We got a bit off-topic in Rev's fed hopper thread so I'm starting a thread about it here ;P
Is it silly that transporters are never used as a weapon in Trek? Would it be banned by treaty? Would the Romulans ever abide by that? Would the Breen even sign it? The Dominion probably wouldn't give a shit. Neither would the Cardassians. The Klingons would probably consider it dishonorable and wouldn't engage in it (except for rogue agents like the Duras sisters or Kruge...).
There are a *lot* of things the transporter could do that they never use it for. It's a truly post-singularity technology and they're just using it as a quick version of the number four bus. You could use it against unshielded enemies (aboard ship or planetside) in a number of ways - beam them into space; scramble them up like Picard did to the Tox Uthat; beam out their bones; beam all the atmosphere off their ship; beam out key components of their ship or bodies; etc (these are a mix of my own suggestions and things other people put forth in Rev's thread).
As for non-weapon uses, you could beam people's waste right out of their bladders and rectums. Goodbye, crew head (except emergency installations I suppose). Also I recall reading some TOS-era novel where the sickbay beds had transporter arrays in them and could beam things in and out of a patient like debris, shrapnel, etc. and which could project forcefields to, for example, keep a major artery closed or halt internal bleeding.
So can you think of any more interesting uses for the transporter, and any more plausible reasons why the galaxy at large in the Trek universe wouldn't use transporters that way?
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Simply, they can't be use against shielded targets... which is most of the time. And I don't think that unshielded targets are worth it because you can just fire a torpedo or phaser and do your damage or destruction. However, Harry Kim did transport a torpedo onto a Borg ship and detonate it thereby destroying it despite just wanting to only disable the ship,
Posted by Ahkileez (Member # 734) on :
This is the Treknology 'magic' that I find annoying.
They never bother to properly define the limits of the technology and every time they run into a moderately sticky problem, a solution is made up so the transporter can be used, thereby exacerbating the lameness of it.
So, for many fans, it's become a magic wand.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Didn't they also cure a disease with transporters in Unnatural Selection. Why didn't they do that in other plague episodes?
As far magic wands go, I say Psychic Powers are on a higher pecking order than transporter abuse.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
UG! Dont get me started on the stupidity of esper stuff in Trek- SOMEHOW Troi can "feel" a peson's emotional state even though she's only viewing an image on a screen of a pperson tens of thousands of miles away.
Well, there's a ton of medical uses- skin grafting (with replicator assist), shrapnel/foreign object removal, tumor removal (very slowly- layr of cells at a time to prevent abcess), etc.
Ship repairs should use transporters and replicators to patch the hull as soon as the emergency forcefield kicks in- possibly completely repairing it good as new.
Weapons uses are extreme- just hop-scotching your torpedos to the target instead of launching them is a major leap ahead....at minimum it would increase their range.
Defenses could include de-materializing inbound torpedos/fighters and replacing the deflector array with something that collects useable raw materials for replicator processing while discarding the undesired molecules.
Or you could just transport your logo with OWND!LOL! onto their ship.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dat: Simply, they can't be use against shielded targets... which is most of the time. And I don't think that unshielded targets are worth it because you can just fire a torpedo or phaser and do your damage or destruction. However, Harry Kim did transport a torpedo onto a Borg ship and detonate it thereby destroying it despite just wanting to only disable the ship,
Well, you could beam ordinance into the space right outside the enemy ship, too close for it to maneuver away from them. Perhaps a volley of small high yeild mines impacting and detonating against the sheilds all at once in a syncronized pattern could overload the sheilds. Then, blowing them up with a photon torpedo won't be that hard.
Also, didn't the crew of the Equinox use the transporter to beam some key component out of Voyager? At least someone thought to use it in that way.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Jason - it's been pointed out on-screen that replicators can't produce living matter, so your idea of replicating skin grafts is out, but with a proper culture of stem cells or something, you could certainly transport layers of new skin very precisely to avoid scarring.
I think the computer is a magic wand, too. Is it sentient or isn't it? It seems to be fine with commands like "take us to speed this at bearing that, match velocities with the third pirate ship from the left, fire a torpedo, beam me aboard the other runabout, and then return to DS9" yet if you mutter something to yourself it often comically thinks you're talking to it. It's simultaneously incredibly stupid and smarter than Data (it managed to create a sentient holoprogram, for example, just because it was asked to), and it never seems to mishear anyone.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
They did a half-assed TNG episode wherein the computer became (sorta) self-aware.
The skin grafting could be acomplished by the transporter transporting minute amounts of skin cells from a person's undamaged body areas to the wound site- small grafts would probably be unabtrusive.
If the computer memory increases (and I mean drasticly) they could ressurect deceased people, return injured people to health...even do a "Tom Riker" and whip up some combat troops: screw cloning! All you'd need is a person's exact transporter pattern.
Posted by OverRon (Member # 2036) on :
There was that season 7 episode of DS9 with the transporter firearm. The TR-116
Imagine that at the starship weapon level. The enemy vessel has weakened shields on one side but they've turned them away from you. You fire a volley of torpedoes and instantly beam them to the vector that will hit the enemy's ship on its vulnerable side.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
I remember the emergent lifeform episode. I've just watched it about a week ago actually. It actually goes to prove my point: The computer is [at least capable of becoming] sentient, so why is it considered "just" a computer and not a person as Data is?
I wonder what kind of fine control they have with the transporter. Can they transport individual molecules? Could they beam drugs directly into the bloodstream, remove harmful toxins from the body, or beam anesthetic gas into an intruder's brain? Granted they have stun settings for that, but the ship doesn't seem to have any automated anti-intruder phaser emplacements in the corridors. Which is pretty stupid, really.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Probably one of those ethical grey areas, like at what point does a collection of cells stop being an embryo become a baby. In the case of AI, after M5 I imagine there are program blocks in place to prevent the computer from becoming self aware, so it exists in potentia. Though it sometimes inadvertently "leaks" out in secondary programs like Moriarty and the EMH.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:As for non-weapon uses, you could beam people's waste right out of their bladders and rectums. Goodbye, crew head (except emergency installations I suppose).
I vaguely recall reading a suggestion from DS9's writers that this was what "waste extraction" (DS9's version of the restroom) was supposed to be. It was probably half in jest, though.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
To paraphrase the baddie from Robocop; just because they can do it, doesn't mean that they must do it. Allot of these applications just sound needlessly wasteful and inefficient, even for a civilisation with access to near limitless energy.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Tickets, Tickets please. May I see your Tickets, gentlemen? Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: To paraphrase the baddie from Robocop; just because they can do it, doesn't mean that they must do it.
I thought that was the Federation President in Star Trek VI. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
No, we're both wrong, it was that bloke from that 70's show...oh wait.
Posted by HopefulNebula (Member # 1933) on :
Don't forget that C-section by transporter in Voyager.
Oh, and along a similar vein, I read a fic once in which the Romulans used transporter tech to extract a few human female embryos in order to further their bioweapon research. Of course, they had to kidnap the women first, but that's a possibility.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You could probably de-toxify someone via the transporter- even replace the air in someone's lungs with fresh air....tricky to match volume and millibar density but a small task compared with the tech in general.
I wonder what they do with with the displaced atmosphere volume when they beam someone in...
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
I figure the annular confinement beam sweeps the air out of the way just before rematerialization.
Posted by Ahkileez (Member # 734) on :
So much treknomagic in here. I bet O'Brien got ready for his shifts in the transporter room by grabbing his robe and wizard hat.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Daniel Butler: I figure the annular confinement beam sweeps the air out of the way just before rematerialization.
That would probably result in a pop-o-matic sound.
Hmmm...a cool sabotage would be to remove that feature- resulting in a lethal case of the bends.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Decidedly unpleasant. It makes me wonder how exactly they found out that you needed that feature...I'd hate to be the first few test subjects for the transporter.
Posted by HopefulNebula (Member # 1933) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: That would probably result in a pop-o-matic sound.
Maybe that's what the fwooshy sound is for?
But then, it doesn't seem like an all-at-once thing. The transporting process takes a few seconds on each end, not including however much time one spends in the buffer. So it could be a piece-by-piece process in which the individual molecules each displace the air around them, negating the "pop." (Maybe that's what the fwooshy sound is?)
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Well, exactly, it takes a few seconds - I thought there wouldn't be much of a sound if it took a second or two to sweep the air out of the way instead of doing it all at once? Any fluid dynamicisists in here?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I'm not a scientist, but my very basic understanding of the whole concept would suggest that the "pop" would be more pronounced in a shorter period of time versus a longer time. Therefore, since the ACB probably starts from the center and expands outwards, it would create a puff of air, certainly, but not a "pop."
I'd betcha that we'd have heard the "pop," though, in those instances where a TOS character instantly disappeared with that cheesy "boi-i-ng" sound. The air rushing in to fill the vacuum instantly created by the departure of said character would certainly create a "pop."
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Again, I figured there was a force field holding the air back on demat until they were totally gone, then sliding back to let the air fill the hole slowly. Not just to prevent a sound, of course, but because you never know what you might disturb with a sudden human-sized vacuum appearing, especially on a starship.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A force field would make sense- it would prevent some damn passing bug from sticking in your chest. maybe the transporter takes a few seconds to ever-so-slightly adjust your matter to the localized environment: pressure, gravity, etc. Otherwise someone taking a big breath in as he transported might be in for a nasty shock as his lungs collpsed. Or maybe the glowy effect is the shedding of massive amounts of planetary inertia: no way the orbiting ship matches perfect geo-sync orbit- most times the ship watching the planet pass underneath it while in orbit.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Well isn't the annular confinement beam canonically established as a force field which preserves the matter stream? It seems to me that pretty much covers the whole bug-chest-sticking-thing.
Why would his lungs collapse? If he's beaming from an area of ~1atm to another area of ~1atm, there shouldn't be any nasty effects.
I figure if they can scan you on the subatomic level and reconstruct you later then they can add and subtract momentum at will.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The lungs thing would depend on the pressure of the atmosphere he's beaming into, also if you suddenly were beamed onto a world with a thin atmospgere you'd at least hyperventilate trying to get oxygen. Also, you ears could burst in a dense, high pressure atmosphere- having done several dives" in a myperbariac chamber, I have grim experience on such dangers.
The momentum thing is really...odd. They have to account for the ship's speed, planetary rotation...the works. Also, the beam has to move with the planet's rotation, lest the subject be spread all over the landscape (beaming is not instantanous).
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Why would you beam somewhere with a dense/thin atmosphere that was enough to hurt you anyway? Wouldn't you wear an environment suit?
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Wouldn't the EV suit make things more complicated? Not only do you have the Human you're beaming to reassemble properly, but you also have the circuitry of the suit, and the O2 in the suit's circulation system. What if they "misplaced" the oxygen?
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
You have watched the show, yes? Besides, what makes you think a circuit board and an air circulation system even REMOTELY compares in complexity to say, your central nervous system?
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: The momentum thing is really...odd. They have to account for the ship's speed, planetary rotation...the works. Also, the beam has to move with the planet's rotation, lest the subject be spread all over the landscape (beaming is not instantanous).
The only time I've ever encountered relive motion taken into account is (weirdly enough) in one of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels. In a nutshell they botched the relative "spin" calculations and the subject found himself travelling horizontally at about 30mph...which was a bit of a shock since he was standing still about a second before. At least I think that's how it went, it's been a while. Still brings up an amusing mental picture...
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Yeah, amusing until he hits the ground and bounces around about a dozen times screaming .... wait that's more amusing...
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)