ideas about star trek tech

wow that is amazing

wow. rare indeed.

see I do have good ideas and opinions.

just not good spelling.

that's true.

for both?

Yes.(that's my opinion.i don't know MNIM's)

same here. but we're getting OT.

I want teleportation! beam me up Scottie!

ah now that is a most interesting topic.

this is what wiki says on it

Until recently, scientists had been able to transport only light or single atoms over short distances (millimeters). However, it was reported in October 2006 in the weekly science magazine Nature [4] that Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough in the field.[5] [6] Their experiment involved the transportation of information from a weak light beam to a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms, located half a meter away. The technique involved the use of quantum entanglement, quantum measurement and quantum feedback.

In June 2002 the Ph.D. project of Dr. Warwick Bowen led by Dr. Ping Koy Lam, Prof. Hans Bachor and Dr. Timothy Ralph of the Australian National University achieved (quantum) teleportation of a laser beam.[7]

It was a successful quantum teleportation experiment involving the use of entangled photons. A target photon was successfully 'scanned', its properties 'copied' onto a transition photon, and finally the photon was recreated at another location of arbitrary distance, proving in essence the theorems proposed by Einstein to explain his 'strange action at a distance'.

Teams of scientists from the University of Innsbruck and the U. S. National Institute of Standards and Technology worked independently to teleport ions of calcium and beryllium, respectively, in 2004. The two groups used different techniques to achieve similar results under the same basic protocol.[1]

In October 2006, Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark conducted a teleportation experiment involving a microscopic atomic object containing trillions of atoms. They teleported the information a distance of half a metre. "For the first time, it involves teleportation between light and matter, two different objects."

In June 2007, Ashton Bradley's team at the Australian Research Council Center of Excellence for Quantum Atom Optics in Brisbane, Australia, proposed a technique that avoids quantum entanglement entirely. "We're talking about a beam of about 5000 particles disappearing from one place and appearing somewhere else", says Bradley. "We feel that our scheme is closer in spirit to the original fictional concept", he adds. While the technique can also transmit quantum information in the beam, the technique itself does not rely on the quantum properties of particles, so the team have dubbed the new method "classical teleportation". John Close, an expert on atomic laser physics at the Australian National University in Canberra, is impressed. "Using entangled atomic states looks pretty tough in comparison." Close wants to set up an experiment to test the system, but estimates it will take at least four years

Yeah, teleporting would be cool... Imagine not having to pay airplanes anymore! And the environmental consequences: No more polution caused by cars!

yea but the power costs would be high.

indeed. and we don't really know what damage transportation could do to the environment.

Absolutely none. The sky has always been orange hasn't it?

um no its not here.

well it shouldent have an effect.

why would a transporter affect the enviroment its just breaking down the molecular structer of a person or thing and reassembleing it at the other end

me naam is m wrote:indeed. and we don't really know what damage transportation could do to the environment.

Other than the high power cost, there's nothing to worry about...I think?

maybes the amount of energy needed may affect the weather but thats about it

I think I figured it out. Since power produced by generating it in power plants. If the power plants used are coal power plants or nuclear power plants, it really can produce pollution. For example, coal plants use coal. When coal burns, it gives off a blackish-brown smoke. This smoke or fume can destroy the environment by depleting the ozone layer. Another example is the Nuke power plant. It can causee overloads which can harm many people and their nuclear wastes are dumped into water. Nuclear wastes can destroy marine life. It can also make the water VERY,VERY polluted. If you think using alternatives, try these : hydroelectric dams and wind power. But sometimes wind power is so weak it cannot even produce power for a small town.

now you are wrong power is generated buy making a coil cut the lines of magnetic flux thereby creating an EMF (electromotive force) but a EMF can be induced buy the application of energy to a object e.g piezoelectric a Crystal vibrates and induces an EMF or thermoelectric when heat is applied to two wires wrapped round each other of different metals inducing an EMF.

well thats my definition.

P.S this was not from, wiki this is the wiki.


Faraday's law of induction describes an important basic law of electromagnetism which is responsible for the workings of all electrical generators, transformers, and inductors. The law states that if a closed loop of wire has a magnetic flux through it which changes in time, then there will be an "induced" electromotive force that will draw current through the wire. The law was discovered by Michael Faraday in 1831 and independently at the same time by Joseph Henry.

Quantitatively, the law takes the following form:[1]

.
where

is the electromotive force (EMF) in volts
ΦB is the magnetic flux in webers through a single loop. The direction of the electromotive force (the negative sign in the above formula) was first given by Lenz's law.
For example, if we move a permanent magnet in the vicinity of a stationary conductor (such as a metal wire), an EMF will be induced in that conductor due to the change of ΦB with respect to time.

If on the other hand, we move the conductor through a stationary magnetic field, an EMF will be induced due to the convective component of the above equation.

A curl version of "Faraday's law" was developed by James Clerk Maxwell, which in modern notation reads:


where

E and B are the electric and magnetic fields,
denotes curl
This law is best known as being one of the four Maxwell's equations. It should be noted however that this law does not explain motionally induced EMF.[2] Note that this equation is often simply called "Faraday's law";[3] however in this article, for clarity, the term "Maxwell-Faraday equation" will be used instead.

whats wrong with nucler energy meltdowns are becoming rarer as we have learrnt more about containing it and they use delpeted uraniam in aircraft tails to wiegh them down(i learnt that from breaking the biggest natinal geographic)

Nuclear is probably the best option until we find better clean ways of generating loads of energy. People in NZ are anti-nuclear though

so there thick but smart as theres alot of wildlife thats rare there any way send the waste into space that would get rid of it and woudnlt hurt it as its already radioactive

well thanks now your calling me thick and I'm not.

im not just whats worng with nuclear power its safe as houses but it deos couase the worst pollution for that your pretty smart
if there was a meltdown at the one near me id be dead its only 30 miles away from a city with over 50000 people in it

and your children would have two heads.

that would be funny is there a such thing as dilithuim crystals coz if der is ill try and make a warp core

Sadly, no.

nooo lets talk about phasers a good weapon but how much energy deos it need

well its a phased energy wepon so it uses as mutch energy as the user wants.

yea but how much energy would it take to be effective (a warp core is about 50 nukular power plants i read somewhere)
so it would take alot

well thats because it uses matter anti-matter reaction witch gives pure energy.

or is it pure matter nobody knows what pure matter is for all we know it could be a bigmac and fries

um matter is anything that has mass its orientation is what makes it matter or antimatter.

yea soz u said energy but is electric not pure energy

no it makes pure energy how they convert it I dont know.

you think you could eat pure energy as we need it it could end world hungor oh lets talk about replicators

um no.

To be honest, I don't think they will ever be able to make replicators like the ones in Star Trek.

me neather but I also am doubtfull about transporters

all replicators do is take protons out of the air and reassemble them to make food no transporters i think its impossible due to youve got to physicly connect something to move any matter

To start with if you took protons from atoms out of the air, then the atoms would become unstable and emit radiation-not good.

yea didnt think about that unless it stabilises the atomsand changes it into something else

and how do you propose to do that may I ask?

youve got to think thatt startrek is set 200 years in the futre well thats when replicators were relesesd

Do you happen to remember "Back to the Future" films? we are supposed to be using hover cars by now.

Replicators... Creating particles out of nothing is really nigh-impossible with anything we have today, and I highly doubt anything we have tomorrow will help either. But if we had an object split into it's basic particles and we had all the molecules necessary, it's possible we could have a machine or a bunch of nanobots put the particles together like a puzzle piece to create an object out of it's basic particle components. I have something similar in my 'Code Red' continuity called a Synthesiser... It disassembles objects into particles, stores the particles somewhere (usually in a data chip), and it can be recalled and put the particles it now HAS back onto the synthesiser pad. A little lower tech than Star Trek, but a little more realistic than particles popping out of nothing x_x;

yes back to the futre and arnt we ment to have dried food they were good films but they started to drag on a bit

no sorry they were **** films.

i agree they are **** films

i agree.they are rubbish.
if replicators in star trek can make something out of nothing, cant they just make an entire ship with a giant one or somethin?

In theory, yes, but they'd never actually work.