Questions of culture's attitude to the transporter

[DarthPooky]

I Have some questions that I'd like to discuss that came out of a discussion I had with a friend in the verses Debate About the transporter In Star Trek Mainly just 2.

1 If transporters do in fact do kill you and make a clone that thinks it's you Then that be why the Republic or empire would not use them like what the site suggested But then if that's the case why does every single culture in the Star Trek Galaxy almost Always seems to use the transporter I think at least one of them might probably think this is not a very good idea and even If the federation is Communist i would think it Unlikely that they that most people would risk death just to get around some pleases and I find it also hard to believe that star fleet would risk the death of there Personnel just to get from ship to planet or vice versa.

2 If in fact they don't kill the person being transported then that would explain why everyone star trek Uses them But why he would The Republic And empire use them I find hard to believe also that a civilization that has expanded throughout almost an entire galaxy and that has existed for 25,000 years we don't then would not have invented a technology that civilization That is only existed for about 200 years Not develop.

As I said this comes from a little debate I have had With a friend a few weeks back who granted knows that the Empire Would waste the federation but thinks that the federation is more high-tech and that things like the transporters prove that and that also red matter would be like a magic bullet to to at least bring casualties to the empire.

I also apologize for any bad grammar Which was never really my strong suit in school.

Anyway way thats my questions feel free to discuss them I look forward to your comments

[Broomstick]

I've read an EU Trek novel or two that either implied or made explicit the notion that Klingon's would sometimes sabotage transporters to eliminate professional rivals (see "Klingon promotion"). Thus, it's not a lack of technology but how the culture uses (or misuses) technology.

Whether that's the official cause or not I don't know, but it's food for thought.

[jwl]

Well, define "high tech". There are some things the empire can do but the federation can't, and some things the federation can do but the empire can't.

[DarthPooky]

Well

Well, define "high tech". There are some things the empire can do but the federation can't, and some things the federation can do but the empire can't.
Posted: 2014-05-24 03:45pm

Well that's just it he ment it as just basically as trek has Teleportation wars Doesn't so trek Is more high-tech he Didn't mean it in a more scientific Analyzing sifi type way

[jwl]

Well

Well, define "high tech". There are some things the empire can do but the federation can't, and some things the federation can do but the empire can't.
Posted: 2014-05-24 03:45pm

Well that's just it he ment it as just basically as trek has Teleportation wars Doesn't so trek Is more high-tech he Didn't mean it in a more scientific Analyzing sifi type way

Well he's right. Trek has teleportation, wars doesn't. If you take "high tech" to mean "better at teleportation", star trek is more high-tech than star wars.

[Batman]

Um-Star Wars 'does' have teleportation (or used to under the old canon at any rate). 'Magwit's Mystifying Hoop' anybody? It's just not used as widely as Trek's transporters (quite likely because it's nowhere near as as useful).
I'd say that's a pretty silly definition of 'higher tech' though.

[DarthPooky]

I agree with it bing a silly definition of high tech but it brings up one of my big questions up that why would a civilization who's bin around for about twenty five millennia not develop or yous trek type teleporters when a much younger civilization has developed and yous them eaven if thay do kill you can still yous them to transefer cargo and what not so clearly thay would be yous full at times.

[Lord Revan]

hmm maybe the scientists in the GFFA thought that kind of research was not worth the resources or the was strong social presuare to not persue that line of development after developing new technologies needs resources and if those with said resources are unwilling to grant you the resources then that line of development won't happen. It's the same reason we don't got nuclear powered cars atm it was deemed not worth the effort to develop them.

[Batman]

Even assuming that Trek style transporters don't need some material or other that simply doesn't exist in the Wars galaxy (unlikely but possible) the 'kill & copy' aspect (regardless of whether or not that is true) may easily have been enough to kill all funding for any transporter research even though that aspect is completely irrelevant for cargo transports. People can be silly that way. And it's not like transporters are that great for cargo handling. What's the biggest thing we've ever seen transported? When large scale surface to orbit transport is dirt cheap, is it really worth to cut the cargo up into transporter-compatible chunks (assuming that's even possible, depending on the cargo) just to save the five minutes it would take to move it the old-fashioned way?
Alternatively, they did star to develop Trek-style transporters in the past, but ran into one of the transporter-disrupting gimmicks-of-the-week early in the process and decided the damned things were way too unreliable and shelved the idea. Heck given how fickle those things are at times any number of Wars shipboard systems may render them inoperable. Hmmm, hyperdrive or the ability to teleport a few dozen tons of matter over orbital distances, what do I pick...

As for the teleportation Wars used to have, we don't know beans about it so for all we know the technology has lousy range and doesn't scale worth shit.

And DarthPooky would you please please please learn how to properly spell 'use'?

[DarthPooky]

And DarthPooky would you please please please learn how to properly spell 'use'?

I'm sorry ill do better next time. grammar and spelling have never bin my strong suite.

[Batman]

No offense intended, we're used to non-native speakers here and Valen knows I've done my fair share of abusing the english language in the past but for some reason those 'yous' instead of 'use' really got on my nerves.

[Lord Revan]

well it might be cause "inventive" spelling makes it extremly difficult to decipher what he's point for a non-native speaker like myself and I've been complement on my skills in english by native speakers granted those were my friends or relatives but still.

my advice for you DarthPooky would be to find a dictionary and take time in crafting your posts, there's no time limit within you have to make your post so, check and double check your grammar and spelling before you post, it'll be a bit more work but it will show us that you want to a) try learn to be better at something b) gives an image of an intelligent person with whom we'd like have discussions with rather then teen trying to score cheap points with the "cool kids" By making fun of the nerds, how you repesent yourself is just as important as the message itself.

obviously few mistakes will happen that's life but if you give the impression that you're at the very least trying to do better, we'll ease on the spelling.

[Broomstick]

well it might be cause "inventive" spelling makes it extremly difficult to decipher what he's point for a non-native speaker like myself and I've been complement on my skills in english by native speakers granted those were my friends or relatives but still.

It's not just you. I'm a native speaker and his creative writing style slowed down my reading speed by half. Seriously, Pooky, your spelling issues are getting in the way of your ability to communicate. We'd appreciate a little improvement on your part, if you need help ask for it.

[DarthPooky]

Just so you guys now I'm Canadian and my native language is English. I just tend to have trouble formulating the right words for the right sentences. I always have whether typing or talking out loud. Anyway as I said I've always had trouble with spelling and gramer ever sinse I was in school but ill do my best and take my time.

Regardless of my spelling I would Appreciate if we could stay on topic thanks.

[jwl]

I agree with it bing a silly definition of high tech but it brings up one of my big questions up that why would a civilization who's bin around for about twenty five millennia not develop or yous trek type teleporters when a much younger civilization has developed and yous them eaven if thay do kill you can still yous them to transefer cargo and what not so clearly thay would be yous full at times.

Scientists in star wars didn't feel like researching into the area that leads to teleporters? To make a teleporter, you can't just start out by saying "I want to make a teleporter", you need to research into the right area of physics until you find something that leads to it. If that something is the heat capacity of lead, and no-one is researching into the heat capacity of lead, you are not going to be making a teleporter any time soon. I think the transporters in star trek contain a Heisenberg compensator or something. Assuming that is referring to heisenburg's work on quantum physics, maybe the reason teleporters haven't been invented in star wars is that quantum physics isn't an area star wars physicists decided to focus on. The only major reference to quantum physics in star wars I can think of is lasers.

[Crazedwraith]

Why haven't the Star Wars universe created Transporters? How about because its impossible for them? Different universes, different technobabble works. Might as well why they haven't invented Warp drive in SW or Hyperdrive in ST.

Yeah, I know the EU actually does has some teleporter-esque tech in it somewhere. But hey, not canon anymore.

[jwl]

Why haven't the Star Wars universe created Transporters? How about because its impossible for them? Different universes, different technobabble works. Might as well why they haven't invented Warp drive in SW or Hyperdrive in ST.

Yeah, I know the EU actually does has some teleporter-esque tech in it somewhere. But hey, not canon anymore.

Isn't it part of the standard assumptions here that in a battle thread both sides reside in a universes that follow the same rules? I haven't seen it written down anywhere, but that is the impression I get when posting here.

[Crazedwraith]

Why haven't the Star Wars universe created Transporters? How about because its impossible for them? Different universes, different technobabble works. Might as well why they haven't invented Warp drive in SW or Hyperdrive in ST.

Yeah, I know the EU actually does has some teleporter-esque tech in it somewhere. But hey, not canon anymore.

Isn't it part of the standard assumptions here that in a battle thread both sides reside in a universes that follow the same rules? I haven't seen it written down anywhere, but that is the impression I get when posting here.

Its a basic assumption that all tech and all their capabilities will remain the same yeah. You can't say 'well jedi will be useless because there is no force in the milky way'. But that's not really the same as needing to 'explain why Star Wars does have transporters'. What ever random act of god that made them crossover can make sure all the tech works everywhere.

Besides, the 'lol transporters are evil killing/cloning machines so the empire wouldn't use them' always struck me as awful part of the debate. Like the Star Trek are communists thing. Suddenly its not enough to prove Star Wars can win in a fight. Suddenly everything in ST has to be evil compared to the mighty righteousness and moral rectitude of the (actually evil) empire.

[Borgholio]

My guess would be that the Transporters in Star Trek are just too unreliable. Accidents and failures happen so often that people in the SW universe probably gave up the tech as being too dangerous (assuming it followed the same tech path).

[SilverDragonRed]

Besides, the 'lol transporters are evil killing/cloning machines so the empire wouldn't use them' always struck me as awful part of the debate. Like the Star Trek are communists thing. Suddenly its not enough to prove Star Wars can win in a fight. Suddenly everything in ST has to be evil compared to the mighty righteousness and moral rectitude of the (actually evil) empire.

Well, it is the bias of the main site. Although it is disconcerting that the only people who had any objections in the TNG-era to the transporters were Dr. Pulaski (until she was forced to go through it), Lt Barclay (who was treated as a wierdo), and random trill of the week.

[Borgholio]

Don't forget McCoy in TOS. He fucking hated the thing.

[SilverDragonRed]

Never saw TOS, so I wouldn't about his case.

[Borgholio]

You've never seen the original Star Trek series?

Get.

Out.

Now.

Heathen.

[SilverDragonRed]

Never saw TOS, so I wouldn't knowabout his case.

You've never seen the original Star Trek series?

Get.

Out.

Now.

Heathen.

OKAY! OKAY!! I watch it after I get through the Peacekeeper Wars, Stargate SG-1, Stargate Atlantis, Casablanca, Cowboy Bebop, Gattaca, Outlaw Star, Dungeonmaster, Starchaser: Legend of Orin, Blake 7, Babylon 5, Dark Star, Star Crystal, and Space: Above and Beyond.

[Borgholio]

Ideally you'd watch it first because it came before just about everything else on that list.