Has space been made too small?

Originally posted by -<Stiletto>-

It was more like "Hey, we cloned the properties on a nearby photon and removed it from the original at the same time!"

The result is the same, of course (provided you destroy the original), so there is no real difference, ay.
 
Originally posted by -<Stiletto>-
Well really, I think it's a bit over-hyped. It wasn't the REAL 'poof' teleportation of a photon, but the transfer of properties which made photon X have the same properties of photon Z using photon Y as a middleman to carry this thing out. It wasn't just a "poof it's not there any more!" It was more like "Hey, we cloned the properties on a nearby photon and removed it from the original at the same time!"

Feel free to correct me if I got this wrong. I read it a while back.
You read it a while back. Perhaps in a post I made *in this thread* a while back. Are we going in circles here?

The effect, for all practical purposes, is the same. And has the nice (although unethical if applied on people) side-effect of having the maybe possibility of replication.
Although right now destroying the original is an inherent effect of the transport process, not something they choose to do.
It could be done with any particle or amount of particles (theoretically) as long as we find out how to create said quantum-entanglement (or EPR-pair as my post called it).
 
okay, a few edits, first it wasn't an apple it was a small rubber ball, and the rumour leaked from the research lab at Larkham, but they are all a bit weird down there so it might not be true. pesonally i don't think that teleportation would be that much of a leap forward, its just the advancement of communication, and i would wait until it had been perfected before hitting the media with it. BT holds all the rights to any teleportation methods developed though
 
Originally posted by Nemesis


More than a few years back, there was a book (written by a physicist, I believe) discussing the feasibility of Star Trek’s technology, including the transporter.

Yup... Have it. Read it.

It's called "the physics of star trek". But I don't remember the author. You see, I am not at home but in vancouver for another month so I dont have immediate access to it. But Appart from describing possible transporter mechanichs it also goes quite indepth into warp drive. If your into modern physics it makes quite an interesting read into theory and such.

(sorry I don't remember who) is writing the Jump FAQ might find it an interesting read.

AD
 
i have read "the star trek fact files" section on transporting and have briefly summarised the transporter process as working roughly like this:

1. the safety checks etc. are completed by the computer. (e.g. to make sure they are beaming to a safe area, that the transporters components are working properly)
2. the "annular confinement beam" (ACB) is activated. It is a cylindrical force field which keeps the person being transported within the transporter beam.
3. the transporters 'molecular imaging scanners' record a person's pattern on the quantum level and store it in the ship's computer (this is called the transporter trace)
4. Using a quark manipulation field, the "phase transition coils" in the transporter pads begin the actual disassembly of the person's body by partially unbinding their energy on the subatomic level.
5. Once recorded and deconverted, the person's "matter stream" is held in the "pattern buffer" until the "Doppler shifts" between ship and destination can be determined.
6. The "pattern buffer" is a superconducting tokamak device holding the pattern in suspension. (there is always a backup buffer etc.)
7. The ACB 'carrier' directs the pattern's matter stream through an emitter array on the external hull of the ship toward the target coordinates (e.g. planet surface). A booster set of the coils and scanners then work in reverse within the ACB to reassemble the pattern into its original form.

i hope this helps answer a few questions. i know little about science so i was wondering if anyone knew how feasible this process may be in the future?
 
Originally posted by The Shadow
I hope this helps answer a few questions. i know little about science so i was wondering if anyone knew how feasible this process may be in the future?

More than a few years back, there was a book (written by a physicist, I believe) discussing the feasibility of Star Trek’s technology, including the transporter.
It's called "the physics of star trek".

Said book has chapter all about it. Very interesting. Basically says transporters may be the least feasable of all star trek tech. But not imposible given major advances in technology.
 
Back
Top