The question is pretty much in the subject line, but allow me to reiterate. After the commanding officer has ordered the hull plating polarized, would it interfere with transport ability? I am aware that with normal shielding up, it is near impossible to transport back and forth on a starship, but why, if at all, would polarized hull plating?
I would appreciate comments on this, using trek or real life physics. As I have not yet seen the crew try to transport while in comabt (with the exception of "Broken Bow," in which Archer is transported off of the Suliban Helix while the Enterprise is being fired on. I do not know, however if T'pol actually ordered the hull polarized).
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote: NX-01 incorporates a polarization matrix in its hull plating. Through the application of electromagnetic power, the metal hull of the ship can be made several orders of magnitude harder than it is in its non-polarized state.
This kind of technology isn't that far out of reach today. So-called 'smart materials' can be programmed to change their shape or their ability to reflect light a the flick of a switch. Designing a material that can be programmed for increased strength will probably happen in the not-too-distant future.
-Andre Bormanis
My take would be, as presently concieved, no, it doesn't interfere. That's purely speculative, though, and should an episode require them to spell out a rule then we may get something different.
Of course, transporters may be spotty enough that beaming into enclosed spaces of moving vehicles that are kicking out a bigass warp field could be dangerous, anyway. "Intraship beaming" being not totally smiled-upon in TOS and all.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
There doesn't seem anything wrong in the technological logic of it. However, if you can in fact beam through polarized hull plating, then this offers a rather significant advantage over shields. Perhaps hull plating isn't effective enough to remain the defense of choice primarily, but I would think this aspect alone would provide enough advantage to keep it around as some sort of secondary defense. As such, it completely dissappears in the future.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Hmm...
I think that the polarized plating WOULD in fact interfere with transporters.
Consider (1) that transporters are (supposedly) much more primitive than TOS or TNG-era units. Even in the 24th century, transporter beams were prone to malfunction and interference from natural or unnatural sources. (2) The polarized hull plating uses electromagnetic fields to achieve its usefulness. Therefore, I'd wager that the EM fields would interfere with the transporter beam.
However, there are a couple of instances where ENT canon may have already contradicted that supposition. In "Broken Bow," they beamed up Archer during the big battle with the Suliban. And in "Civilization," they beamed over that alien M/AM reactor and blew it up. In both instances, I think that the hull plating was engaged.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
I think polarizing the hull plating is just applying a charge to the hull. It shouldn't really affect the transporters. Shields actually imposed a barrier between the transporter beam emitter and the target.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Which means you have potential weak spot to aim for - the emitters.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
Yes, but that wouldn't be avoidable. It absolutely needs emitters on the hull. So the ultimate answer would be no, it doesn't interfere with transporters.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Of course, the windows would also be equally weak spots, so it's not like the emitters would be such a big deal.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
And there are a lot more windows. A lot more.
Of course, it's quite possible that the Bussard ramscoop, the impulse exhaust vents, the thrusters, the warp field glow thingies are all not affected by polarizing of the hull plating, so plenty of things to shoot at.
Posted by Mojo (Member # 536) on :
This thread has the kind of subject line that gives people good reason to fear sci-fi fans...
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Mundanes, we don't need 'em.
You should watch me talking about anime characters as if they were real.
[ January 15, 2002: Message edited by: David Templar ]
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I know exactly how you feel. I mean, look at what my OTHER job is:
What a wonderful world. Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I've dealt with CRTL-A on numerous occasions, especially when we were working with Ian Kim (he did one of our T-shirt designs). You guys rock almost as much as Albertan anime fans do.
Yeah, I know we're going off topic. But kindred souls meeting counts for a lot. David, I guess I might see you at the next Anime North.
Mark
[ January 16, 2002: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by The Antagonist (Member # 484) on :
Yes, I am fully aware that it is scary to talk about this stuff, thats why I never get into the thick of it. I just ask and watch what happens. In anycase I just want some ground rules to establish the things that they don't say or we don't see. Thanks fellas.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Hey cool, I'm in fact going to Anime North this year, barring an untimely end of the universe.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)