Skip to main content

star trek - How much did transporter risk decline over time?



The Star Trek transporter appeared in the original pilot, The Cage, as a cheaper effect (ex-universe) than having the Enterprise land. - Transporter (Star Trek)


enter image description here


Somewhere around one hundred years spanned the distance between the first biologically safe transporters and the launch of NCC-1701. Dr. McCoy was, perhaps reasonably, afraid—there were still problems: TOS The Enemy Within.


There were a series of staged releases for Federation transporter technology. Memory Alpha has this to say:



Production of Mark V transporters was halted in 2356. By 2371, Mark VI transporters were considered outdated. Mark VII transporters were able to transport unstable biomatter, as long as the phase transition inhibitor was adjusted. (DS9: Family Business)



Presumably, there were also Mark I, II, III and IV releases, unless some were skipped à la Windows. Also, Emory Erickson, the transporter inventor, must have had a number of pre-deployment alpha and beta versions. I know of at least two, detailed in ENT: Daedalus.


Various risks have been described, including transporter psychosis (ENT: Realm of Fear), total materialization failure for a variety of reasons (Star Trek: The Motion Picture), merging of two people during transport (Voy: Tuvix), and regression during materialization to childhood (TNG: Rascals).


These risks are described as having decreased over time.




[I]n the episode "Realm of Fear", Geordi La Forge states that there have been no more than 2 or 3 transporter accidents in the preceding 10 years. Reference is also made to the advancement of transporter technology in the same episode, where Chief O'Brien states that each individual transporter pad has four redundant scanners whereby in the event a scanner fails the other three will take over, and that he has never lost anyone having been a transporter operator for over twenty years. - Transporter (Star Trek) at Wikipedia



But how much safer was the technology in the later (in-universe chronology) episodes than when first deployed? Is there evidence beyond what La Forge and O'Brien said anecdotally? There were enough late accidents to make me think that transporters must have been very dangerous in the beginning.


Not that this really proves anything, but extrapolating from Richard's detailed answer to this related but separate question, and adding in the accident from Star Trek: The Motion Picture, I count four known accidents from before TNG and seven from TNG on.


But it would be silly to think that transporter technology had become riskier over time, right?



Answer



Since you said you would accept anecdotal accounts in lieu of cold, hard statistics, note that the Enterprise episode "Daedalus" deals with the genesis of the transporter and introduces its creator, Emory Erickson:



ARCHER: I have to confess, given a choice, I'd much rather use a good old-fashioned shuttlepod.



EMORY: I'll never forget the protests when the transporter was first approved for bio-matter.


DANICA: Oh, God. Here we go.


EMORY: People said it was unsafe, that it caused brain cancer, psychosis, and even sleep disorders. And then there was all that metaphysical chatter about whether or not the person who arrived after the transport was the same person who left, and not some weird copy.


TUCKER Which would make all of us copies.


EMORY: I had to fight all of that nonsense, and I'm not going to tell you there weren't costs. I'm living proof of that, but I won. Mankind is better off. Makes everything I've fought for worthwhile.



While Emory is dismissive of the concerns over transporter use, he goes on to reveal however that actual lives were lost during the first uses of the transporter:



EMORY: I sympathise, believe me. During the initial tests for the transporter, some brave men and women were lost. Not a day goes by that I don't think about them. How can I help?




In particular, his own son Quinn was lost in such an accident, and his pattern was trapped in a subspace anomaly for 15 years. In the episode, they manage to rematerialize him, but he dies a few moments later.


So, anecdotally, it would seem that the risk of using the transporter has diminished significantly since Archer's generation.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.
Post a Comment
Read more

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...
Post a Comment
Read more

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...
Post a Comment
Read more

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...
Post a Comment
Read more