distractions. Data also wasn't paying too close attention. Also, that episode shows explicit interaction of a rock with the holodeck walls; in a decent simulation the rock would simply be dematerialized and a hologram projected. The software must differ between that simulation and most of the rest of what we see.
In "Elementary, Dear Data" [TNG] it's conceivable that the London simulation was convoluted, and fit within the confines of the Holodeck.
The Sherlock Holmes episodes antedate the Bynars upgrade of the holodeck, so it's possible they added the compartmentalization code.
posted
Yep thats all TNGTM stuff
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
quote: Also, that episode shows explicit interaction of a rock with the holodeck walls; in a decent simulation the rock would simply be dematerialized and a hologram projected. The software must differ between that simulation and most of the rest of what we see.
Probably Data programmed that for that special occasion just to examine the nifty techno.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
