Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles - hp internal release 1.2; site hpfcld.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!exodus!mhtsa!mh3bs!eagle!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcla!hpfcld!kgj
From: kgj@hpfcld.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Star Trek II question
Message-ID: <4000002@hpfcld.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-Feb-84 16:48:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hpfcld.4000002
Posted: Mon Feb 13 16:48:00 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Feb-84 02:41:18 EST
References: <16217@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:sri-arpa:-1621700:hpfcld:4000002:000:1093
Nf-From: hpfcld!kgj    Feb  6 13:48:00 1984


	This is a specific  example of a general  class of problems that
	cropped up with Star Trek.  The problem is that a transporter is
	too powerful a concept.  This is why a number of Star Trek plots
	involved transporter breakdowns (e.g.  Kirk urging Scotty to get
	the  transporter  working as the maw of the planet  eater  draws
	closer).  Given the  possibility  of  breaking a person down and
	reassembling   him   elsewhere,   it  then  becomes   merely  an
	information  storage  problem to keep a copy of someone  who has
	been transported.  Then, if you can do that, what's the big deal
	if Kirk gets  killed?  You just  assemble  another  one from the
	latest backup and some hunks of miscellaneous matter.  Also, why
	bother with a Star Fleet Academy?  You can just crank out copies
	of Kirk!  The transporter is such a powerful  concept that it is
	no surprise that writers  routinely  found it necessary to break
	it or even at times to simply ignore it.

	...which did  not prevent  Star Trek  from being the best sci fi
	on television!

						Karl Jensen
						hplabs!hpfcla!kgj