posted
[This reply does not count against the 10-post no-criticism limit. Thanks.]
Warped 1701: Very good. All speculation is welcome.
NOTICE
If anyone has posted this after W-1701, I can't see it because someone upstream of my ISP is caching for short (1-2 hour) periods of time. We've been experiencing technical difficulties.
ICQ and email do not seem to be affected by this current malady. Please feel free to respond via these avenues, but don't do that in lieu of responding to this thread. Share ideas. It's fun!
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread, already in progress.
posted
The "food pill" idea's been advanced before (Good idea, BTW).
What about replicated food? How big is a replicator? How much energy does it take to create a small (~0.5 kg) amount of food? Can you lug one of those things around?
Field Kitchens: Would they make an effort to cook "fresh" food or would it be more efficient to replicate everyone's order? Remember that a hot meal isn't just nutrition, it's a morale-booster.
------------------ CAUTION: The Mass of This Product Contains the Energy Equivalent of 85 Million Tons of TNT per Net Ounce of Weight.
posted
In the end, I think it would probably be easier for them to have a field kitchen. Unless they have heavy vehicles able to carry around at least 15-20 replicator units. Due to their size and complexity, it's quite possible for them to have an extremely high weight. >500 kilograms. If that is the case, it wouldn't be easy to lug around 15-20 of them, while fighting on the move. It would be in Starfleet's best interest to have a nicely equipped field kitchen. Lightweight tent covering, small pots, pans, utensils, and heating devices. To me, it just makes more sense.
------------------ Risk is our business! That's what this starship is all about....that's why we're aboard her!"
posted
How about something like a nutrient patch, like the nicotine patches of today. Sort of like a compact saline sollusion but far better. I think it may be hard to put a whole days worth of "food" into a patch, but maybe a nutrient "t-shirt" is possible. Also it may be feasible to saturate fat cells in the body with nutrients prior to deployment for certain combat teams and situations.
These are alternate ideas for situations where ration packs and field kitckens are impropable to use.
------------------ The best thing about being a solipsist is that I'm the only one here. --Paul Cargile
posted
The chief problem with replicators is power. If you're lugging around enough raw foodstock (protein, carbos, etc) ready to be manipulated, then it might be workable, because simple rearrangement isn't too big of a deal if you've got . If you are trying to replicate the food out of whatever raw matter is available (air, dirt, etc), then you're talking about an enourmous amount of power since actual quantum transmutation has to be done. Carrying ready-made food or rations would be more feasable in that case.
posted
That brings up a question I have had. How do food replicators work? Does they create something from pure energy or do they have a whole bunch of stuff that is mixed together to make a meal?
------------------ There's a lady who knows, all that glitters is gold...and she's buying a stairway to heaven. -Led Zeppelin, "Stairway to Heaven"
posted
According to the TNGTM, there is some kind of raw storage medium that is actually used to create the physical portion of the food. It is dematerialized into energy, sent to the replicator terminal, and rematerialized in the form of whatever foodstuff is requested. Energy is used, but is not the consituent component of the food.
------------------ "We choose to do this and more. Not because it is easy, but because it is hard." -- John F. Kennedy
posted
For that matter, it isn't even transformed into energy. As with transporters, they just break things apart. Replicators work at molecular resolution for the most part, and they are only capable of working with whole molecules. The food is stored as big (presumably compressed) vats of proteins, carbohydrates, and other food-making stuff, which is beamed out and rearranged molecule by molecule. Due to the limitations of molecular resolution, it is simply impossible for standard replicators to accurately make anything composed of materials not already stored. I'm sure some replicators work at quantum resolution and are capable of scanning and rearranging atoms at the quark level, but its likely very energy intensive; hence, there is still mining and so forth in the replicator age. Replication is only good if a.) you're on a starship and you just want common objects, or b.) you're on a planet and have near infinite fusion, solar, and geothermal power available.
posted
I always thought that molecular resolution meant that it simply made every molecule of each substance exactly alike. Whereas quantum resolution would account for the slight variances between them.
------------------ "I fart in your general direction!" -John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
posted
'Fraid not. Molecular resolution refers specifically to the scanners that scan the material. They can only scan molecule by molecule; hence, the devices can only manipulate whole molecules. It would be like me trying to move amoebas (atoms) with the naked eye (mol. res. scanners)... it won't work unless you've got a microscope (q. res. scanners). I'd guess it is pretty easy to convert between the two, but it's just incredibly power intensive to transmute elements.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
