 |
|
 |
|
Next: I've a question about the IKS Gorkon-bookserie
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Nov 18, 2003 Posts: 13
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 4:34 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: alt>startrek>books (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 30, 2003 Posts: 31
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:26 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <hag9c.16$N2.5@newsfe1-win>, ntl: Victim
<ntl.victim.RemoveThis@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I agree that you might expect something like the hydroponics bay that Kes
> created on Voyager so fresh vegetables & the like could be grown but can you
> imagine the space required to cultivate these to the proportions needed to
> feed the whole crew on a daily or even weekly basis. Given this is Earth
> 1st serious attempt at exploration I would imagine that space on the ship
> would be at a premium and any technology that can create food & other items
> on demand would be preferable.
I would agree with pretty much all of that, but my problem with the
poop machine (which is what I think I'll call it) is that it's just
Harry Potter magic. In Star Trek, if you want something to happen and
you don't want to spend too much time worrying about how it happens,
you just make up a device that does the thing for you, and then you
move on. That's really no different from casting a spell.
As you say, it's important that this is Earth's first serious attempt
at interstellar exploration. That's pretty much why, for the sake of
credibility if nothing else, we should be seeing a more primitive level
of technology than we do. There's no reason to suggest that Enterprise
must grow *all* its own crops, but we should be seeing attempts to grow
things they are not likely to find on alien planets -- common spices,
for one thing. I think they would be likely to find a sugar crop
pretty much anywhere plant life is supported, and if you have sugar you
can manufacture any number of other foods and goods.
> And why not make ice cream out of poop? Given that this technology is
> supposed to break everything down into the same material in which to
> re-sequence, what's the difference what you start with? This is after all
> the hope that nanotechnology brings with it isn't it, to be able to
> manipulate single atoms in order to create something completely different
> from what you started with.
If they had nanotechnology at the level you suggest, the ship would be
repairing itself constantly, supplies would be renewing themselves, and
there would be little need for the crew to do anything but sit back and
enjoy the ride. Since we're sort of stuck here with a complex Trekkish
history, it's an unfortunate fact that there is no evidence of such
nanotech in Trek Classic, so the possibilities in Enterprise are (or
should be) rather limited. In Trek Classic, they hauled along their
own supplies and traded for what they needed as they went. The ship
could pay in gold and trade goods. This is the kind of thing you'd
expect to see in an expansionist frontier culture. I would not expect
to see better than this in a show set well before Trek Classic.
> Oh and when technology had progressed to the Voyager era Miss Toress did
> mention to certain aliens that every waste by-product on the ship was
> completely recycled.
Recycling is one thing and remanufacturing is another. However,
Voyager is far enough ahead of Enterprise that such "magic" is more
excusable. I admit that's more of a feeling than a finding of fact.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Mar 26, 2004 Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2004 5:26 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mr. Personality" <affable RemoveThis @no.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:260320041043271626%affable@no.com.invalid...
> In article <1067uvufs3l473f RemoveThis @corp.supernews.com>, Justin Hilyard
> <rpg RemoveThis @eoni.com> wrote:
>
> > "Mr. Personality" <affable RemoveThis @no.com.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:250320042357248329%affable@no.com.invalid...
> > > In article <s2M8c.819$eg6.92@newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net>, ntl: Victim
> > > <ntl.victim RemoveThis @ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > With regards to the post below I thought it was a "Protein
Re-sequencer"
> > > > using the same type of system that they use to recycle the human
waste
> > into
> > > > more useful items.
> > >
> > > IIRC the reference was in turning poop into boots. I got the idea
that
> > > the protein resequencer was used to produce durable goods, not
> > > consumables. The reference to boots meant, I thought, that they could
> > > turn out synthetic leather. It made a certain amount of sense to me
to
> > > use organic mass to do that.
> >
> > Didn't think about it like that, but that makes sense. Are you sure the
> > term was never used to refer to food production in another episode,
though?
> > I get the feeling it might have been in the episode with the automated
> > repair station, when they were talking about its more advanced version.
> >
>
> No, I'm not sure. Long gone are the days when I'd watch a Star Trek
> episode fifteen times and memorize everything. Now Greg Cox says they
> use the resequencer to make different flavors of ice cream, and I'm
> sure he's right about that, but I just don't see the logic of it. But
> it's so Star Trek, this technobabbling. It would have been much more
> interesting to me to see them use these organics in farming a crop
> aboard the ship. I mean, the ship is gone for months at a time, and it
> makes perfect sense for them to try to raise (for instance) fresh
> vegetables on a little farm somewhere below. It would be the kind of
> thing you could reasonably expect a first-generation starship would do.
> Instead, they came up with another undefined gadget and ask me to
> believe that it makes ice cream out of poop. Huh?
I agree that you might expect something like the hydroponics bay that Kes
created on Voyager so fresh vegetables & the like could be grown but can you
imagine the space required to cultivate these to the proportions needed to
feed the whole crew on a daily or even weekly basis. Given this is Earth
1st serious attempt at exploration I would imagine that space on the ship
would be at a premium and any technology that can create food & other items
on demand would be preferable.
And why not make ice cream out of poop? Given that this technology is
supposed to break everything down into the same material in which to
re-sequence, what's the difference what you start with? This is after all
the hope that nanotechnology brings with it isn't it, to be able to
manipulate single atoms in order to create something completely different
from what you started with.
Oh and when technology had progressed to the Voyager era Miss Toress did
mention to certain aliens that every waste by-product on the ship was
completely recycled.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Mar 24, 2004 Posts: 8
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2004 1:30 am
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mr. Personality" <affable.DeleteThis@no.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:270320041226464808%affable@no.com.invalid...
> In article <hag9c.16$N2.5@newsfe1-win>, ntl: Victim
> <ntl.victim.DeleteThis@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree that you might expect something like the hydroponics bay that
Kes
> > created on Voyager so fresh vegetables & the like could be grown but can
you
> > imagine the space required to cultivate these to the proportions needed
to
> > feed the whole crew on a daily or even weekly basis. Given this is
Earth
> > 1st serious attempt at exploration I would imagine that space on the
ship
> > would be at a premium and any technology that can create food & other
items
> > on demand would be preferable.
>
> I would agree with pretty much all of that, but my problem with the
> poop machine (which is what I think I'll call it) is that it's just
> Harry Potter magic. In Star Trek, if you want something to happen and
> you don't want to spend too much time worrying about how it happens,
> you just make up a device that does the thing for you, and then you
> move on. That's really no different from casting a spell.
>
> As you say, it's important that this is Earth's first serious attempt
> at interstellar exploration. That's pretty much why, for the sake of
> credibility if nothing else, we should be seeing a more primitive level
> of technology than we do. There's no reason to suggest that Enterprise
> must grow *all* its own crops, but we should be seeing attempts to grow
> things they are not likely to find on alien planets -- common spices,
> for one thing. I think they would be likely to find a sugar crop
> pretty much anywhere plant life is supported, and if you have sugar you
> can manufacture any number of other foods and goods.
>
> > And why not make ice cream out of poop? Given that this technology is
> > supposed to break everything down into the same material in which to
> > re-sequence, what's the difference what you start with? This is after
all
> > the hope that nanotechnology brings with it isn't it, to be able to
> > manipulate single atoms in order to create something completely
different
> > from what you started with.
>
> If they had nanotechnology at the level you suggest, the ship would be
> repairing itself constantly, supplies would be renewing themselves, and
> there would be little need for the crew to do anything but sit back and
> enjoy the ride. Since we're sort of stuck here with a complex Trekkish
> history, it's an unfortunate fact that there is no evidence of such
> nanotech in Trek Classic, so the possibilities in Enterprise are (or
> should be) rather limited. In Trek Classic, they hauled along their
> own supplies and traded for what they needed as they went. The ship
> could pay in gold and trade goods. This is the kind of thing you'd
> expect to see in an expansionist frontier culture. I would not expect
> to see better than this in a show set well before Trek Classic.
Now, that was never established on TOS, Voyager aside. There were the food
slots, and there was even one in the transporter room that we saw in
"Tomorrow is Yesterday," which would seem a bit odd if it did just move food
from a kitchen out. Especially considering there weren't any in quarters.
Then again, we did _see_ a kitchen in ST6 and hear a chef in Charlie X.
Don't think it'd be hard to think that Kirk's ship had this protein
resequencer in addition to more traditional food preparation systems like on
the NX-01, as it isn't _technically_ a replicator, satisfying both
Enterprise and Voyager.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 30, 2003 Posts: 31
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 2:02 am
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <106i51b9gi21u05.RemoveThis@corp.supernews.com>, Justin Hilyard
<rpg.RemoveThis@eoni.com> wrote:
> Now, that was never established on TOS, Voyager aside. There were the food
> slots, and there was even one in the transporter room that we saw in
> "Tomorrow is Yesterday," which would seem a bit odd if it did just move food
> from a kitchen out. Especially considering there weren't any in quarters.
> Then again, we did _see_ a kitchen in ST6 and hear a chef in Charlie X.
> Don't think it'd be hard to think that Kirk's ship had this protein
> resequencer in addition to more traditional food preparation systems like on
> the NX-01, as it isn't _technically_ a replicator, satisfying both
> Enterprise and Voyager.
I agree that nothing precludes a resequencer in Trek Classic. The
Charlie X reference is important because the chef had been turning meat
loaf (or something) into ersatz turkey for Thanksgiving. Maybe he was
resequencing the meat loaf. Fair enough.
This sequence strongly suggests that meals aboard the ship were
generally prepared along traditional lines, and you get the sense that
whatever it was the chef was doing would result in lesser quality,
artificial-tasting turkey. Note, though, that at least the chef was
turning one kind of foodstuff into another. I can easily accept *that*
kind of resequencer.
BTW, perhaps you don't know that the voice of the chef in Charlie X was
Gene Roddenberry's. It was the only time he appeared on the show.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Mar 24, 2004 Posts: 8
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 5:11 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mr. Personality" <affable.TakeThisOut@no.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:300320042302180963%affable@no.com.invalid...
> In article <106i51b9gi21u05.TakeThisOut@corp.supernews.com>, Justin Hilyard
> <rpg.TakeThisOut@eoni.com> wrote:
>
> > Now, that was never established on TOS, Voyager aside. There were the
food
> > slots, and there was even one in the transporter room that we saw in
> > "Tomorrow is Yesterday," which would seem a bit odd if it did just move
food
> > from a kitchen out. Especially considering there weren't any in
quarters.
> > Then again, we did _see_ a kitchen in ST6 and hear a chef in Charlie X.
> > Don't think it'd be hard to think that Kirk's ship had this protein
> > resequencer in addition to more traditional food preparation systems
like on
> > the NX-01, as it isn't _technically_ a replicator, satisfying both
> > Enterprise and Voyager.
>
> I agree that nothing precludes a resequencer in Trek Classic. The
> Charlie X reference is important because the chef had been turning meat
> loaf (or something) into ersatz turkey for Thanksgiving. Maybe he was
> resequencing the meat loaf. Fair enough.
>
> This sequence strongly suggests that meals aboard the ship were
> generally prepared along traditional lines, and you get the sense that
> whatever it was the chef was doing would result in lesser quality,
> artificial-tasting turkey. Note, though, that at least the chef was
> turning one kind of foodstuff into another. I can easily accept *that*
> kind of resequencer.
>
> BTW, perhaps you don't know that the voice of the chef in Charlie X was
> Gene Roddenberry's. It was the only time he appeared on the show.
Actually, I did. Having never seen the episode myself, that's the only
reason I knew it happened at all. I didn't actually know the turning meat
loaf into turkey part of it.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Apr 26, 2004 Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 22) Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:18 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Now, that was never established on TOS, Voyager aside. There were the food
slots, and there was even one in the transporter room that we saw in
"Tomorrow is Yesterday," which would seem a bit odd if it did just move food
from a kitchen out. Especially considering there weren't any in quarters.
Then again, we did _see_ a kitchen in ST6 and hear a chef in Charlie X.
Don't think it'd be hard to think that Kirk's ship had this protein resequencer
in addition to more traditional food preparation systems like on the NX-01, as
it isn't _technically_ a replicator, satisfying both Enterprise and Voyager.
1. I have trouble seeing a *chef, proper* on a at least quasi-military ship
like the ships of Starfleet are supposed to be; (*my* image is*more like
"Cookie" in the "Beetle Bailey" comic strip!)
2. Didn't they get a bit "food-slot happy" at one point in the original "Star
Trek"; (at least at the point mentioned?)?
3. How do we know that "chef"; (at least in the non-obsolete/"fancy-shmancy
restaurant" sense) isn't just a shorter/slang term for "Protein
Resequencer/Replicator Programmer/Operator"; both in Starfleet AND "civilian"
life ? >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jun 14, 2004 Posts: 23
|
(Msg. 23) Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:18 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
in article 20040420151827.28086.00000131.TakeThisOut@mb-m15.news.cs.com, DBurch7672 at
dburch7672.TakeThisOut@cs.com wrote on 04/20/2004 02:18 PM:
> Now, that was never established on TOS, Voyager aside. There were the food
> slots, and there was even one in the transporter room that we saw in "Tomorrow
> is Yesterday," which would seem a bit odd if it did just move food from a
> kitchen out. Especially considering there weren't any in quarters. Then
> again, we did _see_ a kitchen in ST6 and hear a chef in Charlie X. Don't think
> it'd be hard to think that Kirk's ship had this protein resequencer in
> addition to more traditional food preparation systems like on the NX-01, as it
> isn't _technically_ a replicator, satisfying both Enterprise and Voyager.
This question demonstrates sadly your total unsuitability to write for the
movies or TV. Rationales are not needed or welcome.
> 1. I have trouble seeing a *chef, proper* on a at least quasi-military ship
> like the ships of Starfleet are supposed to be; (*my* image is*more like
> "Cookie" in the "Beetle Bailey" comic strip!)
I bet it's the same race as Mr. Mott the barber. No need for hairnets and
no hair in your nice plomeek soup.
> 2. Didn't they get a bit "food-slot happy" at one point in the original "Star
> Trek"; (at least at the point mentioned?)?
Those slots were probably all removed when a Starfleet officer sued because
the ready access to fast food 24/7 made them fat. (Though that doesn't
really explain Kirk or Riker's girth does it?)
Hell what happens when the poor transporter tech has to go to the little
boys room during a crisis? You'd think there'd be at least two techs
standing by during a landing mission.
Of course realism in anything much less Trek is relative.
There was a quote by director Stanley Kubrick on drama in a crisis about the
atomic bomb that went something like if the bomb drops while you are at work
it's a drama, while your at home a melodrama and if you're in the bathroom
it's a comedy.
Which is why we never saw
"Scotty, emergency! Beam us up now!"
"I canna do it Cap'n, I'm pinching a loaf!"
> 3. How do we know that "chef"; (at least in the non-obsolete/"fancy-shmancy
> restaurant" sense) isn't just a shorter/slang term for "Protein
> Resequencer/Replicator Programmer/Operator"; both in Starfleet AND "civilian"
> life ?
Interesting idea!
"I swore I'd never use one of these things. Computer activate the Emergency
Culinary Program."
"Bon sware. And what would madam like for dinner this evening?"
"A dozen Borg are about to break through that door! Create a diversion!"
"I'm a cook, not a doorstop!"
--
"My favorite thing about the Internet is that you get to go into the private
world of real creeps without having to smell them."
-- Penn Jillette<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 09, 2003 Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 24) Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:59 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <20040420151827.28086.00000131 RemoveThis @mb-m15.news.cs.com>,
DBurch7672 <dburch7672 RemoveThis @cs.com> wrote:
> How do we know that "chef"; (at least in the non-obsolete/"fancy-shmancy
> restaurant" sense) isn't just a shorter/slang term for "Protein
> Resequencer/Replicator Programmer/Operator"; both in Starfleet AND "civilian"
> life ?
On ENT, Chef has been referred to many times as a person. He is
definitely a human being. We even see him - his arm, anyway - in the
ep "Catwalk".
--
"No urban night is like the night [in NYC]...here is our poetry, for we have
pulled down the stars to our will."
- Ezra Pound, poet and critic, 9/18/1912, reflecting on New York City<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Mar 24, 2004 Posts: 8
|
(Msg. 25) Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 11:43 pm
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Keeper of the Purple Twilight" <no.RemoveThis@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:280420041859258618%no@spam.invalid...
> In article <20040420151827.28086.00000131.RemoveThis@mb-m15.news.cs.com>,
> DBurch7672 <dburch7672.RemoveThis@cs.com> wrote:
>
> > How do we know that "chef"; (at least in the non-obsolete/"fancy-shmancy
> > restaurant" sense) isn't just a shorter/slang term for "Protein
> > Resequencer/Replicator Programmer/Operator"; both in Starfleet AND
"civilian"
> > life ?
>
> On ENT, Chef has been referred to many times as a person. He is
> definitely a human being. We even see him - his arm, anyway - in the
> ep "Catwalk".
I think what DBurch means is that the title Chef in ST might not mean
someone
that actually prepares food like a present-day chef, but merely someone that
operates a protein resequencer, food slot, replicator, or what have you.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 09, 2003 Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 26) Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2004 1:52 am
Post subject: Re: "Enterprise" tech question [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <1090uh02kmc52ae DeleteThis @corp.supernews.com>, Justin Hilyard
<rpg DeleteThis @eoni.com> wrote:
> "Keeper of the Purple Twilight" <no DeleteThis @spam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:280420041859258618%no@spam.invalid...
> > In article <20040420151827.28086.00000131 DeleteThis @mb-m15.news.cs.com>,
> > DBurch7672 <dburch7672 DeleteThis @cs.com> wrote:
> >
> > > How do we know that "chef"; (at least in the non-obsolete/"fancy-shmancy
> > > restaurant" sense) isn't just a shorter/slang term for "Protein
> > > Resequencer/Replicator Programmer/Operator"; both in Starfleet AND
> "civilian"
> > > life ?
> >
> > On ENT, Chef has been referred to many times as a person. He is
> > definitely a human being. We even see him - his arm, anyway - in the
> > ep "Catwalk".
>
> I think what DBurch means is that the title Chef in ST might not mean
> someone
> that actually prepares food like a present-day chef, but merely someone that
> operates a protein resequencer, food slot, replicator, or what have you.
Chef's actual cooking (and some of his recipes) is also mentioned on
the show.
--
"No urban night is like the night [in NYC]...here is our poetry, for we have
pulled down the stars to our will."
- Ezra Pound, poet and critic, 9/18/1912, reflecting on New York City<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ --> >> Stay informed about: "Enterprise" tech question |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
| Related Topics: | Enterprise novel question - Hi all, are there any novels you would recommend that have been published about the Enterprise TV series? I have seen about 5 -6 novels to do with that series and wondered about any suggestions of ones you felt were particularly good. thanks Erica..
Trek tech--question - Does anyone remember any substances, minerals, etcetera, that tend to interfere with scanners and transporter beams? I'm sure the various crews have encountered such obstacles in the past, but my memory isn't coming up with any specific examples. Thank...
Tech question: fabrics? - Have any futuristic new fabrics ever been identified by name in the STAR TREK universe? I can think of various building materials and such (duranium, transparent aluminum), but what are tents and blankets and such made out of? Any help would be..
May Enterprise Novel - Has anyone seen the scheduled May Enterprise novel, Enterprise: Daedalus' Children on the shelves? I found TNG: A Time to Harvest all over, but no Enterprise. Thanks, Bob
Question - I just finished reading an old ST original bock, "The IDIC Epidemic". Well, one of the characters is a Klingon/Human young man. My question is this, in STNG, Worf is supposed to be the first Klingon in Star Fleet. This character had applied ... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|