this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
59 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek

10586 readers
192 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-07 LD 5x04 "A Farewell to Farms"
11-14 LD 5x05 "Star Base 80?"
11-21 LD 5x06 "Of Gods and Angels"
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (2025)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)

In Development

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.


Allied Discord Server


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.one 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I always thought the least believable part of transporters was that they worked without a pad on both ends.

[–] Chrisosaur@startrek.website 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right? Absolutely no point to the pads, since you can dematerialize anywhere and rematerialize anywhere else. They might as well hide the equipment and make a nicer reception area.

[–] FormerGameDev@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

I think the 'pad' is just basically a guaranteed good area, although could also be specific technology there does improve your ability to transport successfully?

[–] knotthatone@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's some hand-wavey technobabble about annular confinement beams and whatnot but the real reason was because TOS didn't have the money or time to show a shuttle land or receiver pad sent down, etc. It was cheap to depict and the audience bought it without much explaining (step into booth, shimmer, be someplace else).

It was just a sciency-looking version of what I Dream of Jeannie did.

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, and I 100% understand that. But, we're talking about what if it could be real.

[–] knotthatone@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

I think transporters would work better if they just said they pushed you through a subspace portal of some kind vs. the whole matter-to-energy-and-back again process described. That sidesteps some of the thornier physics issues and makes more sense why it would work at a distance.

[–] Nmyownworld@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I accept transporting to somewhere without a pad because mumble, mumble, Star Trek science. What I always wondered about was how blasé folks usually were about transporting to somewhere that didn't have a transporter pad. Who makes sure no one is standing in the beam to area. Does the transporter have safety protocols to just not transport if there is something of a certain size in the way? Transporting someone partially into rock has been shown in Star Trek (one instance, PIC s2e9). Weaponized use of a transporter, maybe by overriding transporter safety protocols? That was done intentionally, but still.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if the area was clear when the process started, what is stopping some space tumbleweed from blowing in there right after it starts?

[–] Nmyownworld@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago

If the safety protocols fail, resulting in a space tumbleweed hybrid, then Division 14 steps in. D-14 will send the affected to a medical spa on Endicronimas V, where they are pampered and tended to like a precious gem. (Lower Decks, "Much Ado About Boimler" s1e7)

[–] tdriley@mas.to 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Nmyownworld @SeeJayEmm @startrek I mean, if you’re OK with ship sensors that can analyze space in tiny detail, it’s reasonable that transporter tech makes sure the target area is safe/unobstructed, and safety protocols prevent transport if there’s risk. We often see a human operator scanning for good transport locations too.

There’s obvious issues with the concept of course, but Star Trek is the type of scifi that you can trust with your suspension of disbelief, and you’ll usually be rewarded.

[–] Nmyownworld@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago

A transporter tech checking that area is clear for transport makes sense. And, Star Trek is excellent at getting me to suspend disbelief (in its tech). I'm going to roll with your idea.

[–] kring@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if nobody is standing in the beam there is still at least air.

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

Could be head canon but I'm pretty sure the air is dematerialized when the people are rematerialized. Not sure how they keep more air from rushing in.

[–] AeternalBorealis@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

... Can't believe I've never thought about that, but now I'll never fail to notice... Damn it