Skip to main content

star trek - Why can't a Federation Starship's transporter history be used to bring someone back to life?


I've always been a little confused by the fact that when a crew member dies they don't just use the transporter history to bring that person back. I'm aware that this wouldn't make for good TV, but I was wondering if there was a more technical reason.



Answer



In early canon, the transporter log was exactly that; such and such a person transported to these coordinates at such and such a time. They were likely entered by the person manning the console instead of in any automatic fashion.


With more advanced transporter technology, such as the ability to "save" a person's pattern in the transporter's buffer, there is the possibility of bringing someone back to life. In fact, a Voyager episode (VOY:Jetrel) deals with exactly that; Neelix's backstory is that his home colony, Rinax, had all life wiped out and was rendered permanently uninhabitable by an enemy's use of a WMD, the Metreon Cascade. Neelix was on the Talaxian homeworld at the time, but lost his entire family to the weapon. We learn over the course of the episode that the Haakonian scientist who developed that weapon is attempting to atone for his actions, and eventually comes up with a plan to use Voyager's transporter to resurrect Rinax's victims, as their "patterns" remain in the residual radiation of the moon's atmosphere. He fails, but the attempt redeems him in Neelix's eyes.



In the TNG episode "Relics", the Enterprise comes across a Dyson's Sphere while investigating a distress signal. The ship sending the signal has crashed on its surface, and the away team learns that the transporter on the ship has basically been used as a stasis pod, using the transporter to dematerialize a human (Scotty), then hold them in the pattern buffer indefinitely before their rescuers re-enable the rematerialization half of the sequence to get them back out. However, the imperfect nature of this approach is obvious as a second "stored" person's pattern has degraded too much to save.


So, the thought has obviously occurred to several characters in the canon that transporters have the ability to create life as well as recreate it. But, other than a couple episodes of cloning (such as Thomas Riker, a duplicate of William Riker who joins the Maquis) it hasn't been widely successful, to say the least.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

harry potter - What is the difference between Diffindo and Sectumsempra?

In the Harry Potter books, Diffindo is called the 'Severing Charm' and it’s most commonly used to cut ropes and the like. However, in the last book Hermione uses it on Ron but misses, creating a 'slash in his jeans' and his knee gets cut, causing him to 'roar in pain'. We've only seen Sectumsempra used once on screen when Harry directly uses it on Malfoy in the sixth book, but there it's mentioned that he is 'waving his wand wildly'. Wouldn't Diffindo, if used in such a fashion also cause a similar effect? Similarly, if it was able to cut Ron, it would also be able to, say, chop off an ear (George's)? In that case, how are these two spells different, except for Sectumsempra seemingly used exclusively to hurt humans? Answer While Diffindo and Sectumsempra both can be countered by other spells, Diffindo is far more easily countered. Reparo, a relatively common spell, can completely reverse its effect when used once. “He pulled the old cop...