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